Showing papers on "International human rights law published in 1982"
TL;DR: In this article, a third generation of human rights, composed of solidarity rights, is proposed, which is defined as a set of more or less homogeneous demands which are distinguished primarily by the fact that solidarity is a prerequisite to their realization.
Abstract: In recent years there has been growing support, manifested in various international fora, for the notion that a third generation of human rights, composed of solidarity rights, is emerging. The principal assumptions behind this concept are:(1) that the principal categories or sets of human rights presently recognized by international law (civil and political rights on one hand and economic, social and cultural rights on the other) can be termed respectively first and second generation rights;(2) that these rights are not sufficiently flexible or dynamic to be able to respond adequately to present circumstances;(3) that there is a set of more or less homogeneous demands which are distinguished primarily by the fact that solidarity is a prerequisite to their realization; and(4) that these new demands are presently in the process of acquiring international recognition as human rights.
91 citations
TL;DR: Human rights are a particular type of rights held by human beings, the rights they hold simply by their nature as human persons as mentioned in this paper, and each of the major formulations, human rights, natural rights and the rights of man, has advantages and disadvantages.
Abstract: 1. There are subtle differences in emphasis, however, between each of the major formulations, human rights, natural rights and the rights of man, and each has advantages and disadvantages. Natural rights stresses a grounding in human nature. It also refers to a tradition of thought which includes Locke, Paine, and Jefferson among its most prominent exponents and suggests a connection with the older idea of natural law. Such resonances add richness to the idea, but also may be a burden, for example, as is the case in the Lockean tradition's concentration on civil and political rights alone or the vague and confusing reference to natural law. Furthermore, the endowment of man with rights by nature is at best an obscure process. The phrase rights of man suggests man as the source of rights. To the extent that man is viewed as not merely natural, but rational and moral, this suggests a more complicated, and probably more illuminating, source for these rights. However, this phrase, particularly in English (although not necessarily in the French droits de I'homme), has deeply rooted ideological connotations from the era of the French Revolution. It also has regrettable, even if easily exaggerated, sexist connotations. Human rights seems to avoid the disadvantages of the other two terms. Like the rights of man, it suggests a subtle and particularly interesting derivation of rights from the complex moral notion of humanity; human nature as the source of the rights. However, the character of this derivation is rarely made explicit enough to be considered as anything more than suggestive. In addition, human rights may misleadingly suggest that all the rights held by human beings are human rights. Paine falls into this confusion, for example, in attacking Burke. See The Collected Works of Thomas Paine, edited by Philip S Foner, New York: The Citadel Press, 1945, vol. 1, p. 273. Instead, human rights are a particular type of rights held by human beings, the rights they hold simply by their nature as human persons. Furthermore, human rights may misleadingly suggest that one is being humane, charitable or beneficent in establishing or recognizing such rights, when in fact one is giving to rightholders that to which they are entitled. However,
70 citations
TL;DR: The authors argue that human rights and the national interest are often complementary and that any justifiable priority for one class of rights must rest on strategic or political, not conceptual or moral, grounds.
Abstract: Five recent books reveal the beginnings of important new work in conceptualizing the place of human rights concerns in national foreign policies. The moral force of claims of human rights requires that they be given serious consideration in foreign policy. Philosophical analysis also shows that categorical moral distinctions between personal (or civil and political) and economic and social rights must be abandoned. Any justifiable priority for one class of rights must rest on strategic or political, not conceptual or moral, grounds. Since human rights are only one of many foreign policy concerns, tradeoffs with other goals, interests, and values will be necessary. However, human rights and the national interest are often complementary. The “tradeoffs” actually made should be principled, instrumental decisions, rather than apparently ad hoc or cynical sacrifices of human rights.
64 citations
TL;DR: The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) as mentioned in this paper is the final interpreter of the European Convention and has developed a considerable body of case law of its own, including the margin of appreciation.
