Suchergebnisse

What must the next United States president do to reclaim Washington's standing to promote human rights around the globe? Many aspects of President George Bush's administration's human rights policy have caused American moral authority to plummet, including its penchant for cosying-up to favoured dictators, equating democracy promotion with regime change, and undermining international standards such as the new treaty banning cluster munitions. But probably nothing has done more to tarnish Washington's reputation in this area than the administration's decision to combat terrorism without regard to US obligations under international human rights law. Adapted from the source document.

Despite the key importance of accountability for the legitimacy of humanitarian action, inadequate academic attention has been given to how the concept of accountability is evolving within the specific branches of the humanitarian enterprise. Up to now, there exists no comprehensive account of what we label the "technologies of accountability", the effects of their interaction, or the question of how the current turn to decision-making software and biometrics as both the means and ends of accountability may contribute to reshaping humanitarian governance. 'UNHCR and the Struggle for Accountability' explores the UNHCR's quest for accountability by viewing the UNHCR's accountability obligations through the web of institutional relationships within which the agency is placed (beneficiaries, host governments, implementing partners, donors, the Executive Committee, UNGA). The book takes a multidisciplinary approach in order to illuminate the various layers and relationships that constitute accountability and also to reflect on what constitutes good enough accountability

War and armed conflict — International humanitarian law — Human rights law — Domestic legal obligations of State when providing training and assistance to foreign armed forces — Whether serious risk that training and assistance might directly or significantly contribute to violation of human rights/international humanitarian law — Duty to carry out appropriate assessment — Whether assessment irrational — Whether justiciable in English courtsHuman rights — Non-justiciability — Acts of executive — Foreign relations — Courts' power of review — Whether reputational damage may be caused to State when providing training and assistance to foreign armed forces — Duty to carry out lawful assessment — Whether subject to judicial review — The law of England

783Diplomatic relations — Diplomatic protection — Applicant requesting diplomatic protection from Government of South Africa against Government of Zimbabwe — Whether applicant entitled to diplomatic protection — Whether State having obligation to provide diplomatic protection — Position under international law — South African Constitution — Responsibility of executive for conducting foreign relations — Discretion of executive with respect to diplomatic relations — Zimbabwean expropriation of farmland — Response of South AfricaRelationship of international law and municipal law — Conduct of foreign relations — Whether justiciable in municipal court — Nature of diplomatic protection — Whether court entitled to question efficacy of steps taken by South African Government — The law of South Africa

121Aliens — Refugees — Criteria for grant of refugee status — Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951, and Protocol, 1967 — Absence of implementing legislation — Illegal immigrant — Threatened deportation — Allegation of breach of rights conferred by the Convention and ProtocolHuman rights — Refugees — Right of asylum — Illegal immigrant — Right to determination of application for asylum — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — Obligations of parties to CovenantTreaties — Effect in municipal law — Absence of implementing legislation — Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951, and Protocol, 1967 — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 — The law of Australia

The individual in international law — In general — Human rights and freedoms — Right to marry and found a family — Right to protection for family life — Obligation of State not to discriminate on grounds of sex — Alien men married to Mauritian nationals not entitled to reside in Mauritius as of right — No such restriction imposed on alien wives of Mauritian men — Whether discrimination against Mauritian women — International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — Optional Protocol — U.N. Human Rights Committee — Communications by alleged victims of violations of the Covenant — Definition of victim — Whether individual not personally affected entitled to complain that legislation violates Covenant — Actio popularis

AbstractInitial drafts of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) did not include any significant reference to the obligations of States to protect their citizens with disabilities during armed conflict or other emergency situations; international documents dealing with disability up until that point had not considered persons with disabilities as rights holders during armed conflict either. But early in the negotiations for the CRPD, disabled persons' organizations made it clear that they wanted to see the protections of the Convention extend to times of risk, emergency and armed conflict.This study focuses on Article 11 of the CRPD. The negotiating history of Article 11 demonstrates that although there were some disagreements over the scope of the article, support for a clear statement of States' obligations during armed conflict and other emergencies was broad-based and came from all regions.

