Seeking Life, Finding Justice: Russian NGO litigation and Chechen Disappearances before the European Court of Human Rights

This article presents findings from an interview study of human rights practitioners who assist relatives of the disappeared from Chechnya with their complaints before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). These practitioners work for nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). The study contributes to the scant literature on NGO litigation before the ECtHR and to the social scientific literature on how human rights are actively practiced. It investigates the NGOs?? intermediary position between the ECtHR and the relatives of the disappeared in Chechnya. Consequently, this article asserts that a significant aspect of this position lies in the practitioner??s capacity to mediate between an ambition to externalize local grievances to the ECtHR and the relatives?? hopes that the ECtHR can bring certainty to the uncertain loss of their disappeared relatives. From this position, several dilemmas emerge as to how international legal mechanisms can provide remedies following disappearances.     

Courts and the politics of secrecy: national security,human rights and the importance of supranational oversight

Abstract

The article examines the use of state secrecy in court litigation concerning alleged gross human rights violations committed in the struggle against terrorism, focusing specifically on cases of extraordinary rendition and comparing the performance of courts in the United States, in Italy and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The article explains that national courts have validated the assertion by national governments of the state secret privilege in litigation involving cases of extraordinary rendition, ensuring de facto immunity to individuals involved in gross human rights abuses. On the contrary, it underlines that the ECtHR has pierced the veil covering these ‘deep secrets’, undertaking a strict scrutiny of acts of extraordinary rendition to torture committed by governments in the name of national security. As the article argues, the success of the ECtHR can be explained by a number of reasons, including distance, time and institutional design. In conclusion, the case law of the ECtHR on secrecy and national security confirms the continuing importance of supranational courts as instruments of external oversight on the human rights practice of European states.     

Defensive Enforcement: Human Rights in Indonesia

The objective of the article is to examine the human rights enforcement in Indonesian legal and political system. This is done by studying the legal basis of human rights, the process of proliferation of human rights discourse, and the actual controversies of human rights enforcement. The study has the effect of highlighting some of the immense deficits in ensuring that violations are treated under judicial procedure and the protection of human rights is available and accessible for victims. The author inevitably came into a conclusion that the openness of legal and political arenas for human rights discourses is not followed with a tangible impact on the entitlement positions of the people. The problems of the weak institutions and the unenthusiastic enforcement show that, in Indonesia, human rights are formally adopted as a political strategy to avoid substantial implementation.     

The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in the Implementation of the UN Guiding Principles

National human rights institutions (NHRIs) are key domestic mechanisms for promotion and protection of human rights. The institutions' broad mandate, competencies, and special status between state and nonstate actors on the one hand, and special status between the national and international levels on the other hand enable them to engage effectively in the field of business and human rights. Since 2009, NHRIs have been engaging with the international human rights system in order to increase understanding and raise awareness of their role in addressing business and human rights issues. As a result, they have contributed to the development of the UN “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework and obtained an evolving role within all pillars of the framework and in its implementation. This paper presents how these domestic institutions, bridging the national and international levels, fit into the UN legal regime for corporate responsibility for human rights and what contribution they make to the implementation of the UN Guiding Principles.     

Indigenous Rights, Global Governance, and State Sovereignty

This article discusses indigenous rights within the context of global governance. I begin by defining the terms ??global governance?? and ??indigenous peoples?? and summarizing the rights that are most important to indigenous peoples. The bulk of this article studies the global governance of indigenous rights in three areas. The first example is the creation of the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. A second example involves violations of indigenous rights brought before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. A third case looks at a relatively new international regime created by indigenous peoples themselves??the Inuit Circumpolar Council. I conclude by using theories of sovereignty to assess the relative successes and failures of indigenous efforts to secure their rights.     