Abstract: The European Convention of Human Rights (Convention) 1 establishes a set of rights and freedoms which all member states undertake to "secure to everyone within their jurisdiction."2 At the same time the Convention provides machinery to enforce these rights: the European Commission of Human Rights (Commission); 3 the European Court of Human Rights (Court); 4 and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.5 Though the Commission continues to be the most active, the Court has in recent years developed a considerable body of case law of its own. It has also made use of the doctrine of the margin of appreciation, first developed by the Commission. As the Court is the final interpreter of the Convention, its use of the margin of appreciation doctrine and its development of standards for its application are critical to the enforcement of the Convention.
51 citations
27 citations
TL;DR: This paper argued that property rights are moral values independent of the particular (capitalist) structure of society and that there is a conflict between the community good and individual liberty, and that values themselves (whether defined as the deep causes of inequality) can only be derived from the community.
Abstract: Property rights are commonly thought to be absolute and sacrosanct. Utilitarian theorists, such as Locke, have encouraged a further belief that property rights are synonymous with individual liberty. A number of more recent writers have claimed that these rights are moral values independent of the particular (capitalist) structure of society. Moreover, there is a supposed conflict between the community good and individual liberty. These notions are criticized from a Structuralist perspective which presumes that individuals have meaning only in a social context. It is also claimed, contrary to utilitarian notions, that values themselves (whether defined as the deep causes of inequality or not) can only be derived from the community.
25 citations
TL;DR: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (ICHR) as discussed by the authors was established by the American Convention on Human Rights, which entered into force in 1978; to date the Convention has been ratified by 17 of the 29 member states of the Organization of American States.
Abstract: The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has drafted its Statute, adopted its Rules of Procedure, negotiated its headquarters agreement, and so far dealt with its first case.1 It is timely, therefore, to describe the Court's institutional framework and to analyze its jurisdiction. A more extensive study, of course, will have to await its developing case law. The Court was established by the American Convention on Human Rights, which entered into force in 1978; to date the Convention has been ratified by 17 of the 29 member states of the Organization of American States.2 The Court consists of seven judges, nominated and elected by the states parties to the Convention.3 The judges must be nationals of an OAS member state, but they need not have the nationality of the states parties to the Convention.4 The regular term of the judges is 6 years; they may be reelected for one additional term.5 The judges constituting the first Court were elected in May 1979.6
23 citations
Book•
16 Nov 1982
TL;DR: Valticos and Ramcharan as mentioned in this paper proposed a model of rules of procedure for United Nations bodies dealing with violations of human rights in the context of international human rights fact-finding missions.
Abstract: Foreword: Dr N Valticos, Former Assistant Director-General and Adviser for International Labour Standards, ILO Secretary-General, Institute of International Law Introduction: Dr BG Ramcharan Chapter I Substantive law applicable - Dr BG Ramcharan Chapter II Procedural law - KT Samson, Co-ordinator for Human Rights, ILO Chapter III Evidence - Dr BG Ramcharan Chapter IV The competence and functions of fact-finding bodies - Prof Felix Ermacora, Member of the Austrian Parliament, Member of the European Commission on Human Rights, Member of the Human Rights Committee, former member of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights Chapter V Hearings - A Dieye, Judge of the Supreme Court of Senegal, Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Chile, Member of the Human Rights Committee Chapter VI Legal representation - Prof R Clark, Rutgers University Chapter VII Visits on the spot A The Experience of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights - Edmundo Vargas Carreno, Executive Secretary, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights B The experience of the European Commission on Human Rights - CH Kruger, Secretary, European Commission of Human Rights C The experience of the ILO - Mr G von Potobsky, Chief, Application of Standards Branch, International Labour Standard Department, ILO D The experience of the United Nations - Dr BG Ramcharan Chapter VIII The reports of fact-finding bodies - Dr Theo C van Boven, former Director, United Nations Division of Human Rights Chapter IX Fact-finding by non-governmental organizations - Prof D Weissbrodt, University of Minnesota, and J McCarthy Annex I: Model rules of Procedure for United Nations Bodies dealing with violations of human rights Annex II: Draft Model Rules of Procedure suggested by the Secretary-General of the United Nations for Ad Hoc bodies of the United Nations entrusted with studies of particular situations alleged to reveal a consistent pattern of violations of human rights Annex III: Economic and Social Council resolution 1870 (LVI): Model rules of procedure for United Nations bodies dealing with violations of human rights Annex IV: Belgrade Minimal rules of procedure for international human rights fact-finding missions Annex V: UN General Assembly Resolution 35/176 Bibliography Index
17 citations
17 citations
TL;DR: The Australian Government tabled a Bill concerning Plant Variety Rights in May 1981 This Bill would, if enacted, establish property rights in new plant varieties and has been adopted in more than twenty countries as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The Australian Government tabled a Bill concerning Plant Variety Rights in May 1981 This Bill would, if enacted, establish property rights in new plant varieties Plant Variety Rights legislation has been adopted in more than twenty countries A range of economic issues relevant to the adoption of Plant Variety Rights legislation in Australia is considered in this paper, including assessments of some of the arguments of proponents and opponents of the proposed legislation It is concluded that differences in the physical, economic, political and institutional environments in Australia mean that the claimed effects of Plant Variety Rights in other countries may not necessarily be repeated in Australia if this legislation were enacted here
TL;DR: The Carter human rights policy as discussed by the authors was grounded in American historic oscillation between pragmatism and idealism, and represented a major change, yet was prefigured in congressional initiatives, which continued thereafter.
