50 human rights cases that changed Australia

The proliferation of international human rights treaties, committees and courts over the last sixty years represents enormous achievement. International human rights laws are now asserted throughout the world by individuals of many cultures and traditions. Yet, at the same time international human rights ideas and principles continue to have difficulty in manifesting their relevance in the daily lives of those who are geographically and culturally distant from international institutions Two new books - William Twining’s Human Rights, Southern Voices: Francis Deng, Abdullahi An-Na’im, Yash Ghai, Upendra Baxi, and Helen Stacy’s Human Rights for the 21st Century - address aspects of this paradox and lay the foundations for exciting changes in the international human rights regime to facilitate greater human rights permeation and legitimacy for actors globally in the 21st century. In this Essay, I provide a critical account of some important remaining gaps in the literature on international human rights theory and practice. I argue that notwithstanding the fact that giving voice to those oppressed is a main function of the movement and that the meaning of human rights must be grounded in local culture at grassroots levels, relatively little scholarship bases its analyses on the discourse of the subjects of international human rights law and particularly those actually involved in human rights violations cases in the global South. What are victims’ and legal actors’ conceptions and expectations of human rights and their agendas and experiences in processing their cases? What factors affect their attitudes and behavior in this context? Such knowledge is critical in order to obtain a comprehensive picture of the workings of human rights on the ground. It is also key to enable greater comprehension of local, Southern actors’ needs, epistemologies and micro-realities. As such, bottom-up perspectives from local actors must inform macro-level scholarly conversations on human rights as well as policies aimed at improving respect for human rights at grassroots levels. I provide some such data from a forthcoming book, grounded in interpretive theory and based on the perspectives of legal and lay actors involved in the processing of human rights violation cases of violence against women in India. Actors’ discourses contextualize some of the issues set out in both volumes. The Essay further links actors’ understandings and objectives to norm diffusion theory in the international relations literature and to vernacularization theory in the law and anthropology literature, which like both reviewed books engage the issue of the permeation of human rights standards to grassroots levels. The Essay additionally argues that on the basis that a culturally plural universalism in human rights is an acceptable aim, we are in dire need of a new integrated analytical framework. This framework must be grounded not only in the perspectives of Southern actors, but must simultaneously imbed their epistemologies within the realities of human rights case processing in the legally pluralistic global South. This involves not only formal courts but also informal justice or quasi-legal non-State justice systems processing human rights cases. Drawing on insights from both books, I conclude with a call for more research into Southern actors’ human rights perspectives, including interpretive accounts of their contextual realities. Such knowledge is critical in order to innovatively engage the controversies in international human rights theory and practice and to assist human rights organizations and advocates to become more relevant to the poor and the oppressed. As such, they will be better able to effect realizable change for the subjects of human rights in the global South.

ABSTRACTThis article argues that reports from election observation missions can constitute evidence and shows that they are occasionally being used as evidence when regional human rights bodies are resolving human rights cases that deal with elections. The practice has so far been confined to regional human rights jurisprudence. Between 1998 and April 2016, election observation mission reports have been used in a total of 16 cases brought before regional human rights courts and commissions. The African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights have each used mission reports once, while the main bulk of practice has emerged in the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). I will argue that so far, the jurisprudence indicates three different usages of election mission reports: (1) as facts in the circumstances of the case; (2) as corroborative or indirect evidence; and (3) as direct evidence that is conclusive for the resolution of the case. Furthermore, there is an emerging dialogue between the ECtHR and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe–Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODIHR), particularly with regards to the election observation missions that concern Article 3 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. This indicates that there may be a new function for mission reports in human rights law, particularly in Europe.