The Governing Uranium project is a global research effort studying the implications of a changing uranium market, specifically the production, processing and transport of uranium ore concentrates (UOC), commonly referred to as "yellowcake". In total, 15 uranium producing and consuming countries were studied, representing 85% of global production and 70% of consumption. The concluding final report published 28 August 2015, provides a mapping of an evolving system of treaties, guidelines, and regional and national obligations at a time when the uranium market is shifting both structurally and geopolitically. This regulatory snapshot is particularly relevant as more front-end materials fall under the full-scope safeguards system of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), placing new obligations on state regulatory authorities and industry and facility operators, as well as new verification responsibilities on the IAEA. This means that, although the three rules of real estate apply to uranium (location, location, location), the uranium market is still global, while export controls and nuclear security are still local (that is, national). The expansion of civilian nuclear fuel cycles to new centres of production and consumption thus calls for increased harmonisation of regulations across states. The report begins with a look at the uranium industry (Chapter 2), followed by descriptions of the evolving application of IAEA safeguards (Chapter 3) and the international nuclear security structure (Chapter 4) as it applies to the (very) front-end of the nuclear fuel cycle. Chapter 5 analyses best practices in tracking and inventory controls to ensure that safeguards and security obligations are met efficiently and effectively. Each chapter provides recommendations for addressing governance gaps at the international and national levels as the industry undergoes legal and structural reforms. It attempts to assist long-time suppliers in updating governance approaches and newcomers in developing nationally appropriate regulatory systems from scratch based on global best practices.

IN AN EXAMINATION OF AMERICA'S POLICY TOWARD CHINA AND TAIWAN, THE ARTICLE DISCUSSES THE INTERNAL POLITICAL SITUATION IN TAIWAN; TRACES US POLICY SINCE 1972; AND DISCUSSES AMERICA'S OBLIGATIONS TO TAIWAN, PARTICULARLY AS EXPRESSED IN THE JOINT 'MUTUAL DEFENSE TREATY' (WHICH TERMINATED AT THE END OF 1979).

Nicola Lacey presents a new approach to the question of the moral justification of punishment by the State. She focuses on the theory of punishments in context of other political questions, such as the nature of political obligation and the function and scope of criminal law. Arguing that no convincing set of justifying reasons has so far been produced, she puts forward a theory of punishments which places the values of the community at its centre

This collection of essays, written by noted scholars and theorists, covers everything from the practical to the theoretical, and investigates the obligations we have to future persons, ranging from our own future offspring to distant future generations.

