AbstractThe margin of appreciation (MoA) has become the central conceptual doctrine in the institutional and jurisprudential architecture of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This article critiques the existence and operation of the MoA within the ECHR system and defends its use. It is submitted that as each of the central justifications for the MoA under the ECHR applies equally to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), so the doctrine should be applied by the Human Rights Committee.
La investigación aborda las principales reivindicaciones del movimiento sindical en Colombia, sus características orgánicas como organización, a partir de su devenir histórico y sus diversas formas de entender su actividad asociativa como un derecho. De la misma manera busca poner de relieve la importancia que tiene el derecho internacional en el reconocimiento de la actividad sindical y los criterios que esta fija para la reparación en una eventual vulneración de derechos. Esto con el propósito de caracterizar la violación de derechos al sindicato Sintraunicol en la toma paramilitar del bloque Córdoba en la Universidad de Córdoba, en aras de evaluar el proceso de reparación colectiva de estos y avanzar en una serie de principios indiscutibles, para llevar a cabo una reparación colectiva eficaz que tenga como sustento lo que en materia de derechos humanos y derechos internacional humanitario se ha construido. ; The research addresses the main demands of the union movement in Colombia, its organic characteristics as an organization, based on its historical evolution and its various ways of understanding its associative activity as a right. In the same way, it seeks to highlight the importance of international law in the recognition of union activity and the criteria that it sets for reparation in a possible violation of rights. This in order to characterize the violation of the rights of the Sintraunicol union in the paramilitary takeover of the Córdoba Block to the University of Cordoba, in order to evaluate the process of collective reparation of these and advance in a series of indisputable principles to carry out a effective collective reparation based on what has been built on human rights and international humanitarian rights. ; CRAI-USTA Bogotá ; orcid:0000-0002-8504-4680 ; https://scholar.google.es/citations?user=hpItNRMAAAAJ&hl=es ; https://scienti.minciencias.gov.co/cvlac/visualizador/generarCurriculoCv.do?cod_rh=0000131091 ; http://unidadinvestigacion.usta.edu.co
Problem setting. The urgency of the analysis of the current experience of sociological assessments of the level of trust in social institutions, in particular, the court, is due to the fact that for European countries the paradox of mass consciousness becomes more and more characteristic: confidence in the court decreases even in conditions of increase of efficiency, accessibility, justice of justice, that are recorded according to the results of ju- dicial reform. Requirements and expectations are growing (especially in more educated or socially adapted categories of the population), and, accordingly, there is a probability of inconsistency of pace of reforms and the presence of positive dynamics of trust in court. Recent research and publications analysis. The assessment of trust in the courts as a factor of trust in public authority is at the center of attention of domestic and foreign scholars. These problems were addressed by B. Barber, M. Buromensky, M. King,I. Lavrinenko, V. Lebedev, N. Luhmann, C. Morgner, O. Serdyuk, T. Habriyeva et al. How- ever, each state is looking for its criteria for monitoring the activities of courts.Paper objective. The purpose of this article is to formulate the main principles of na- tional monitoring of the level of trust in the court and the judicial system on the basis of analysis, firstly, of the most famous international sociological methodologies and, sec- ondly, the peculiarities of the current Ukrainian situation in this area.Paper main body. Trust is a generalized indicator of the norms, attitudes and values that underlie social cooperation, and in public life, trust fosters community unity and com- munity building, and in the economic sphere, it accelerates cooperation and interper- sonal exchanges. As a socio-psychological category of trust, it is a characteristic of anopen, positive relationship between the parties and reflects the confidence in the honesty and benevolence of the other party with which the trust is in one way or another based on his experience. From this point of view, trust has certain limits based on knowing about the other party that is trusted. Full trust is often identified with faith, because the mechanism of such trust is no longer based on rational principles, that is, on experience and on pre- diction and prior knowledge of one side of the second and includes irrational motives of the relationship. In social sciences, the level of trust one party can trust in another is measured in the belief in the honesty, charity and competence of the other party. Based on recent research, distrust can be forgiven much easier when interpreted as lack of compe- tence than inadequate benevolence or honesty. The assessment of trust in the court is recognized as a measure of the rule of law (rule of law). This approach is used in a variety of international and national practical tools for assessing democratic regimes.Conclusions of the research. Institutional trust can be considered as a kind of indica- tor that determines social well-being of the population, in addition, it is an important condition of social communication, through which the consent, understanding and dialogue of the parties is achieved, and it becomes possible to seek new opportunities for further development. The increase of trust in the judicial system of Ukraine is one of the tasks of the judiciary and is outlined in strategic documents of the development of the judiciary of Ukraine in recent years. The level of trust (distrust) of citizens to justice is affected by a number of factors, the most important among which should be called: the quality of leg- islation, on the basis of which decisions are adopted and substantiated; the quality of the judiciary; the degree of accessibility and openness of justice; coverage of court work in the media; the degree of execution of court decisions. From trust in the court it is necessary to distinguish between the perception of justice by citizens, the level of