LSN: International Human Rights Issues (Topic)最新文献

{"title":"State Obligations with Regard to the Extraterritorial Activities of Companies Domiciled on their Territories","authors":"N. Bernaz","doi":"10.1163/9789004284258_016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004284258_016","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter focuses on the various ways in which international bodies and courts have dealt with the question of state obligations with regard to the extraterritorial activities of their corporate nationals, specifically exploring mutual influence, similarities and differences in their approaches, as well as possible reasons for divergence. Section 2 defines the contours of these obligations, giving examples of what they might entail in practice. The idea of a form of state responsibility for the overseas activities of their corporate nationals is slowly emerging under the cautious leadership of certain UN human rights mechanisms, as discussed in section 3. While these developments are occurring at the UN level, regional systems remain behind, as shown in section 4. On the whole, it seems as though it is outside human rights systems as such that the most important developments on this question have occurred. Indeed, as the field of business and human rights is growing, international bodies whose mandate is not specifically human rights-oriented have adopted soft law and policy instruments dealing with the question of state ‘obligations’ with regard to the overseas activities of their corporate nationals. Section 5 explores these developments and assesses their contribution to the area.","PeriodicalId":102429,"journal":{"name":"LSN: International Human Rights Issues (Topic)","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115373692","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Protecting International Civil Rights in a National Context: Danish Law and its Discontents","authors":"S. Adamo","doi":"10.1163/15718107-08502004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718107-08502004","url":null,"abstract":"The effective impact of international law on national civil rights protection is dependent on being implemented in a modality that allows for the actual use of international rules in domestic courts. With particular reference to the Danish case, this article investigates the effects of lack of ratification for the placement of civil rights in the ranking of sources of law, the issues arising from a dualist approach to international law, and the impact of judicial restraint in resolving conflicts of rights in practice. The study’s focal point is the legal rules and modalities for reception of international standards which can be, in any national legal context, more or less suitable for an appropriate protection of civil rights. The article’s enquiry aims to help revive a debate on these modalities for reception which in practice have a great impact on the effective realisation of civil rights, especially in judicial settings.","PeriodicalId":102429,"journal":{"name":"LSN: International Human Rights Issues (Topic)","volume":"321 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134287484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Rise and Fall of Human Rights: A Sceptical Account of Multilevel Governance","authors":"J. Mazzone","doi":"10.7574/CJICL.03.03.237","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7574/CJICL.03.03.237","url":null,"abstract":"The pursuit of universal human rights in the modern era has a dark side. While universal conceptions of rights can keep abusive governmental practices in check, they can also limit the advancement of rights and result in their diminishment. Where a lower level of government has a strong pre-commitment to rights, obligations imposed at a higher level - such as through a national constitution or an international treaty - can act as a ceiling rather than a floor. Left to their own devices, some states or nations would adopt stronger protections for rights than they do when brought into a system of universal standards. Worse, universality provides cover to local reformers interested in cutting back on pre-existing local rights protections: as attention shifts from strong local traditions to less stringent universal standards, rights diminish. When rights weaken locally, a feedback effect, facilitated in part by judicial dialogue, can in turn reduce the scope of universal requirements. As core sets of rights continue to spread around the world, we should thus expect those rights to take on ever-diminishing form. When it comes to protecting rights, localism has benefits over globalism; diverse conceptions of rights may be preferable to common requirements; and the celebrated practice of cross-jurisdictional dialogue among courts (and other actors) may curtail rights rather than advance them.","PeriodicalId":102429,"journal":{"name":"LSN: International Human Rights Issues (Topic)","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115470043","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Strategic Compliance in the Shadow of Transnational Anti-Trafficking Law","authors":"Daphna Hacker","doi":"10.1163/2210-7975_hrd-9944-2015005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/2210-7975_hrd-9944-2015005","url":null,"abstract":"The enactment of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) in 2000 marked the beginning of the ongoing systematic attempt by the United States of America to combat human trafficking transnationally. Through this Act, the United States employs a regime of positive and negative incentives, aimed at pressuring other countries to comply with its minimum anti-trafficking standards. Very little is known about the action taking place within the countries thus pressurized and in the transnational shadow of the TVPA. Especially neglected is the aspect relating to the protection of victims of trafficking, including their rehabilitation. In an attempt to address this lacuna, this paper reports a first-of-its-kind study of the approach to victims of trafficking in a destination country pressured by the TVPA. By interviewing officials, activists, professionals and survivors of human trafficking in Israel, and by analyzing policy and legal documents and reports, the study highlights the effectiveness of the United States’ transnational pressure in motivating the Israeli authorities to assist victims of human trafficking. Notwithstanding, the study also reveals the ability of a pressured country to develop compliance strategies that allow it to satisfy the U.S. demands while preserving its sovereignty over its borders. Moreover, the study points to the often-ignored power of the victims of trafficking to mobilize both the domestic legal system and the global human rights discourse to their advantage and highlights their definitions of successful protective measures, which differ from the definitions employed by the U.S. and Israel. Hence, on the theoretical level, the study yielded an innovative typology of compliance strategies, and it illuminates the importance of differentiating between “compliance” and “success,” often confused within the literature on global governance in general and on the TVPA in particular, and the need to develop a model that treats superpower states, weaker states — and the victims of human rights violations themselves — as significant players in the global field of norm-making.","PeriodicalId":102429,"journal":{"name":"LSN: International Human Rights Issues (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115673351","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"From Nuclear War to Net War: Analogizing Cyber Attacks in International Law","authors":"Scott J. Shackelford","doi":"10.15779/Z38KS9B","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38KS9B","url":null,"abstract":"On