Abstract: The Carter human rights policy was grounded in American historic oscillation between pragmatism and idealism. It represented a major change, yet was prefigured in congressional initiatives, which continued thereafter. After an initial honeymoon, human rights like all “new” policies became a contentious bureaucratic and diplomatic issue, was modified to fit changing realities, and was eventually obscured by crises in Iran and Afghanistan. Criticized from left to right abroad and at home, the Carter human rights policy illustrated the impossibility of avoiding inconsistency in global policies-but also the certainty that, given the American tradition, it will continue to emerge on the policy stage.
Journal Article•
Journal Article•
01 Jan 1982
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that an image of a kind of constrained disputation or conflict is appropriate for the use of power, authority, and rights in the practice of medicine.
Abstract: Power, authority, and rights are edgy, adversarial notions. They come into play primarily where there is disagreement and incipient or at least latent conflict. Exploring these somewhat contentious ideas (whose home ground of politics is an arena in which we expect contention) in the context of the practice of medicine might seem marginal if not alien. The argument of this essay is that an image of a kind of constrained disputation or conflict — an image at once suggested by and conducive to the use of “power”, “authority”, and “rights” — is in fact appropriate to much of current medical practice. As might be expected of a political theorist, this argument will be presented in part through models and analogies familiar from political thought and practice. But the matters before us are sensitive. For this and more specifically analytical reasons that will emerge as we proceed, it will be well to seek perspective by first giving attention to the venerable and apparently more comfortable notion that medicine forms a practice.
Posted Content•
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examine the effect of the Constitution Act, 1982 on the rights of aboriginal peoples and specifically analyze the three sections in which those rights are expressly mentioned, and examine their effect on aboriginal peoples' rights.
Abstract: Canada's aboriginal peoples have always enjoyed special status and unique rights under Canadian law as a result of their original occupation and use of the land that now makes up this country. Prior to the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), however, the constitutional protection afforded those rights was at best limited. The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of the Act on the rights of the aboriginal peoples, and specifically to analyze the three sections in which those rights are expressly mentioned.
TL;DR: A majority of states in the U.N. General Assembly tends to emphasize the priority of socioeconomic rights, perhaps to the exclusion of civil-political rights as mentioned in this paper, and the United States does not like to speak about socioeconomic rights; indeed, spokesmen for the Reagan Administration have strongly suggested that socioeconomic rights do not exist.
Abstract: A majority of states in the U.N. General Assembly tends to emphasize the priority of socioeconomic rights, perhaps to the exclusion of civil-political rights. President Jimmy Carter signed and sent to the Senate the U.N. Covenant on Social, Economic, and Cultural Rights. President Ronald Reagan, however, does not like to speak about socioeconomic rights; indeed, spokesmen for the Reagan Administration have strongly suggested that socioeconomic rights do not exist. This essay first charts these two polarized positions, then offers reflections on the clashing conceptions. The point of these reflections is to suggest that neither of these two views completely comprehends reality. The subject of socioeconomic rights involves some weighty matters: the overall effect of capitalism, the relation of capitalism to civil-political rights, the history of the West since the industrial revolution, the result of state intervention in Latin America, the nature of the structure of international economics, the extent of equality in America, and more. The reader will no doubt understand that in the following short article I do not pretend to provide the definitive answers to these questions, which after all have been examined in countless volumes through the years. What I do attempt is to distill some of the major points from these previously published perspectives and present them in a provocative think piece.
