scholarly journals OBJECTIVE 8 AT THE CROSSROADS BETWEEN HUMAN RIGHTS AND NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Victoria Priori
PMLA ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 121 (5) ◽  
pp. 1638-1642
Author(s):  
Bruce Robbins

Will historians looking back a hundred years from now see the rise of human rights as an agent or reflection of the decline of national sovereignty? I take this question (asked at a recent meeting by Richard Wilson, director of the Human Rights Institute at the University of Connecticut) as an expression of worry about the effects that the decline of national sovereignty is likely to have, including effects on human rights themselves. Human rights advocates will recognize an obvious reason for this worry. Human rights are often seen, correctly but narrowly, as a key line of protection against an invasive and oppressive state. But the project of winning respect for human rights also relies heavily on the state's legal and bureaucratic powers—the power to enforce, to educate, to take positive measures, and so on. This is especially true in the domain of economic, social, and cultural rights, which require for their fulfillment that states exercise what has come to be called “due diligence.” Violence against women, for example, which has only been classified as an abuse of human rights since 1993, is often perpetrated not by states but by private individuals and groups. It can come under the protection of human rights discourse only if a sovereign state, which is held responsible for intervening to punish and prevent, is strong enough to do so. Weaken national sovereignty, and you may subvert the cause of women's rights.


2000 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 23-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Caplan

States have long taken exception to the notion of humanitarian intervention because it threatens to undermine a bedrock principle of international order: national sovereignty. In the case of Kosovo, however, NATO's nineteen member states chose not only to put aside their concerns for national sovereignty in favor of humanitarian considerations, but also to act without UN authorization. This essay examines the ways in which states – European states in particular – are rethinking historic prohibitions against humanitarian intervention in the wake of the Kosovo war. It focuses on two approaches:Efforts to reinterpret international law so as to demonstrate the legitimacy of humanitarian intervention andEfforts to build a political consensus regarding when and how states may use force for humanitarian endsWhile efforts to weaken prohibitions may succeed, thereby facilitating future interventions, resolution of the tension between legitimacy and effectiveness in defense of human rights will continue to elude the international community unless a political consensus can be achieved.


2005 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 43-69
Author(s):  
Nam-Kook Kim

This paper examines how Britain tries to defend its national sovereignty against European challenges in the area of human rights policies and how the British approach to human rights has evolved after adjusting complicated demands from Europe. I explore the three British Acts of human rights and immigration policies: the Human rights Act of 1998, the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Act, and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000. I assess the British case in the context of two competing views: one, human rights as a constitutive principle of, not an external imposition on, liberal nation states. The other, human rights as a universalized discourse of entitlement that rendered national citizenship inventively irrelevant. I argue that the British case basically confirms the priority of national sovereignty in the evolution of human rights regime, but shows a transition to the concept of human rights as a universalized entitlement beyond the nation state.


Author(s):  
Rich Cole

Rich Cole's essay reads laws of minority rights in Europe to challenge the tendency for cultural historians to understand the human rights revolution as beginning in the 1940s with signing of the the UN Charter. James Joyce's Cyclops, for instance, is written in such a way that it intersperses voices of national sovereignty with an increased rights consciousness brought about by global market forces. The citizen and the court trial provide two obvious points of reference to trace emerging debates about the promise of global constitutionalism and liberal rights claims to counter imperial oppression in pre-war Dublin.


This volume considers the interconnection of racial oppression in the U.S. South and West, presenting thirteen case studies that explore the ways in which citizens and migrants alike have been caged, detained, deported, and incarcerated, and what these practices tell us about state building, converging and coercive legal powers, and national sovereignty. As these studies depict the institutional development and state scaffolding of overlapping carceral regimes, they also consider how prisoners and immigrants resisted such oppression and violence by drawing on the transnational politics of human rights and liberation, transcending the isolation of incarceration, detention, deportation and the boundaries of domestic law. Contributors: Dan Berger, Ethan Blue, George T. Díaz, David Hernandez, Kelly Lytle Hernández, Pippa Holloway, Volker Janssen, Talitha L. LeFlouria, Heather McCarty, Douglas K. Miller, Vivien Miller, Donna Murch, and Keramet Ann Reiter.


1976 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-8
Author(s):  
Istvan Deak

The national movement to foster the social, political, and economic rejuvenation of Hungary began in earnest some twenty years before the Revolution of 1848. There was a direct line of development from the first reform diet of 1825, which demanded the redress of national grievances but no economic or social reform, to the last diet of feudal Hungary in 1847–1848, which demanded and obtained national sovereignty, the emancipation of the peasants, and the codification of basic human rights. During these years Hungary's political climate definitely changed, and every political group, even the court circles in Vienna, moved in what can be called a generally progressive or leftist direction. The court, the Hungarian chancellery in Vienna, the royal administration in Budapest, the conservative, liberal, and radical parties in the diet, and the extra-parliamentary opposition in the streets and the cafés—all assiduously planned, advocated, and introduced reform programs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document