scholarly journals The Right of Self-Determination: Its Emergence, Development, and Controversy

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Munafrizal Manan

This paper discusses the right of self-determinationfrom  international  law  and international human rights law perspective. It traces the emergence and development of self-determination from political principle to human right. It also explores the controversy of the right of self-determination. There have been different and even contradictory interpretations of the right of self-determination. Besides, there is no consensus on the mechanism to apply the right of self-determination. Both international law and international human rights law are vague about this.

2020 ◽  
pp. 109-130
Author(s):  
Michelle Jurkovich

This chapter considers the puzzling role of international law around the right to food and examines why the existing law has been unable to generate norms within the advocacy community. It explores the reasons why international anti-hunger organizations rarely legitimate the right to food in legal terms and how this case can challenge the understanding of the relationships between norms, human rights, and law. It also provides a conceptual discussion of the distinction between formal law and norms, underscoring the importance of not conflating the two concepts. The chapter argues that many international anti-hunger organizations still do not conceptualize food as a human right, making international human rights law less relevant. It looks at the hunger case that suggests there is nothing automatic about law generating norms among activists or society at large.


Author(s):  
Martin Dixon ◽  
Robert McCorquodale ◽  
Sarah Williams

Human rights are a matter of international law, as the rights of humans do not depend on an individual’s nationality and so the protection of these rights cannot be limited to the jurisdiction of any one State. This chapter introduces the principal ideas, issues and framework of international human rights law. It discusses human rights theories; human rights and the international community; international protection of human rights; regional human rights protections; limitations on the human rights treaty obligations of States; the right of self-determination; and the protection of human rights by non-State actors.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (3.30) ◽  
pp. 182
Author(s):  
Syafiq Sulaiman ◽  
Salawati Mat Basir ◽  
Mohd Zamre Mohd Zahir

The protection of the right to life and the duty to rescue persons in distress at sea are the fundamental obligations under two specialized international law regimes which are the international human rights law and the law of the sea. These rules when read together form a strong protection of the human rights of the asylum-seekers stranded at sea. However, often states failed to honour this obligation for various reasons ranging from national security to economic reasons. This article will analyse Malaysia’s responsibilities as regards the right to life and the duty to rescue of these asylum-seekers. It will also identify the existing international and domestic legal framework relevant to the application of these obligations upon Malaysia and whether it has acted in breach of such obligations. The article then proceeded with suggestions for further improvement that Malaysia can adopt in order to better perform its obligations. This study is a pure doctrinal legal research which is qualitative in nature. The data used in this research is collected from library-based resources. These data were then analyzed by using methods of content analysis as well as critical analysis. The article found that Malaysia has a duty to protect the right to life under international human rights law. Additionally, Malaysia is also bound under the law of the sea to perform its duty to rescue. In view of Malaysia’s failure to perform these duties in two occasions in the past consequently had resulted in a violation of international law. Therefore, it is suggested that Malaysia should initiate a revision of its national laws and policies regarding treatment of asylum-seekers stranded at sea to be in line with Malaysia’s duty under international law. Besides, the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency is call upon to comply with the international standards of treatment of persons in distress at sea which includes the asylum-seekers.  


Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith

This chapter examines the right to self-determination in international human rights law. It traces the origins of this right and considers issues characterizing the current debate on the future of self-determination. The chapter suggests that while self-determination is acceptable for divesting States of colonial powers, problems can arise when groups that are not the sole occupants of a State territory choose to exercise self-determination. The right to self-determination may sit uneasily with respect for territorial integrity of States. Various forms of modern self-determination, including partial or full autonomy within States are emerging.


Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith

This chapter examines the right to self-determination in international human rights law. It traces the origins of this right and considers issues characterizing the current debate on the future of self-determination. The chapter suggests that while self-determination is acceptable for divesting States of colonial powers, problems can arise when groups that are not the sole occupants of a State territory choose to exercise self-determination. The right to self-determination may sit uneasily with respect for territorial integrity of States. Various forms of modern self-determination, including partial or full autonomy within States are emerging.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 306-332
Author(s):  
Annick Pijnenburg

Abstract Containment policies whereby destination States provide funding, equipment and training to transit States that intercept refugees on their behalf suggest that destination States try to circumvent the prohibition of refoulement and raise the question to what extent destination States can avoid responsibility for violations of the rights of migrants and refugees by cooperating with transit States. Answering this question requires broadening the analysis beyond the principle of non-refoulement, including not only international human rights law, especially the right to leave and the concept of jurisdiction, but also the law of State responsibility, notably the prohibition of complicity. This article argues that, although it remains debatable whether the principle of non-refoulement applies when transit States intercept migrants and refugees on behalf of sponsoring destination States, the wider network of international law rules constrains the latter’s ability to avoid responsibility when implementing cooperative migration control policies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-47
Author(s):  
Jochelle Greaves Siew

