Linguistic Rights of Indigenous Peoples

De Jure ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Sanka ◽  
◽  
◽  

Language plays an essential role in one’s ability to access the life opportunities offered by a society through employment, healthcare, jurisprudence, voting, education, media, etc. Linguistic rights have been designed under international human rights law to address the right to choose the language or languages for communication while accessing such opportunities. Even so, the individually held linguistic right, which evolves from general individual human rights, such as the right to freedom of expression, to privacy, to a fair trial, etc., comes with less consequences as compared to the collective linguistic rights of groups. This paper, while exploring how international law deals with linguistic rights generally, shall focus on the linguistic rights of indigenous peoples. By so doing, the author discusses various international legal instruments which envisage collective linguistic rights of indigenous peoples, highlights the challenges faced by indigenous peoples with regards to such rights, and concludes by suggesting ways by which these challenges can be surmounted.

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.  


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed R.M. Elshobake

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the most prominent human rights violations during the COVID-19 pandemic in accordance with international human rights law. Design/methodology/approach Through doctrinal and legal study and content analysis, this paper analyses the important relevant legal provisions under International human rights law and applies these provisions to the reality of managing the COVID-19 crisis to identify the most prominent human rights violations during the COVID-19 outbreak. This research paper considered as a review paper in that it provides a review of the most prominent measures taken during the COVID-19 crisis, which constitutes violations of international human rights law. Findings It is concluded that some measures that have been taken by countries to confront the COVID-19 pandemic have constituted violations of human rights and did not comply with the legal conditions to restrict human rights. Indeed, the COVID-19 pandemic has shown the ugly fractures in health-care systems, health inequities, racism and discrimination, Undermining the right to freedom of expression and the right to access information, gross negligence in protecting detainees from COVID-19 infection, all of these constitute clear violations of the principles of international human rights law. Research limitations/implications The spread of COVID-19 has not stopped, and its effects still continue, including human rights violations. Therefore, this paper cannot enumerate all human rights violations that occur during the spread of COVID-19. Practical implications Based on the results in this paper, governments need to be more prepared to face any health crisis at all levels including health care, which would reduce human rights violations. Social implications This research paper reflects positively on the social reality, as the adoption of its recommendations leads to the provision of adequate health care to all members of society in accordance with the principles of human rights, granting them the right to access information, protecting their right to freedom of expression, reducing the phenomenon of racism and discrimination and providing adequate health care to all detainees. Originality/value This paper studies an up-to-date topic that we are still living and seeing its effects. The benefit of this paper is to provide recommendations that protect human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 373-408
Author(s):  
M. Ya’kub Aiyub Kadir

This article investigates the problem of defining ‘people’ and ‘indigenous people’ under the International Human Rights Covenants and their application in the Indonesian context. Using analyses based on the Third World Approach to International Law (twail), this article shows the problems facing Indonesia in identifying indigenous peoples as traditional peoples, in terms of being isolated peoples (Masyarakat Hukum Adat, hereafter mha), and the non-isolated indigenous peoples who were sovereign before the independence of Indonesia. This interpretation has been confusing in relation to the entitlement to natural resources. Therefore, this article proposes a new understanding of indigenous peoples, in order to arrive at better treatment and recognition and in terms of sharing power and the benefits of natural resources in the Indonesian system.


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.


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.


Author(s):  
Rhona K. M. Smith

International Human Rights Law provides a concise introduction for students new to the subject. Clearly written and broad in scope, this popular text gives a concise introduction to international human rights, including regional systems of protection and the key substantive rights. The author skillfully guides you through the complexities of the subject, making it accessible to those with little or no prior legal and/or international knowledge. Key cases and areas of debate are highlighted throughout, and a wealth of references to cases and further readings are provided at the end of each chapter. The book continues to be relied upon by students worldwide as the first book to turn to for clear and accurate coverage. It discusses the United Nations; the United Nations’ organizational structure; regional protection of human rights; Europe; the Americas; Africa; key treaties and mechanisms for monitoring, implementing, and enforcing human rights; substantive rights; equality and non-discrimination; the right to life; freedom from torture; cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment or punishment; the rights to liberty of person; equality before the law; the right to a fair trial; the right to self-determination; freedom of expression; the right to work; the right to education and human rights education; minority rights; and group rights.


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 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 393-422
Author(s):  
Joshua Castellino

AbstractIt is easy to detect a sense of achievement with the extent to which the human rights regime has progressed 60 years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The relative international successes suggest a bright outlook for the future of the human rights regime. However, an important lacuna remains in the attention that ought to be paid to minorities, indigenous peoples and others in vulnerable situations, including in some instances, women. This paper argues that despite the creation of sophisticated systems of international human rights law, the regimes for the protection of minority rights were stronger before the United Nations (UN) era. In support of this argument it seeks to assess regimes that existed at three different times, attempting to extrapolate and analyse the snapshots presented by these through the lens of evolving human rights law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document