Chemistry Students and Human Rights

Over the last decade, many scholars have argued for the enforcement of international human rights norms by the domestic courts. Those claims are largely normative and there are hardly any empirical arguments advanced in support of the normative arguments. This paper presents an empirical study which examines the enforcement of international human rights norms by the Indian Supreme Court between 1997 and 2008; based on the content analysis of its judicial decisions. With specific focus on the Indian Supreme Court, it examines the reasons, justifications and means for referral to international human rights norms between 1997 and 2008. Firstly, it examines the human rights cases in which the Supreme Court refers to international human rights norms. Then, human rights cases are divided into three categories; those involving: 1. Civil and political rights, 2. Economic, social and cultural Rights and 3. Both. Secondly, techniques developed by the Supreme Court of India for the enforcement of international human rights norms in these three categories of cases are explained. The methodology deployed codes the variables aimed at ascertaining the frequency of the enforcement of international human rights norms by the Supreme Court of India, using different techniques between 1997 and 2008. The study finds that the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence during the years 1997-2008 can be defined as a transitional period, at least when it comes to the enforcement of international human rights norms. The Court has used international human rights norms largely as an interpretative tool, where international human rights norms were taken as a ‘given’ under the international human rights instruments. There are only a few instances where the Court has ‘defined’ what constitute international human rights norms by reading them into customary international law.This paper concludes by suggesting that the Supreme Court of India should take an ‘active,’ informed approach, while referring to international human rights norms, and should enforce international human rights norms by reading them into customary international law where needed; rather than its ‘passive’ approach of referring to international human rights norms for statutory interpretations. The Supreme Court should look at the relationship between international and domestic legal norms as a “co-constitutive, or synergistic,” and should utilize these norms actively as a participant in the dynamic process of developing international law. The Supreme Court must be able to apply customary law on human rights exhaustively and in a fully independent way, in particular, it must be able to verify that the violations of human rights recognized by customary international law are not committed by the executive. While the Supreme Court has been known for its judicial activism, it is time that it is also known for its informed approach and respect towards international human rights norms.

The article encompasses the legal perspectives and challenges emerging when corporations defend their rights at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Researching the procedural aspects and jurispru­dential developments, it aims to conduct a legal analysis of the human rights entitlements of corporations, as legal entities, enshrined in the Eu­ropean Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). Issues concerning property rights, fair trial, and fundamental liberties pro­tected by the European Convention, are addressed. Furthermore, the re­search explores the extent to which rights traditionally attributed to nat­ural persons beyond business context, such as the right to privacy, free­dom of expression, and the entitlement to just satisfaction, apply to le­gal entities. Attempting to shed light on the context of corporate rights and their in­tersection with well-established human rights standards, the article con­tributes to fueling the dialogue between business and human rights with­in the European legal framework.

The article analyses the process of applying the European Court of Human Rights case law and the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 in criminal proceedings in Ukraine. The basic principles arising from the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and their impact on national legislation and court practice are investigated. Particular attention is paid to the issues of observance of the right to a fair trial, presumption of innocence, prohibition of torture and effective investigation of human rights violations. The key cases of the European Court of Human Rights against Ukraine, which have determined the directions of reforms in the field of criminal justice, are analysed. The problems of implementation of the European Court of Human Rights case law in the criminal justice system of Ukraine, in particular, the formal approach to the use of case law, the lack of an effective mechanism for the execution of judgments and insufficient training of law enforcement and law enforcement agencies are investigated. The following prospects for improving the application of the European Court of Human Rights case law in criminal proceedings in Ukraine are identified: 1) the amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine to comply with European standards, in particular, with regard to the right to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence, protection against torture and unlawful detention, ill-treatment, etc.; 2) the development of recommendations to improve the training of judges, prosecutors, lawyers and pre-trial investigation bodies; 3) the strengthening of control over the observance of human rights, the reasonableness of the time limits during the pre-trial investigation, and fair and lawful trial; The following prospects for improving the application of the European Court of Human Rights case law in criminal proceedings in Ukraine are identified: 4) the improvement of procedures for verification, evaluation and examination of evidence in order to protect the defence from unlawful actions of the prosecution; 5) the introduction of mechanisms for the effective implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in individual cases; 6) the provision of adequate funding and resources to law enforcement and law enforcement agencies.

The author's focus in this article is to question the religious framework in viewing the 1965 gross human rights case as one of the reconciliation efforts. Reconciliation of 1965 Gross Human Rights is an important effort to build peace and unity in Indonesia, especially in facing the political year. It is also important for the creation of peaceful politics. However, this effort faces challenges, one of which is the religious framework in viewing the 1965 Gross Human Rights case. The method used in this analysis is a historical study of the 1965 gross human rights violations case, especially regarding the role and involvement of religions in responding to this case. This article offers a religious framework that is more inclusive and emphasizes the characteristics of a religion of peace and love. This framework is based on the principles of humanity, justice and equality. The findings of this research are a new framework of religion that is broader and more open in viewing the 1965 Gross Human Rights Case that emphasizes love. This new framework is the basis for reconciliation for the Indonesian people. It is hoped that from this new framework, all elements of the nation can accept it so that the 1965 Gross Human Rights case has the same perspective in terms of religion. This is expected to bring political stability in Indonesia and free the Indonesian people from the 1965 Serious Human Rights issue.

