scholarly journals The Politics of Victimhood in Human Rights Violations: The Case of the Erased Residents of Slovenia

2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Gornik
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Political ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Compensation Scheme ◽  
European Court ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
Permanent Residents

During the process of gaining national independence the Slovenian government unlawfully erased 25,671 individuals, mainly citizens of other republics of the former Yugoslavia from the Slovenian Register of Permanent Residents. In 2012 the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Kurić and others vs. Republic of Slovenia held that there had been a violation of the 8th, 13th and 14th Articles of the European Convention on Human rights. Following this judgement the Slovenian government adopted a compensation scheme for the Erased introducing the criteria determining conditions for their redress. The article reflects on the political and legal construction of victimhood and reveals the notions of political loyalty, legal conformity and territorial attachment as one of the most decisive elements of victimhood. It shows that the subjectivity of victims in the case of the Erased is not defined within the human rights discourse but is grounded in nationalist terms.

14. Land Law and Human Rights

Land Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 593-629
Author(s):  
Chris Bevan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Land Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines the relationship between land law and human rights. From a distinctly land law perspective, the human rights discourse has given rise to much debate, which continues to fuel much academic commentary including recent examination of the availability of horizontal effect in McDonald v McDonald in the Supreme Court and in the European Court of Human Rights. The chapter focuses chiefly on the two most pertinent provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) for land law; namely Art. 1 of the First Protocol and Art. 8 and reflects on the, at times, difficult relationship between land law and human rights.

The Internationalization Of Human Rights And The Importance Of Normative Dialogues Between International And National Courts

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 137
Author(s):  
Mariane Morato Stival ◽  
Marcos André Ribeiro ◽  
Daniel Gonçalves Mendes da Costa
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Differences Of Opinion ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Different Characteristics ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

This article intends to analyze in the context of the complexity of the process of internationalization of human rights, the definitions and tensions between cultural universalism and relativism, the essence of human rights discourse, its basic norms and an analysis of the normative dialogues in case decisions involving violations of human rights in international tribunals such as the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and national courts. The well-established dialogue between courts can bring convergences closer together and remove differences of opinion on human rights protection. A new dynamic can occur through a complementarity of one court with respect to the other, even with the different characteristics between the legal orders.

scholarly journals The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the social model of health: new perspectives

2014 ◽  
pp. 74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penelope Weller
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Model ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
People With Mental Illness ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Social ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
Health Laws

Contemporary mental health laws are embedded in basic human rights principle, and their ongoing evolution is influenced by contemporary human rights discourse, international declarations and conventions, and the authoritative jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR). The<em> Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities</em> (CRPD) is the most recent expression of international human rights applicable to people with disability including people with mental illness.3 It provides a fresh benchmark against which to assess the human rights compatibility of domestic mental health laws.

Conclusion: An Intersectional Future for Human Rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 245-250
Author(s):  
Johanna Bond
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Organizations ◽  
International Human ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
The Way

Intersectionality has changed the way we think about human rights. It offers a complex, comprehensive, and nuanced approach that redounds to the benefit of victims seeking redress. It allows victims to articulate the multiple and intersecting forms of subordination that have negatively affected their lives. Intersectionality rejects the anemic and siloed approach to human rights that invariably fails to capture and remedy the complex, intersectional violations that characterize the lived experience of subordination for many people. Intersectionality has positively influenced human rights discourse ranging from the UN human rights treaty bodies to local human rights organizations that have incorporated the theory into their organizational missions. The theory is gaining ground in international human rights discourse, and it will continue to transform and expand our vision of appropriate remedies for human rights violations. Only by more accurately conceiving of intersectional human rights violations can we hope to provide meaningful and comprehensive remedies to those who have experienced violations of their rights.

5 Judgments and Efficacy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nussberger Angelika
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
The Other ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Daily News ◽  
European Court ◽  
General Rules ◽  
The One

This chapter evaluates the efficacy of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). On the one hand, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) system has had an amazing success in building up a constitutional order in Europe defining common values. Significant changes in the laws of all Member States were made; individual human rights violations were effectively remedied. On the other hand, Europe is far from being a human rights paradise. Even an average observer of daily news cannot avoid having the impression that in some States even the most basic human rights are not effectively guaranteed and that some so-called ‘democracies’ hide their disdain for individual rights behind lip services and promises to abide by the Convention, but in reality use membership in the Council of Europe only as a tool in foreign relations. The chapter then identifies the roles played by the Committee of Ministers, NGOs, and the Court in executing judgments on human rights violations. Article 46 para 1 ECHR obliges the parties to abide by the final judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties. In line with the general rules of State responsibility, the Court interprets the obligations arising out of Convention violations as threefold: ‘to cease the breach, to make reparation for it and ensure non-repetition of similar violations in the future’.

