Inter-State Cases under icerd as an Avenue to Protect Cultural Heritage

Q3 Social Sciences
David Keane
{"title":"Inter-State Cases under icerd as an Avenue to Protect Cultural Heritage","authors":"David Keane","doi":"10.1163/22131035-13010007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe most recent applications before the International Court of Justice (icj) under Article 22 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (icerd), Armenia v. Azerbaijan and Azerbaijan v. Armenia, both claim that the destruction of cultural heritage during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict constitutes a violation of the Convention. The applications have met with enthusiasm that icerd offers a potential new avenue for the protection of cultural heritage, as well as scepticism as to whether these claims fall within the scope of the treaty. Armenia and Azerbaijan bypassed the inter-State communications mechanism under Articles 11–13 before the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (cerd), as they are legally entitled to do. But the cerd perspective remains important. First, the Articles 11–13 mechanism is available in relation to 182 States Parties, whereas due to reservations, the Article 22 mechanism is available only in relation to 157 States Parties. Second, cerd practice in relation to cultural heritage ought to inform the determination of the Court. This article investigates the cerd approach to the protection of cultural heritage. It draws in related questions such as whether religious cultural heritage comes under a treaty on racial discrimination; the applicability of these protections in situations of armed conflict; and icerd’s relationship with other specialised instruments. It offers conclusions as to what extent an avenue for the protection of cultural heritage under icerd exists before the Committee and the Court.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Human Rights Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-13010007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The most recent applications before the International Court of Justice (icj) under Article 22 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (icerd), Armenia v. Azerbaijan and Azerbaijan v. Armenia, both claim that the destruction of cultural heritage during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict constitutes a violation of the Convention. The applications have met with enthusiasm that icerd offers a potential new avenue for the protection of cultural heritage, as well as scepticism as to whether these claims fall within the scope of the treaty. Armenia and Azerbaijan bypassed the inter-State communications mechanism under Articles 11–13 before the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (cerd), as they are legally entitled to do. But the cerd perspective remains important. First, the Articles 11–13 mechanism is available in relation to 182 States Parties, whereas due to reservations, the Article 22 mechanism is available only in relation to 157 States Parties. Second, cerd practice in relation to cultural heritage ought to inform the determination of the Court. This article investigates the cerd approach to the protection of cultural heritage. It draws in related questions such as whether religious cultural heritage comes under a treaty on racial discrimination; the applicability of these protections in situations of armed conflict; and icerd’s relationship with other specialised instruments. It offers conclusions as to what extent an avenue for the protection of cultural heritage under icerd exists before the Committee and the Court.
将 icerd 下的国家间案件作为保护文化遗产的途径
最近根据《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》(icerd)第 22 条向国际法院(icj)提交的申请,即亚美尼亚诉阿塞拜疆案和阿塞拜疆诉亚美尼亚案,都声称在纳戈尔诺-卡拉巴赫冲突期间对文化遗产的破坏违反了《公约》。这两份诉状引起了人们的热烈反响,认为 icerd 为保护文化遗产提供了一条潜在的新途径,但也有人对这些诉求是否属于条约范围持怀疑态度。亚美尼亚和阿塞拜疆根据第 11-13 条绕过国家间沟通机制,向消除种族歧视委员会 (cerd)提出申请,因为它们在法律上有权这样做。但是,cerd 的观点仍然很重要。首先,第 11-13 条机制适用于 182 个缔约国,而由于保留意见,第 22 条机制仅适用于 157 个缔约国。其次,文化遗产方面的判例实践应为法院的决定提供参考。本文研究了文化遗产保护方面的 cerd 方法。文章探讨了相关问题,如宗教文化遗产是否属于种族歧视条约的管辖范围;这些保护措施在武装冲突情况下的适用性;icerd 与其他专门文书的关系。它就委员会和法院在多大程度上存在根据《公约》保护文化遗产的渠道提出了结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The International Human Rights Law Review (HRLR) is a bi-annual peer-reviewed journal. It aims to stimulate research and thinking on contemporary human rights issues, problems, challenges and policies. It is particularly interested in soliciting papers, whether in the legal domain or other social sciences, that are unique in their approach and which seek to address poignant concerns of our times. One of the principal aims of the Journal is to provide an outlet to human rights scholars, practitioners and activists in the developing world who have something tangible to say about their experiences on the ground, or in order to discuss cases and practices that are generally inaccessible to European and NorthAmerican audiences. The Editors and the publisher will work hands-on with such contributors to help find solutions where necessary to facilitate translation or language editing in respect of accepted articles. The Journal is aimed at academics, students, government officials, human rights practitioners, and lawyers working in the area, as well as individuals and organisations interested in the area of human rights law. The Journal publishes critical articles that consider human rights law, policy and practice in their various contexts, at global, regional, sub-regional and national levels, book reviews, and a section focused on an up-to-date appraisal of important jurisprudence and practice of the UN and regional human rights systems including those in the developing world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信