REPORT ❐ BUSINESS AND HUMAN RIGHTS She also expressed ‘the need for an international binding instrument on the corporate obligation to respect human rights’. Amnesty International’s Joe Westby reported that ‘the discussions at the Forum are primarily focused on implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, But despite much talk of progress, there is little evidence that governments are actually willing to tackle the root causes of problems around business and human rights’. He noted the ‘frustration among NGOs over slow progress exhibited at the UN Forum’. Drawing a biting distinction between the illustrious setting of the UN Palais des Nations in Geneva and the toxic devastation left by the Bhopal gas leak, he noted that ‘governments in ‘home states’ still turn a blind eye to serious human rights abuses involving their companies abroad. Many of the barriers to justice faced by the Bhopal survivors are systemic problems that require concerted action. However, avenues to justice seem to be closing rather than opening’. He lamented that ‘companies continue to publicly support human rights, but when faced with even modest demands – for example to disclose payments made to governments or publicly report on their supply chains or their impact on human rights – they fight tooth and nail to oppose them. It is overwhelmingly clear that companies will not go far enough on their own initiative – which is why the UN has such a potentially key part to play’. This year’s annual report on corporate legal accountability from the Business and Human Rights Resources Centre, frankly titled ‘Barriers worsen for victims seeking justice’ observed: ■ ‘steep and worsening barriers that prevent most victims of abuses involving companies from accessing justice’; ■ ‘less availability of courts in countries where companies are headquartered’ ■ ‘threats to lawyers bringing human rights cases against companies’. Enter the labour movement Better late than never, goes the saying, and trade unions are finally participating in the UN’s work on business and human rights by sending appropriately technically skilled delegations to participate . Although still comprising only a handful of people, this rush of labour movement lawyers, PhDs and senior officials, all present at the Forum, must of course be welcomed, but it seems unfortunate that the unions couldn’t muster this kind of participation back when all the fundamental terms of settlement were still to play for, in 2007-2010. Business as usual Some breathless reviews emerged from the CSR world, but many NGOs remain deeply sceptical: barriers to corporate liability are getting worse, not better INTERNATIONAL union rights Page 24 Volume 20 Issue 4 2013 DANIEL BLACKBURN is Director of ICTUR in London. Daniel is a UK-qualified lawyer and was awarded a distinction and academic prize for his MA thesis on the legal history of business and human rights I n December 2013 1,700 participants attended the second UN Forum on Business and Human Rights to examine and discuss the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in the two years since their unanimous endorsement by the Human Rights Council. It would be fair to say that most stakeholders at the Forum showed a strong commitment to the Guiding Principles, and a number of glowing reviews of the Forum emerged from the CSR world, but many civil society groups remain deeply sceptical of the process. During the Forum the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations (‘SOMO’), the International Corporate Accountability Roundtable (‘ICAR’), the Business and Human Rights Resource Centre, and the International Federation for Human Rights (‘FIDH’) hosted a ‘Civil Society Dialogue’. Mariëtte van Huijstee of SOMO raised three key criticisms as outcomes of that session: ■ States and businesses ‘are doing far too little to implement the UNGPs and thereby fail to fulfil their respective duties and responsibilities to protect and respect human rights’. ■ Only one National Action Plan has been published so far, which includes far too little substance to create meaningful impact on the ground’. ■ ‘The same holds for human rights due diligence implementation efforts by companies. Instead of a focus on avoiding risks of human rights violations, human rights due diligence too often involves a simply seeking to avoid risk to corporate reputation’. Ms van...

The purpose of this study is to analyze human rights awareness and cases of human rights violations among North Korean defectors living in Korea and to identify ways to improve domestic human rights-related laws and systems in order to lay a foundation for improving North Korean human rights in preparation for future unification. This is a study to find out. In the case of North Korean defectors, it may not be easy for them to understand the concept of human rights because they lived as North Korean residents before defecting. Therefore, through an understanding of the possibility of human rights violations during the settlement process in South Korea and the human rights that they have been educated and conscious of directly or indirectly after settlement, we newly analyzed the human rights awareness and cases of human rights violations that North Korean defectors have and the human rights that are currently being applied in our country. There is a need to seek ways to improve related laws and systems, while at the same time establishing a foundation to increase human rights awareness among North Korean residents in preparation for future unification. Specifically, based on the survey conducted by the National Human Rights Commission and the Korea Institute for National Unification, the human rights of North Korean defectors are as follows: the right to physical freedom that may be violated during the investigation phase after entering the country; the right to due process in criminal cases; We examine the「Act on Protection and Settlement Support for North Korean Defectors」and the 「Unification Education Support Act」, which specify adaptation education for North Korean defectors after their settlement in the Republic of Korea, and examine the problems of our country's current human rights system for North Korean defectors. The purpose of this study is to suggest legal and institutional improvement measures to foster human rights awareness among North Korean defectors and prepare for unification.

