事实调查任务还是遗漏?:对非洲人权和人民权利委员会的批判性分析

Tarisai Mutangi
{"title":"事实调查任务还是遗漏?:对非洲人权和人民权利委员会的批判性分析","authors":"Tarisai Mutangi","doi":"10.4314/EAJPHR.V12I1.39334","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article presents an analysis of the conduct of fact-finding missions by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR). The analysis is enriched by comparison with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). The impetus of the article is the controversy arising out of the response of the Government of Zimbabwe to the ACHPR in its 17th Annual Activity Report. The author examines in good measure the nature, origins and purpose of fact-finding missions. Through a juxtaposition of fact-finding in the African System and the Inter-American System, he identifies a number of fact-finding related issues arising out of the controversial Government of Zimbabwe report, on\nwhich his analysis is based. It is argued that the ACHPR must always be ready to borrow lessons from other human rights systems. The article makes several recommendations to the ACHPR. East African Journal of Peace and Human rights Vol. 12 (1) 2006: pp. 1-48","PeriodicalId":296246,"journal":{"name":"East African journal of peace and human rights","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fact-finding missions or omissions?: A critical analysis of teh African Commission on Human and People's Rights\",\"authors\":\"Tarisai Mutangi\",\"doi\":\"10.4314/EAJPHR.V12I1.39334\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article presents an analysis of the conduct of fact-finding missions by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR). The analysis is enriched by comparison with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). The impetus of the article is the controversy arising out of the response of the Government of Zimbabwe to the ACHPR in its 17th Annual Activity Report. The author examines in good measure the nature, origins and purpose of fact-finding missions. Through a juxtaposition of fact-finding in the African System and the Inter-American System, he identifies a number of fact-finding related issues arising out of the controversial Government of Zimbabwe report, on\\nwhich his analysis is based. It is argued that the ACHPR must always be ready to borrow lessons from other human rights systems. The article makes several recommendations to the ACHPR. East African Journal of Peace and Human rights Vol. 12 (1) 2006: pp. 1-48\",\"PeriodicalId\":296246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"East African journal of peace and human rights\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"East African journal of peace and human rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4314/EAJPHR.V12I1.39334\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"East African journal of peace and human rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/EAJPHR.V12I1.39334","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文对非洲人权和人民权利委员会实况调查团的行为进行了分析。通过与美洲人权委员会(美洲人权委员会)的比较,分析更加丰富。这篇文章的动机是津巴布韦政府在其第17届年度活动报告中对人权委员会的反应所引起的争议。作者很好地审查了实况调查团的性质、起源和目的。通过对非洲系统和美洲系统实况调查的对比,他指出了从有争议的津巴布韦政府报告中产生的若干实况调查相关问题,他的分析正是基于这些问题。有人认为,人权事务委员会必须随时准备借鉴其他人权制度的经验。文章对ACHPR提出了几点建议。东非和平与人权杂志,第12卷(1),2006年:第1-48页
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fact-finding missions or omissions?: A critical analysis of teh African Commission on Human and People's Rights
This article presents an analysis of the conduct of fact-finding missions by the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR). The analysis is enriched by comparison with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). The impetus of the article is the controversy arising out of the response of the Government of Zimbabwe to the ACHPR in its 17th Annual Activity Report. The author examines in good measure the nature, origins and purpose of fact-finding missions. Through a juxtaposition of fact-finding in the African System and the Inter-American System, he identifies a number of fact-finding related issues arising out of the controversial Government of Zimbabwe report, on which his analysis is based. It is argued that the ACHPR must always be ready to borrow lessons from other human rights systems. The article makes several recommendations to the ACHPR. East African Journal of Peace and Human rights Vol. 12 (1) 2006: pp. 1-48
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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