Journal Article•
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss women's rights regarding marriage, the family, and genital operations in the context of internationally accepted views of the individual rights of women, and use examples from several English-speaking sub-Saharan countries.
Abstract: In this paper I will discuss women’s rights regarding marriage, the family, and genital operations in the context of internationally accepted views of the individual rights of women. I focus upon these particular areas partly because the issue of female genital operations in Africa has been the subject of much popular attention in the last three years, but mainly because, given that women’s biological reproductive roles are so much more central to their lives than are the equivalent roles for men, their rights in these areas profoundly affect their ability to exercise their rights in other areas, i.e. in the polity and in the economy. For data I use examples from several English-speaking sub-Saharan countries.
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors consider, in the light of relevant precedents, recent international proposals which could provide a more positive orientation for international human rights policies in the context of multilateral action linked to world trade policies.
Abstract: International human rights policies have long been dominated by an overriding concern with violations of a narrow range of rights rather than focusing on constructive policies for the promotion of respect for the whole range of human rights. As a logical consequence of this preoccupation with curative rather than preventive measures, recent human rights policy discussions have primarily centered around the application of various sanctions. This obsession with violations and the subsequent imposition of sanctions has also characterized proposals to link human rights and trade, and it has been a feature of relevant legislation enacted in a number of states, including the United States. However, a comprehensive strategy for the promotion of respect for human rights cannot rely exclusively on sanctions which address only a small part of the overall problem, are readily manipulated for extraneous political purposes, and have rarely proved to be particularly effective. The purpose of the present article is to consider, in the light of relevant precedents, recent international proposals which could provide a more positive orientation for international human rights policies in the context of multilateral action linked to world trade policies. In essence, these proposals involve the creation of a link between, on the one hand, further liberalization of world trade and in particular the extension of provisions for preferential treatment of developing countries and, on the other hand, the promotion of respect for human rights in the form of fair labor standards. One of the most notable proponents of this approach is the Report of the Independent Commission on International Development Issues under the chairmanship of Willy Brandt, referred to as the Brandt Report. In a separate section dealing with fair labor standards the report notes:
Posted Content•
TL;DR: The work of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry as discussed by the authors was one of the most significant contributions of the Inquiry, which permitted a clear and comprehensive articulation by the aboriginal peoples of how they understood their rights.
Abstract: n this article the author reviews the work of a major commission of inquiry established by the Federal Government of Canada in 1974 to consider the environmental, social and economic impact of the then proposed Mackenzie Valley natural gas pipeline on the land and people in the Yukon and the Northwest Territories - Canada's northland. This commission of inquiry, which is commonly referred to as the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry, was presided over by Mr. Justice Thomas Berger, a judge of the Supreme Court of British Columbia. One of the principal issues which quickly emerged in the work of the Inquiry was that of the legal and political rights of the aboriginal peoples of the North. One of the most significant contributions of the Inquiry was the establishment of new procedures which permitted a clear and comprehensive articulation by the aboriginal peoples of how they understood their rights. These procedures were not developed on an a priori basis but were derived from the volksgeist and law ways of the aboriginal people. These procedures in turn resulted in the substance of aboriginal rights or, as they are generally termed, "native rights", being given a radical content; radical in the sense that the rights as articulated by native peoples, while much broader than those which have been recognized by Canadian courts, reflected the original principles which had governed the relationships between aboriginal peoples and the European colonialists who came amongst them some 400 years ago. An analysis of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry in the context of the articulation of native rights provides, therefore, an opportunity not only to assess within the sociology of law the important role of commissions of inquiry in developing new procedural forums but also to better understand the close relationship between procedural and substantive rights as revealed in the historical evolution of native rights in Canada.