Journal Article Common Law of Human Rights?: Transnational Judicial Conversations on Constitutional Rights Get access CHRISTOPHER McCRUDDEN CHRISTOPHER McCRUDDEN Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Volume 20, Issue 4, WINTER , Pages 499–532, https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/20.4.499 Published: 01 December 2000

The Right to Claim for State Compensation and the Extinctive Prescription

In the international debate over the human rights impact of transnational corporations' activities, access to judicial remedies for the human rights consequences of corporate misbehaviour has acquired a rather prominent place. For various reasons, victims of human rights abuses involving corporations may not have access to the fora offered by corporations' home and host states. Therefore, attention can be turned to bystander states offering an exceptional “forum of necessity” to avert a denial of justice. Such a forum of necessity is not, however, without problems. While, on the one hand, it may provide access to justice for victims of human rights abuses, it also creates the risk of forum shopping and potentially increases uncertainty for corporate defendants. Adopting forum of necessity thus requires the striking of a delicate balance between the interests of plaintiffs, defendants and the states asserting necessity jurisdiction. The debate on forum of necessity takes place in different fora. The doctrine is found in several European jurisdictions, but its contents and the degree to which it is developed vary signifi cantly. Thus, whether it can be expected to play a noticeable role in business and human rights cases is uncertain. As there are few relevant cases in Europe and the doctrine is generally in its infancy, the article compares the European experience with the experience of Canada, where forum of necessity has played a more prominent role, also in (business and) human rights cases. The European Union for its part has recently adopted a new regulation on jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters known as the recast Brussels I Regulation; the Commission's initial proposal for this new regulation contained a forum of necessity clause. This proposal was however signifi cantly amended, not specifi cally because of forum of necessity, but because EU Member States likely rejected the Commission's extension of the Regulation's scope to cover all civil cases in the EU, even those against defendants domiciled in third states. Consequently, the initiative to pursue forum of necessity as a helpful tool in business and human rights cases may fall to the Council of Europe. A lively debate is currently going on regarding the remedies that CoE Member States should provide to implement the UN Guiding Principles, and proposals are currently on the table to encourage CoE Member States to adopt certain grounds for jurisdiction, including forum of necessity, in their civil procedure law.

This article discusses the roles of the government and the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) in handling severe human rights violation cases in Paniai, Papua. The purpose of this article is to determine whether the National Commission on Human Rights handled the severe human rights violations in Paniai optimally. The article employs a qualitative research method as a research procedure that generates descriptive data in the form of written or oral words from individuals or things observed. For gathering information, interviews were used along with different types of literature, like journals, to look at the steps that the National Commission on Human Rights took and news stories from different media outlets about how they dealt with serious human rights violations in Paniai. This article uses the theory of institutional and institutional roles to examine the roles played by the National Commission on Human Rights. The research findings indicate that handling the severe human rights violation cases in Paniai creates problematic situations between the government and civilians. First, the National Commission on Human Rights attempts to adapt to external and social expectations. Second, the formation of an order between the majority and minority in the uniformity pattern of witness elements during the investigation stage conducted by the Attorney General. Other challenges include the back-and-forth return of investigation files, which hinders the process of handling the Paniai case by the National Commission on Human Rights.

The human rights mentioned in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) are universal values agreed upon countries in the world. This is reflected by the fact that no state rejects the United Nations General Assembly Resolution in 1948. It is even strengthened by the ratification of two major international human rights covenants, which have binding legal powers. They are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights in 1966. European states are legally bound to human rights through the European Human Rights Convention that is signed in 1950 and come into force in 1953. On the other hand, ASEAN states are bound to human rights as parties of ICCPR, ICESCR, and their commitment to the regional level ASEAN Declaration of Human Rights. Both in European Union and ASEAN have their own human rights mechanisms: the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). This study employed a comparison method with a normative legal research approach to compare the human rights mechanisms in Europe and in ASEAN. It also deals with the implementation of human rights protection by the states in the two regional organizations. As a result, although the two regional organizations have human rights mechanisms applied in their areas, with experiences through cases appealing to European Human Rights Courts, Europe provides more assurance and legal certainty towards individuals when a state commit human rights violations against individuals. On the other hand, the AICHR, as the equal commission in ASEAN region, tends not to have sufficient legal power in handling human rights cases occurred in its territory.

Chris Hanretty, A Court of Specialists: Judicial Behavior on the UK Supreme Court, New York: Oxford University Press, 2020, 304 pp, hb £64.00