which is influenced by the ability of citizens to protect their rights in court, the application of the law by the court in an appropriate and effective manner, equality and non-discrimination before the law, the legality of the adopted judgments, the effective struggle of the state with corrup- tion, etc. ; Оценка доверия к суду признана в качестве измерения верховенства права (правовластия). Такой подход применяется в различных международных и нацио- нальных практических инструментах оценки демократических режимов. В даннойстатье формулируются главные основания национального мониторинга уровня доверия к суду и судебной системе на основе анализа, во-первых, наиболее известных международных социологических методологий и, во-вторых, особенностей украин- ской ситуации в этой сфере. ; Оцінка довіри до суду визнана у якості виміру верховенства права (правовладдя). Такий підхід застосовується у різноманітних міжнародних та національних прак- тичних інструментах оцінки демократичних режимів. У даній статті формулю- ються головні засади національного моніторингу рівня довіри до суду та судової системи на основі аналізу,по-перше, найбільш відомих міжнародних соціологічних методологій та, по-друге, особливостей сучасної української ситуації в цій сфері.
Problem setting. The urgency of the analysis of the current experience of sociological assessments of the level of trust in social institutions, in particular, the court, is due to the fact that for European countries the paradox of mass consciousness becomes more and more characteristic: confidence in the court decreases even in conditions of increase of efficiency, accessibility, justice of justice, that are recorded according to the results of ju- dicial reform. Requirements and expectations are growing (especially in more educated or socially adapted categories of the population), and, accordingly, there is a probability of inconsistency of pace of reforms and the presence of positive dynamics of trust in court. Recent research and publications analysis. The assessment of trust in the courts as a factor of trust in public authority is at the center of attention of domestic and foreign scholars. These problems were addressed by B. Barber, M. Buromensky, M. King,I. Lavrinenko, V. Lebedev, N. Luhmann, C. Morgner, O. Serdyuk, T. Habriyeva et al. How- ever, each state is looking for its criteria for monitoring the activities of courts.Paper objective. The purpose of this article is to formulate the main principles of na- tional monitoring of the level of trust in the court and the judicial system on the basis of analysis, firstly, of the most famous international sociological methodologies and, sec- ondly, the peculiarities of the current Ukrainian situation in this area.Paper main body. Trust is a generalized indicator of the norms, attitudes and values that underlie social cooperation, and in public life, trust fosters community unity and com- munity building, and in the economic sphere, it accelerates cooperation and interper- sonal exchanges. As a socio-psychological category of trust, it is a characteristic of anopen, positive relationship between the parties and reflects the confidence in the honesty and benevolence of the other party with which the trust is in one way or another based on his experience. From this point of view, trust has certain limits based on knowing about the other party that is trusted. Full trust is often identified with faith, because the mechanism of such trust is no longer based on rational principles, that is, on experience and on pre- diction and prior knowledge of one side of the second and includes irrational motives of the relationship. In social sciences, the level of trust one party can trust in another is measured in the belief in the honesty, charity and competence of the other party. Based on recent research, distrust can be forgiven much easier when interpreted as lack of compe- tence than inadequate benevolence or honesty. The assessment of trust in the court is recognized as a measure of the rule of law (rule of law). This approach is used in a variety of international and national practical tools for assessing democratic regimes.Conclusions of the research. Institutional trust can be considered as a kind of indica- tor that determines social well-being of the population, in addition, it is an important condition of social communication, through which the consent, understanding and dialogue of the parties is achieved, and it becomes possible to seek new opportunities for further development. The increase of trust in the judicial system of Ukraine is one of the tasks of the judiciary and is outlined in strategic documents of the development of the judiciary of Ukraine in recent years. The level of trust (distrust) of citizens to justice is affected by a number of factors, the most important among which should be called: the quality of leg- islation, on the basis of which decisions are adopted and substantiated; the quality of the judiciary; the degree of accessibility and openness of justice; coverage of court work in the media; the degree of execution of court decisions. From trust in the court it is necessary to distinguish between the perception of justice by citizens, the level of which is influenced by the ability of citizens to protect their rights in court, the application of the law by the court in an appropriate and effective manner, equality and non-discrimination before the law, the legality of the adopted judgments, the effective struggle of the state with corrup- tion, etc. ; Оценка доверия к суду признана в качестве измерения верховенства права (правовластия). Такой подход применяется в различных международных и нацио- нальных практических инструментах оценки демократических режимов. В даннойстатье формулируются главные основания национального мониторинга уровня доверия к суду и судебной системе на основе анализа, во-первых, наиболее известных международных социологических методологий и, во-вторых, особенностей украин- ской ситуации в этой сфере. ; Оцінка довіри до суду визнана у якості виміру верховенства права (правовладдя). Такий підхід застосовується у різноманітних міжнародних та національних прак- тичних інструментах оцінки демократичних режимів. У даній статті формулю- ються головні засади національного моніторингу рівня довіри до суду та судової системи на основі аналізу,по-перше, найбільш відомих міжнародних соціологічних методологій та, по-друге, особливостей сучасної української ситуації в цій сфері.