This paper seeks to examine whether the current framework of international human rights law formally grants the right to a healthy environment to future generations. There has been much debate regarding the effectiveness of international human rights law in guaranteeing environmental sustainability in particular without the consideration of future generations. The right to a healthy environment was specifically chosen both as a means of narrowing the scope of this research and given that future generations are a fundamental concept of international law relating to environmental sustainability. In Section II, all relevant concepts, including ‘future generations’, ‘intergenerational justice and ‘environmental sustainability’ will be defined and explored. In addition, a link will be established between intergenerational equity and sustainable development in light of current literature and scholarly discussion. The following section discusses how the link drawn between environmental protection, human rights protection and environmental sustainability provides for a common approach to fully handling current environmental issues. Subsequently, a positive analysis of present day international legal instruments, customary international law and case law will be conducted, to determine the current status of future generations regarding the right to a healthy environment. Use will also be made of academic literature on the subject, including extensive research carried out by scholars such as Edith Brown Weiss and Bridgit Lewis. To conclude, the findings of each section will be summarised, and a final conclusion will be drawn as to the state of future generations in international law and the potential for the right to a healthy environment to be accorded to them.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 164
Author(s):  
Iryna PROTSENKO ◽  
Кostiantyn SAVCHUK

In the contemporary science of international law, the state sovereignty issue lacks adequate treatment. In particular, the list and essence of sovereign rights and duties of the state are not defined, although these are referred to in some international legal instruments and resolutions of international courts and arbitrations. In addition, particular circumstances are being under development, which require if not precise outlining of the catalogue of fundamental rights of states, then at least determining the essence of some of these rights and the scope of their implementation. It goes about developing the practice to limit specific sovereign rights of the state to ensure the implementation of human rights (notably, the ones not directly related to the respective rights of the state). In this very way, the state is limited in its right to determine its own immigration policy. The fact is that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has ruled in some of its judgments that by implementing this right, the state violates the right to respect for private and family life provided for by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 (ECHR). This resulted in ECtHR`s practice to be somewhat considered in the draft articles on the expulsion of aliens elaborated by the International Law Commission (ILC) in 2014. The examples from ECtHR`s practice analyzed in this paper provide the basis for the conclusion that the development of the International Human Rights Law is gradually narrowing the scope of the internal sovereign rights of the state.


2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 303-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivier De Schutter

AbstractThis article identifies the emergence of the right to land in international human rights law, and which measures of implementation are called for to ensure the full realization of this right. In certain contexts, the right to land may be seen as a self-standing right, whether it is protected as an element of the right to property, whether it is grounded on the special relationship of indigenous peoples to their lands, territories and resources, or whether it is a component of the right to food. In other cases, the right to land may be said to be instrumental to the right to food: it is protected as an indispensable means through which people can produce food, for their own consumption or as a source of income allowing them, in turn, to purchase food. In making the case for the explicit recognition of the right to land in international human rights law, this article recalls the current pressures on land; it examines the protection of landusers in their existing access to natural resources; and it discusses whether agrarian reform may be seen as a component of the progressive realization of the emerging human right to land.


2013 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharmila L Murthy ◽  
Mark Williams ◽  
Elisha Baskin

In the case 9535/06 Abadallah Abu Massad and Others v Water Commissioner and Israel Lands Administration (2011), the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that the right to water deserves constitutional protection under Israel's Basic Law: Human Dignity and Freedom. The Court also found support for the right to water under both international human rights law and Israeli statutory law. At the same time, the Court held that the right to water is not absolute but must be balanced against the rights of the state. The case was brought by residents of unrecognised Bedouin villages in the Negev, a desert region in southern Israel, who do not have access to household water. The Court found that in exercising its discretion regarding additional water access points, the Israeli Water Authority could consider the ‘illegal’ nature of these villages. Applying the criteria of reasonableness and proportionality, the Court ultimately affirmed the Israeli Water Authority's policy in unrecognised villages in the Negev. Despite this administrative deference, the invocation of constitutional and international human rights law raises the level of scrutiny that should be applied to a review of the Israeli Water Authority's exercise of discretion. The Court's opinion is coloured and influenced by long-standing land disputes between the indigenous Bedouin population and the State of Israel. Drawing on empirical research conducted in December 2011, the analysis attempts to place the Abu Massad decision in its proper historical and political context. The dispute over land in the Negev can be traced back to the days of the Ottoman Empire. More recent efforts by the Israeli government as set out in the Goldberg Report and the Prawer Plan, and the international community's response to these efforts, are discussed. In light of the history and current political context, it may be prudent for the Israeli Water Authority to re-assess the effectiveness of its existing water policy in unrecognised Bedouin villages in the Negev.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document