April 27, 2007, Estonia suffered a crippling cyber attack launched from outside its borders. It is still unclear what legal rights a state has as a victim of a cyber attack. For example, even if Estonia could conclusively prove that Russia was behind the March 2007 attack there is no clear consensus on how Estonia could legally respond, whether with armed force, its own cyber attack, or some other measure. The scholarly literature dealing with these questions, as well as the ethical, humanitarian, and human rights implications of information warfare (IW) on national and international security is scarce. Treatments of IW outside the orthodox international humanitarian law (IHL) framework are nearly non-existent. This underscores the tension between classifying cyber attacks as merely criminal, or as a matter of state survival calling for the same responses as conventional threats to national security. International law has been slow to adapt. The facts on the ground, and the widespread, amorphous use and rapid evolution of the internet in many ways challenge state sovereignty. I will advocate that the best way to ensure a comprehensive regime for cyber attacks is through a new international accord dealing exclusively with cyber security and its status in international law. Yet, the international community lacks the political will to tackle this issue directly. Until such an accord becomes politically viable, it is critical to examine how existing treaty systems may extend to cover the novel facts presented by cybe attacks. Together, existing treaties form a dual track approach to cyber attacks - one that is available for cyber attacks that do not rise to the level of an armed attack, and another that is activated once an armed attack occurs. To that end this paper will examine the most apt analogues in international law to form an appropriate legal regime for the various types of cyber attacks - whether it is humanitarian law (laws of war), human rights law (regulation of nation states behavior), or some novel combination of these and other treaty systems. In framing this regime, it will be argued that cyber attacks represent a threat to international peace and security as daunting and horrific as nuclear war. Yet the nuclear non-proliferation model is not a useful analogy since the technology necessary to conduct IW is already widespread in the international community. Instead, other analogies will rely on communications and cyber law, space law, and the law of the sea. The main failings of existing international treaties that touch on cyber law though are that most do not carry enforcement provisions. Nor do they specify how the frameworks change or fall away entirely during an armed attack. Nevertheless, regardless of whether or not cyber attacks fall below the threshold of an armed attack these bodies of law have a role to play in forming an appropriate regime. The cyber attack on Estonia in April, 2007, presents an example of the dire need","PeriodicalId":102429,"journal":{"name":"LSN: International Human Rights Issues (Topic)","volume":"649 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123050137","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Trust in Indicators: Measuring Human Rights","authors":"Annjanette Rosga, Margaret L. Satterthwaite","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1298540","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1298540","url":null,"abstract":"Debates over the best way to identify human rights violations, assess compliance with treaty obligations, and measure human rights progress over time have preoccupied scholars and practitioners for many years. These debates have been especially pressing in the field of economic, social, and cultural rights, where the need for new methodologies has been felt most urgently. Quantitative data has been forwarded as a central tool in the drive for better methods of assessment, monitoring, and advocacy. Among quantitative tools, human rights indicators have been identified as especially powerful. Rights indicators are understood to have a variety of advantages: they render complex data simple and easy to understand; they can be designed to demonstrate compliance with obligations, fulfillment of rights, and government efforts toward these goals; and they are capable of capturing progress over time and across countries. This Article closely examines the use of indicators by U.N. bodies charged with monitoring State compliance with human rights treaties. The Article places these efforts to create human rights indicators in conversation with scholarship on audit and standardization from the social sciences. We conclude that while there are very real drawbacks involved in the indicators project, debates about indicators may provide advocates with new opportunities to use the language of science and objectivity as a powerful tool to hold governments to account. However, because human rights compliance indicators threaten to close space for democratic accountability and purport to turn an exercise of judgment into one of technical measurement, advocates of human rights would do well to remain vigilant to effects of the elisions at work in the indicators project. The conundrum of democratic accountability and the failure to clearly locate responsibility for judgment in international human rights assessment exercises are not products of the tools chosen to carry out those exercises, but are instead structural problems, foundational to international human rights law as it exists today. Thus, some of the core problems we argue are inherent in the indicators project would still be present even if quantitative indicators were banished from human rights assessment projects. Nonetheless, the use of quantitative indicators tends to disguise those problems as technical ones of measurement and data availability. The Article unfolds as follows: in Section I, we explore some of the conditions leading to the increasing reliance on indicators for monitoring the fulfillment and/or enjoyment of international human rights, especially economic and social rights. Using the example of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, we consider the way in which that treaty's monitoring committee has shifted from attempting to create and directly apply indicators in the measurement of compliance with treaty obligations to calling on States to identify and implem","PeriodicalId":102429,"journal":{"name":"LSN: International Human Rights Issues (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2008-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124183623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo: The ICJ Finds Uganda Acted Unlawfully and Orders Reparations","authors":"M. Mcguinness","doi":"10.1163/9789004481237_158","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004481237_158","url":null,"abstract":"On December 19, 2005, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued its final judgment in the Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda). The Court held that the armed activities of Uganda in the Democratic Republic of Congo (“DRC”) between August 1998 and June 2003 violated the international prohibition against aggressive use of force as well as international human rights and international humanitarian law. The Court ruled in favor of Uganda on its counter-claim that the DRC violated obligations owed to Uganda under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The Court ordered Uganda to pay reparations to the DRC.","PeriodicalId":102429,"journal":{"name":"LSN: International Human Rights Issues (Topic)","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116534297","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}