The Admissibility of Confessions and Real Evidence Obtained in Violation of Human Rights in Criminal Trials in European Countries: Analysing the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-355
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
The State ◽  
European Countries ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
European Court ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Right

The right to a fair trial is guaranteed under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In an effort to protect this right, the European Court of Human Rights has, inter alia, set criteria to determine whether or not the admission of a confession in domestic courts violated the right to a fair trial. This jurisprudence also shows that the Court has established two broad guidelines that govern the admissibility of confessions obtained through human rights violations. The first guideline is that confessions obtained in violation of absolute rights and in particular in violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights must be excluded, because their admission will always render the trial unfair. The second guideline is that a confession obtained in violation of a non-absolute right may be admitted without violating the right to a fair trial if the State had a compelling reason or reasons to restrict the right in question. The Court has also dealt with the issue of the admissibility of real evidence obtained through human rights violations. The purpose of this article is to highlight the Court’s jurisprudence.

scholarly journals Non-pecuniary damages before the European Court of Human Rights: Forget the victim; it’s all about the state

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 335-369
Author(s):  
Veronika Fikfak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Individual Justice

AbstractThis article studies how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR, the Court) adjusts damages for human rights violations. The article empirically analyses 13 years of ECtHR’s case law in relation to Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (torture, inhuman and degrading treatment), and 5 (arbitrary detention) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR, the Convention). The goal is to understand whether the statements made by the Court about the aims pursued through just satisfaction are confirmed in practice. Through an empirical quantitative study relating to non-pecuniary damages, the article analyses the practice of the Court in awarding non-pecuniary damages for human rights violations and compares it to the competing visions of the ECtHR’s function. In particular, I am interested in determining whether just satisfaction is aimed at redressing the suffering of the victim, her circumstances and vulnerability, or whether the focus is more on the respondent state, its conduct and its past human rights record. The answers to these questions will contribute to the debate whether the ECtHR’s role is one of delivering ‘individual justice’ or whether the Court is – as an international court enforcing an international treaty – focused on the ‘state’.

Human rights and the moralities of property

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 176-185
Author(s):  
Bonnie Holligan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Existing Structures ◽  
European Court ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Environment Agency ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
The Uk

Purpose Responding to the Supreme Court’s decision in R (on the application of Mott) v. Environment Agency, the purpose of this study is to explore the interface between property, environment and human rights. It examines the space within human rights jurisprudence for a richer notion of property that can accommodate social and environmental obligation and non-anthropocentric values. Design/methodology/approach In this study, a theoretical lens is applied to human rights doctrine. A central question is the extent to which there is room within the discourse on Article 1 of Protocol 1 (A1P1) to the European Convention on Human Rights for a more relational and ecocentric approach. The paper engages with the jurisprudence of the UK courts and that of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as the works of scholars such as Jennifer Nedelsky and Nicole Graham. Findings It is concluded that although the judgment in Mott demonstrates the potential for A1P1 to function as a means for rights-holders to obtain a voice in environmental decision-making processes, it highlights the tendency of property to preserve existing structures and arrangements. When assessing whether an individual is asked to bear an excessive burden, great weight was given in Mott to values associated with livelihood. What did not feature in the (brief) judgment was the consideration of the ecological context in which Mr Mott’s rights were embedded and the extent to which this context might have inherently restricted his ability to enjoy his property. The dispute demonstrates the limitations of existing property institutions and discourses in managing ecological conflict and fostering positive relationships and management practices. Originality/value This study contributes to the doctrinal literature on A1P1, providing a new perspective on the role of human rights jurisprudence in managing environmental conflict. It is original in its examination of human rights discourse in light of relational and ecocentric theories of property, providing a critique of existing values and paradigms. Evaluating the doctrinal reasoning in Mott with reference to this theoretical framework, it provides fresh insight into the limitations of the Supreme Court’s approach. It points to the need for more explicit incorporation of environmental values and contexts in human rights reasoning.

scholarly journals The victim and the criminal process: an analysis of recent trends in regional and international tribunals

Legal Studies ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Doak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Clear Trend ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
European Court ◽  
Recent Trends ◽  
International Tribunals ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

This paper examines the recent trends in regional and international tribunals that relate to the position of the victim in the criminal process. Recent decisions in both the European Court of Human Rights and other international tribunals have illustrated a new and progressive attitude towards the role of the crime victim. This can be attributed, in part, to the breakdown of the public/private divide in human rights law and the mutually expanding parameters of both human rights discourse and criminal law. It is argued here that cross-fertilisation between these disciplines, which is widely evident in current policy making and judicial decision-making, has meant that the traditional failures of human rights law and the criminal law to protect victims are being addressed – at least to some extent. A line of European and international case law has developed which suggests that victims of crime have acquired a number of enforceable substantive rights, similar to those held by victims of abuse of power. While the potential for victims to be further empowered will always be inherently limited in adversarial jurisdictions, it is none the less a welcome development that a clear trend is emerging which indicates that international policy makers and tribunals are viewing criminal justice issues in a much more holistic manner.

scholarly journals Protection AgainstRefoulementfrom Europe: Human Rights Law Comes to the Rescue

1999 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 515-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hélène Lambert
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
The Status ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
Domestic Jurisdiction ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
Scope Of Protection

A growing opinion has appeared in refugee and human rights discourse that the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the European Convention) provides more extensive protection againstrefoulementthan the 1951 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (the Refugee Convention). However, uncertainties remain as to whether the protection offered by the 1984 UN Convention against Torture (the Torture Convention) and the 1966 UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the Political Covenant) may substitute, or, rather, reinforce, that of the European Convention. Which of these four instruments offers the greatest protection against a decision ofrefoulementfrom a European country? The answer to this question is far from being academic. The rule that an international organ may only be competent to consider an individual petition or communication provided “the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of individual investigation or settlement” is embodied in all three instruments providing a procedure for individual complaints. It is therefore crucial for an asylum-seeker to give his or her best shot first, even if, as rightly pointed out by Liz Heffernan, the Strasbourg organs and the Geneva organs are not in competition.1This article will review the scope of protection afforded under the three of these treaties which provide an international enforcement mechanism to persons who have sought refugee status in the domestic jurisdiction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document