Suchergebnisse

This volume maps out the response of states to human rights violations. It covers the period 1946-1999 and offers a complete and unmatched record for this period. Its starting point is that such responses are not established and accepted state practice. Traditional, if unwritten, norms of states' behaviour developed through centuries of silence and inaction; the prevalent reaction to human rights violations by another state remains the absence of any response. Furthermore, this book probes into evidence of active and passive complicity by reviewing aid to countries in which violations have been taking place and diplomatic initiatives undertaken to shield violators from public opprobrium. Since international law is generated through state practice, the book highlights the ongoing tussle between the pre-1946 heritage of silence and inaction and the 1946-1999 haphazard pattern of responses to violations

"Despite the continuous addition of regulatory initiatives concerning corporate human rights responsibilities, what we witness more often than not is a situation of corporate impunity for human rights abuses. The Bhopal gas leak - examined as a site of human rights violations rather than as a mass tort or an environmental tragedy - illustrates that the regulatory challenges that the victims experienced in 1984 have not been overcome so far. This book grapples with and offers solutions to three major regulatory challenges to obligating companies to comply with human rights norms whilst doing business, and asks; why companies should adhere to human rights, what these responsibilities are, and how to ensure that companies comply with their responsibilities. Building on literature in the fields of law, human rights, business ethics, management, regulation and philosophy, this book proposes a new 'integrated theory of regulation' to overcome inadequacies of the existing regulatory framework that seeks to humanize business"--

This article examines how states and international organizations can be held to account for extraterritorial human rights violations. I develop and investigate the potential of what I call an "indirect accountability" mechanism. In indirect accountability relationships, accountability fora do not directly hold states and international organizations that commit extraterritorial human rights violations to account as these are frequently immune to direct accountability claims. Instead, they hold them to account indirectly by addressing accountability claims to an implicated third party, expecting that the third party will upload the accountability claims to the state or international organization. After conceptualizing the mechanism and its scope conditions, I conduct two brief qualitative case studies using the method of deductive process tracing to explore the potential of the mechanism. The first case study traces efforts to indirectly hold the United States to account for violating foreigners' privacy rights in the context of mass surveillance. The second case study traces attempts to indirectly hold the United Nations Security Council to account for violating the due process rights of blacklisted terror suspects. Both case studies provide support for the mechanism.

This article examines how states and international organizations can be held to account for extraterritorial human rights violations. I develop and investigate the potential of what I call an "indirect accountability" mechanism. In indirect accountability relationships, accountability fora do not directly hold states and international organizations that commit extraterritorial human rights violations to account as these are frequently immune to direct accountability claims. Instead, they hold them to account indirectly by addressing accountability claims to an implicated third party, expecting that the third party will upload the accountability claims to the state or international organization. After conceptualizing the mechanism and its scope conditions, I conduct two brief qualitative case studies using the method of deductive process tracing to explore the potential of the mechanism. The first case study traces efforts to indirectly hold the United States to account for violating foreigners' privacy rights in the context of mass surveillance. The second case study traces attempts to indirectly hold the United Nations Security Council to account for violating the due process rights of blacklisted terror suspects. Both case studies provide support for the mechanism.

Reparations for human rights violations in the form of rehabilitation can include social services such as education. This can be a particularly appropriate form of reparation for victims who have experienced abuses that result in missed education as a lost opportunity. Reparations can be rehabilitative by directly responding to harms suffered by victims and their ensuing needs, thereby helping to reintegrate those victims into society and restoring to them a functional life. Education can be provided through an administrative program or policy as individual reparations, such as scholarships to victims, as collective reparations, such as the rebuilding of schools in communities hard hit by abuses, and as symbolic reparations, such as naming schools. Court decisions awarding education as a form of reparation have also contributed significantly to our understanding of education as rehabilitation. This article examines the contributions that education as rehabilitation can make to redress as well as the implementation challenges faced by initiatives that have attempted to do so.