International audience ; The article is devoted to examination of analogy of law and analogy of legislation as real fiction in legal mechanism of right-deprivation and legal regulation of property relations and as the mean of its correction. The differences between real and jural fiction are analyzed, the impotence of fictions in legal mechanism of right-deprivation is determined.
Dass vielfältige Inhalte und Meinungen über eine Vielzahl an Medien verbreitet werden, ist für unsere demokratische Gesellschaft heute wichtiger denn je. Gerade deshalb ist es unabdingbar, Meinungsmacht einzelner Medienunternehmen zu verhindern und dadurch zur Meinungsvielfalt beizutragen. Diese bedeutende Aufgabe kommt der Medienkonzentrationskontrolle des Medienstaatsvertrages zu. Doch haben die digitalisierungsbedingten Veränderungen in der Medienlandschaft zu einem inkonsistenten Prüfungsregime der Medienkonzentrationskontrolle geführt, da medienrechtlich aktuell nicht alle für die Meinungsbildung relevanten Medienakteure ausreichend erfasst werden. Die Arbeit untersucht die Thematik im Kontext der nationalen sowie internationalen medien- und wettbewerbsrechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen. Basierend auf den dabei gewonnenen Erkenntnissen wird ein den aktuellen Erfordernissen entsprechender normativer Vorschlag unterbreitet."Media Concentration Law in the Digital Age": In the interest of democracy, individual media companies must be prevented from gaining opinion power. To this end, media concentration is regulated in accordance with the Interstate Media Treaty. However, recent developments in the media sector have led to an inconsistent regulatory regime, which no longer adequately covers all media players relevant to the formation of public opinion. This publication analyzes the issue in the context of both a media law and competition law framework and presents a legislative proposal suitable for restoring regulatory effectiveness
A Crimes Against Humanity Convention after the establishment of the International Criminal Court / by Morten Bergsmo and Song Tianying -- Codifying the 'Laws of Humanity' and the 'Dictates of the Public Consciene': towards a new global treaty on crimes against humanity / by Leila Sadat -- The ICC case law on the contextual elements of crimes against humanity / by Eleni Chaitidou -- The Draft Convention on Crimes Against Humanity: what to do with the definition? / by Darryl Robinson -- Beyond territory, jurisdiction, and control: towards a comprehensive obligation to prevent crimes against humanity / by María Luisa Piqué -- The obligation to prevent in the Proposed Convention examined in the light of the obligation to prevent in the Genocide Convention / by Travis Weber -- State obligation to punish core international crimes and the Proposed Crimes Against Humanity Convention / by Julie Pasch -- Towards greater coherence in international criminal law: comparing protected groups in genocide and crimes against humanity / by Rhea Brathwaite -- The Proposed Convention on Crimes Against Humanity and human trafficking / by Christen Price -- The responsibility to protect and to prosecute: reflections on the Canadian experience and recommendations for the Proposed Crimes Against Humanity Convention / by Rita Maxwell -- U.S. role in the prevention and prosecution of and response to crimes against humanity / by Mary Kate Whalen -- The Proposed Convention on Crimes Against Humanity and aut dedere aut judicare / by Ian Kennedy -- The aut dedere aut judicare provision in the Proposed Convention on Crimes Against Humanity: assessment from a Chinese perspective / by Shang Weiwei and Zhang Yueyao -- The Proposed Convention on the the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity: developments and deficiencies / by Tessa Bolton
Preliminary Material -- The Role of Courts in Foreign Affairs /Royce C. Lamberth -- Policy Options for the Obama Administration: Enforcement Provisions of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act as a Tool Against State Sponsors of Terrorism /Steven R. Perles and Edward B. MacAllister -- Adjudicating Acts of State /Chimène I. Keitner -- Sovereign Immunity and the International Court of Justice: The State System Triumphant /Paul B. Stephan -- Non-State Actors and the Alien Tort Claims Act /Ralph Steinhardt -- Equity, Damages and the Rule of Law /Baher Azmy -- The Act of State Doctrine in Recent "Looted" Art Litigation /Allan Gerson -- Foreign Affairs Takings: The Question of Foreign Plaintiff Standing /Douglas J. Pepe -- The Work of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission of the United States /Timothy J. Feighery -- Lawsuits by Foreigners in the U.S. Courts and in the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission /Allan I. Mendelsohn -- International Claims and the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission /David E. Bradley -- The Future of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission Rests with the Modernization of Its Jurisprudence: The Regrettable Results Arising from an Intersection between the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission and the U.S. Insurance Industry, a Case Study /Steven R. Perles and Edward B. MacAllister -- The 2005 Hague Choice of Court Agreements Convention: A Useful Tool for the Transnational Litigator /David P. Stewart.