Extradition is the most important judicial figure in international cooperation; the most notable cases being terrorism, drug trafficking, money laundering, weapons, trafficking in persons, criminal organizations and other punishable conducts related to the above, as well as the crimes contained in the Rome Statute. This cooperation figure in some estates has overcome a series of political, economic, legal and social barriers, becoming a more viable and more valid institution, since it has gone from being a government policy to being a state policy, in addition to extending its scope of applicability, going from the simple referral of criminals to reciprocity of information, investigation, judicial assistance, among others. Thus, countries today have the international obligation to make and ratify treaties where mutual assistance commitments are generated in the field of international cooperation, based on the principle or Latin formula called: aut dedere aut judicare (extradite or judge), issued since the Geneva Conventions of 1949, so that if the state is unable to prosecute the offender or wishes to surrender it to the requesting nation, the offender may be prosecuted by the petitioner.It is to be clarified that this regulation was set aside for decades and has its legal reappearance in articles 8 and 9 of the draft code of crimes against the peace and security of mankind of 1996, where this principle and that of the universal jurisdiction were timidly addressed. This was taken up again in 1998 when the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was adopted. ; La extradición es la figura jurídica judicial de mayor expresión en materia de cooperación internacional; siendo los casos más notorios los de terrorismo, narcotráfico, blanqueo de capitales, armas, trata de personas, organizaciones criminales y demás conductas punibles conexas a los anteriores, así como los delitos contenidos en el Estatuto de Roma. Esta figura cooperativa en algunos estamentos ha superado una serie de barreras de conveniencia política, económicas, jurídicas y sociales, convirtiéndose en una institución más viable y de mayor validez, pues ha pasado de ser una política de gobierno a ser una política estatal, además de ampliar su espectro de aplicabilidad, pasándose de la simple remisión de criminales a la reciprocidad de información, investigación, asistencia judicial, entre otros. Es así que los países se encuentran hoy con la obligación internacional de efectuar y ratificar tratados en donde se generen compromisos de asistencia mutua en materia de cooperación internacional, basados en el principio o denominada formula del latín: aut dedere aut judicare (extraditar o juzgar), emanado desde los convenios de Ginebra de 1949, con el propósito de que si el estamento está imposibilitado de juzgar al criminal o desea entregarlo a la nación requirente, este pueda ser procesado por el solicitante.Es de aclarar que esta norma se hizo a un lado durante décadas, tiene su reaparición legal en los artículos 8 y 9 del proyecto de código de crímenes contra la paz y la seguridad de la humanidad de 1996, en donde se trataba tímidamente este principio y el de jurisdicción universal. Lo anterior se retoma en 1998 al adoptarse el Estatuto de Roma de la Corte Penal Internacional. ; A extradição é a figura jurídica judicial de maior expressão em matéria de cooperação internacional; sendo os casos mais notórios os de terrorismo, narcotráfico, branqueamento de capitais, armas, tráfico de pessoas, organizações criminosas e demais condutas puníveis conexas às anteriores, assim como os delitos estabelecidos no Estatuto de Roma.Esta figura cooperativa em alguns estamentos tem superado uma série de barreiras de conveniência política, econômicas, jurídicas e sociais, convertendose em uma instituição mais viável e de maior validez, ora tem passado de ser uma política de governo ao ser uma política estatal, além de ampliar seu espectro de aplicabilidade, passando da simples remissão de criminosos à reciprocidade de informação, investigação, assistência judicial, entre outros.É assim que os países encontram-se hoje com a obrigação internacional de efetuare ratificar os tratados nos quais se gerem compromissos de assistência mútua emmatéria de cooperação internacional, baseados no princípio ou denominada formula do latim: aut dedere aut judicare (extraditar ou julgar) emanado nos convênios de Genebra de 1949, com o objetivo que se o estamento está impossibilitado para julgar ao criminoso ou deseja entregá-lo à nação requerente, o criminoso seja processado pelo solicitante.Deve-se esclarecer que esta forma foi ignorada durante décadas, tem sua reaparição legal nos artigos 8 e 9 do projeto do código de crimes contra a paz e a segurança da humanidade de 1996, na qual se tratava timidamente este princípio e o do jurisdição universal. O anterior se retoma em 1998 ao se adotar o Estatuto de Roma da Corte Penal Internacional.

The individual in international law — Human rights and freedoms — Right to public hearing by independent and impartial tribunal established by law — European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950, Article 6 (1) — Notion of determination of civil rights and obligations — Right to continue to exercise medical profession — Whether public or private right — Disciplinary proceedings concerning allegations of professional misconduct — Whether determination of private or civil rights — Notion of dispute (contestation) — Whether civil right the object of dispute — Disciplinary organs of medical association — Whether independent and impartial tribunals established by law — Whether guaranteeing public hearingArticle 11 — Right to freedom of association, to form and join trade unions — Legal obligation to join medical association and be subject to its disciplinary organs — Whether limiting guaranteed rights — 'Association' — Definition of — Freedom not to associate — Whether recognized by ConventionArticle 10 — Right to disseminate information and ideas — Whether sanctions imposed by disciplinary body impinge upon right — Admissibility of complaint — Whether complaint separate or adduced in support of other claims — Ambit of case referred to Court — Exhaustion of domestic remedies319Article 50 — Request for just satisfaction — Effect of possibility of compensation under domestic law

Background. Transplant tourism is a phenomenon where patients travel abroad to purchase organs for transplants. This paper presents the results of a fieldwork study by describing the experiences of Dutch transplant professionals confronted by patients who allegedly purchased kidney transplants abroad. Second, it addresses the legal definition and prohibition of transplant tourism under national and international law. The final part addresses the legal implications of transplant tourism for patients and physicians. Methods. The study involved seventeen interviews among transplant physicians, transplant coordinators and policyexperts and a review of national and international legislation that prohibit transplant tourism. Results. All Dutch transplant centers are confronted with patients who undergo transplants abroad. The estimated total number is four per year. Transplant tourism is not explicitly defined under national and international law. While the purchase of organs is almost universally prohibited, transplant tourism is hardly punishable because national laws generally do not apply to crimes committed abroad. Moreover, the purchase of organs (abroad) is almost impossible to prove. Conclusions. Transplant tourism is a legally complex phenomenon that warrants closer research and dialogue. The legal rights and obligations of patients and physicians confronted with transplant tourism should be clarified.