Rethinking Derogations from Human Rights Treaties

2021 ◽  
Vol 115 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-40
Author(s):  
Laurence R. Helfer

AbstractNumerous governments have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic by declaring states of emergency and restricting individual liberties protected by international law. However, many more states have adopted emergency measures than have formally derogated from human rights conventions. This Editorial Comment critically evaluates the existing system of human rights treaty derogations. It analyzes the system's problems, identifies recent developments that have exacerbated these problems, and proposes a range of reforms in five areas—embeddedness, engagement, information, timing, and scope.

Author(s):  
Steven Wheatley

International Human Rights Law has emerged as an academic subject in its own right, separate from, but still related to, International Law. This book explains the distinctive nature of the new discipline by examining the influence of the moral concept of human rights on general international law. Rather than make use of moral philosophy or political theory, the work explains the term ‘human rights’ by examining its usage in international law practice, on the understanding that words are given meaning through their use. Relying on complexity theory to make sense of the legal practice in the United Nations, the core human rights treaties, and customary international law, The Idea of International Human Rights Law shows how a moral concept of human rights emerged, and then influenced the international law doctrine and practice on human rights, a fact that explains the fragmentation of international law and the special nature of International Human Rights Law.


Author(s):  
Carla Ferstman

This chapter considers the consequences of breaches of human rights and international humanitarian law for the responsible international organizations. It concentrates on the obligations owed to injured individuals. The obligation to make reparation arises automatically from a finding of responsibility and is an obligation of result. I analyse who has this obligation, to whom it is owed, and what it entails. I also consider the right of individuals to procedures by which they may vindicate their right to a remedy and the right of access to a court that may be implied from certain human rights treaties. In tandem, I consider the relationship between those obligations and individuals’ rights under international law. An overarching issue is how the law of responsibility intersects with the specialized regimes of human rights and international humanitarian law and particularly, their application to individuals.


Author(s):  
Farouk El-Hosseny ◽  
Patrick Devine

Abstract The intersection between foreign investment and human rights is gaining attention, as is evident from an increasing number of investment treaty awards analysing legal issues relating to human rights. In the recent International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) arbitration of Bear Creek v Peru, Philippe Sands QC posited, in a dissenting opinion, that the investor’s contribution to events—ie protests against its allegedly adverse environmental impact and disregard of indigenous rights, namely resulting from its ‘inability to obtain a “social licence”’—which led to the unlawful expropriation of its investment, was ‘significant and material’. He further noted that the investor’s ‘responsibilities are no less than those of the government’ and found that damages should thus be reduced. Last year, the Netherlands adopted a new model bilateral investment treaty (BIT), which allows tribunals to ‘take into account non-compliance by the investor with the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises’ when assessing damages. These recent developments shed light on how states and tribunals, as part of their decision-making process, can take into account human rights in practice, and crucially in respect of damages analyses. By first dissecting the concept of contributory fault, then shedding light on the intersection of investment treaty law and human rights, as elucidated in recent jurisprudence, this article questions whether there now exists a gateway for human rights obligations (soft or hard) in the investment treaty arbitration realm through the concept of contributory fault.


2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-132
Author(s):  
Shane Darcy

AbstractInternational law has not traditionally recognised individuals as victims of the crime of aggression. Recent developments may precipitate a departure from this approach. The activation of the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court over the crime of aggression opens the way for the future application of the Court's regime of victim participation and reparation in the context of prosecutions for this crime. The determination by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in General Comment No. 36 that any deprivation of life resulting from an act of aggression violates Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights serves to recognise a previously overlooked class of victims. This article explores these recent developments, by discussing their background, meaning and implications for international law and the rights of victims.


Author(s):  
Noura Karazivan

SummaryThis article argues that states should have a limited obligation — and not only a privilege — to extend diplomatic protection to their nationals when they are facing violations of their most basic human rights abroad. The author addresses the current state of international law regarding diplomatic protection, with a focus on the International Law Commission's failed attempt to impose a duty on states to exercise protection in cases of jus cogens violations. A review of domestic case law, particularly in the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, and South Africa, shows that while some courts recognize legitimate expectations to receive diplomatic protection, all are reluctant to exercise judicial review of a denial of diplomatic protection. The author nevertheless examines whether adherence to international human rights treaties could entail a positive obligation for states to exercise diplomatic protection in order to protect the human rights of their nationals that are ill-treated abroad.


2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-130
Author(s):  
Wiebke Ringel

On 3 May 2008, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) entered into force. The CRPD is the first human rights treaty adopted by the UN General Assembly in the 21st century. It is also the first binding international law instrument that specifically and comprehensively addresses disability from a human rights perspective. Building on existing UN human rights treaties, the CRPD aims to strengthen the effective enjoyment of all human rights by persons with disabilities. Specifically, the new convention seeks to remedy the neglect and marginalization of the rights of persons with disabilities not just at the national level but also at the international level, most notably within the UN treaty system. In this regard, the new convention endorses innovative and new approaches relating to, inter alia, the notions of disability, nondiscrimination, and intersectionality. This article analyses selected emerging key issues, including the principle of reasonable accommodation and the intersectionality of disability and gender. A specific focus will be on the emerging jurisprudence of the responsible treaty body, the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. While some of the aspects discussed may appear to primarily arise under a disability-specific perspective, it is suggested that they could potentially provide an impetus to advance the UN human rights system in general, beyond the context of disability.


2019 ◽  
pp. 193-224
Author(s):  
Courtenay R. Conrad ◽  
Emily Hencken Ritter

This chapter highlights the conclusions and contributions of theresearch: obligation to international law can constrain leaders from violating human rights-and encourage potential dissidents to revolt against their governments. The argument that human rights treaties "work" is contrary to the explanations of a wide variety of scholars who maintain that the international human rights regime has been an abject failure. Although scholars have found evidence that domestic institutions can lead to decreased repression, there has been little support for the argument that international institutions do so.In contrast, this book finds that-if international law creates even the smallest shift in assumptions over domestic consequences for repressive authorities-these effects can yield a substantively meaningful reduction in rights violations when leaders have significant stakes in domestic conflicts.


Author(s):  
Andreas Th Müller

One of the asymmetries faced by military missions in areas of limited statehood are diverging legal obligations of state and non-state actors, in particular in relation to human rights duties. From a perspective of states bound by human rights treaties, there is a certain danger that armed groups opposing them might abuse the obligations incumbent upon state actors. Against this perception, the potential application of human rights law to armed groups is not only relevant as a tool for protecting civilians but also from a reciprocity perspective in view of the fluidity of armed conflicts and with a view to convergence of standards. The chapter assesses how international law and international legal practice in relation to armed groups have evolved over the past decade. It takes stock of recent developments and analyses the degree to which human rights obligations apply to armed groups.


2021 ◽  
pp. 341-346
Author(s):  
William A. Schabas

Custom poses challenges for its identification but at the same time it offers a potential for dynamism that may often be superior to that of treaty law. Recent developments, most importantly the near-universal ratification of major human rights treaties and the Universal Periodic Review mechanism of the Human Rights Council, greatly facilitate the identification of customary law. It is clear that most of the rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are unquestionably part of customary international law. Doubts may persist about a few rights, such as the right to property. Customary law also extends to ‘solidarity rights’ or ‘peoples’ rights’, whose reflection in treaty law is not so universal. Recognition of rights does not ensure that there are effective mechanisms for their enforcement and implementation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document