In: Grama , B 2022 , ' Company-administered grievance processes for external stakeholders : A means for effective remedy, community relations, or private power? ' , Wisconsin International Law Journal , vol. 39 , no. 1 , pp. 71-143 .
Company-administered grievance processes for handling complaints by external stakeholders (CGPs) have been endorsed by international standards as a means to provide remedy and to improve companies' risk management. Despite their apparent proliferation in practice, and a growing body of academic literature which references them, they remain a nebulous and undertheorized phenomenon. A CGP can be anything from a suggestion box to a private court determining what awards a victim of human rights abuses will receive. Legal scholarship has often described CGPs as mechanisms to provide victims of human rights abuses with an effective remedy. However, in the academic literature more broadly, CGPs are often described as a tool to foster better company-community relations or as pursuing corporate objectives and countering community mobilization against company projects. These trends accompany unique narratives as to the role of governments, companies, and communities in relation to one another. This Article systematically reviews 117 academic publications on CGPs across various domains including law, human rights, environmental policy, development, natural resources, corporate social responsibility and business ethics. It creates an integrative framework to organize this literature against three broader trends: effective remedy, community relations, and private power. It highlights different research trends, explains underlying disagreements, identifies methodological shortcomings, and identifies opportunities for interdisciplinary engagement in developing theory on this relatively new phenomenon.
Abstract The aim of this article is to identify the main principles governing the interpretation of domestic law clauses that grant jurisdiction to ICSID arbitration and to analyse the meaning of such provisions in the context of the SPP v. Egypt case as the first case on the issue. The article first examines the peculiarities of consent to ICSID jurisdiction by way of national legislation. In the first part the analysis of the practice of arbitral tribunals in which a claim was introduced on the basis of consent to arbitration in domestic law shows that specific language of national legislation on consent to arbitration varies considerably. Therefore, since consent is the "cornerstone" of the Centre's jurisdiction, arbitral tribunals recognize that not all references to ICSID arbitration in national legislation amount to consent. They approach the task of ascertaining the existence of such consent with great care. In the second part, the article focuses on the SPP v. Egypt case on the issue and analyses challenges that the tribunal met in interpreting relevant national clauses and establishing the consent to arbitration. Finally, this article discusses the legacy of interpretation standard of SPP v. Egypt case in context of the dissenting opinion and further case law. It is argued that the rules of interpretation of domestic law clauses that grant jurisdiction to ICSID arbitration are conditioned by the sui generis nature of consent to arbitration as unilateral declarations capable of giving rise to international legal obligations. Therefore, for the purpose of establishing whether there is consent to arbitration provided in national legislation, international tribunals reasonably take a balanced approach and use the methodological mix of rules of interpretation involving various sources: the VCLT, customary law principles governing unilateral declarations and domestic legislation. Additionally, this article provides suggestions on the possible role of the Guiding Principles applicable to unilateral declarations of states capable of creating legal obligations (Guiding principles) in interpreting domestic provisions containing an offer to arbitrate before ICSID.
How far the basic needs approach can help in defining and realizing the international rights to basic needs which are encompassed in the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and the 1986 Declaration on the Right to Development.