National Responses to European Court Jurisprudence

The power of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to promote European integration through law has been broadly acknowledged, but the court’s domestic impact has received less attention and remains contested. In particular, the ambiguity of many ECJ judgments is said to have two opposed effects: According to one logic, legal ambiguity enables national policy-makers to contain the impact of court rulings, i.e. to ignore potentially broader policy implications. According to another logic, ambiguous case law provides opportunities for interested litigants to pressure national policy-makers into (anticipatory) adjustments. Which of these two logics prevails, it is argued, depends on the distribution of legal uncertainty costs between supporters and challengers of the regulatory status quo. The argument is supported by two in-depth case studies on the domestic responses to series of ECJ rulings concerning the free movement of capital (golden shares) and services (posted workers).     

How to Advance Social Rights without Jeopardising the Human Rights Act 1998

When the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was drafted, governments grasped that human rights are needed as safeguards, not only against authoritarianism but also against the causes of authoritarianism. For this reason, the UDHR encompasses civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. This holistic vision of human rights was obscured during the Cold War and more recently by economic neo‐liberalism. The UK government neglects social rights, which have a very low public profile, although there is evidence that the profile of these human rights is increasing. UK domestic law and practice is inconsistent with the holistic vision of human rights and the government's binding international social rights obligations. The UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights recommends that the UK provides for ‘the legislative recognition of social rights’ which can be approached in various ways. One way is to proceed social right by social right (for example, the rights to housing, health and education), and sector by sector (for example, the sectors of housing, health and education). This administrative law approach advances explicit social rights without implicating or jeopardising the Human Rights Act 1998.     

Delivering Lasting Peace, Democracy and Human Rights in Times of Transition: The Role of International Law

¹The increasing scope of international legal regulation, particularlyin the field of human rights, has facilitated the impositionof sustained policies of domestic reform aimed at entrenchinginternationally accepted standards of governance in transitionalsocieties. At the point of such societal change, however, thesymbolism of who makes and enforces the law is important. Thequestion of the relationship between national and internationallaw is therefore one that bears scrutiny. This article examinesthe theoretical basis upon which such policies are based, namelythe idea of a liberal peace, considering the extent to whichthe blanket implementation of international standards can addressthe need of transitional societies to reestablish the legitimacyof both political and legal authority in order to ensure thefuture protection of human rights.     

Law as a System of Rights: A Critical Perspective

The “rhetorical incorporation of human rights terminology” into domestic law is the central concern of this article. Over the last 20 years or so, countries have faced international pressure to conform to human rights standards in order to enjoy legitimacy. However, there is a huge gap between what is legalized as “human rights” in domestic laws and what is set forth as “human rights” in international human rights instruments. Based on this presupposition that a proper incorporation of human rights on the books is a prerequisite for putting them into practice, this study by adopting a Systems Thinking approach seeks to show that law as a soft system on the books is more than the name and number of rights. It is a complex whole whose function depends on not only the name and number of rights but also different features of rights and the relationships between them. To this end, law is conceived as a system of rights that has five major features including the “frame of reference,” “scope of rights,” “orientation of rights,” “enforceability of rights,” and “realizability of rights.” The way of codification of human rights with respect to each of these features makes a big difference in implementing human rights in practice. To develop a heuristic devise for evaluating the situation of human rights in current legal systems, the conceptual space of law as a system of rights is depicted in a matrix called a “Rights Fabric Matrix.”     

Human Rights in Policing: The Past,Present and Future

This article seeks to demonstrate, largely from practitioners’ perspectives, the growing evolution in understanding and implementation of meaningful human rights standards within the policing context. In the early 2000s, human rights were perceived and treated as a rather restrictive framework in UK policing. They are now more readily seen as a set of tools that guide and help the police to balance the views and interests of all parties to the criminal justice process. Human rights values enable police in the UK to better endeavour to do the right thing, ‘without fear or favour’.     

Externalizing Human Rights: From Commission to Council, the Universal Periodic Review and Egypt

Critics of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (CHR) and its successor, the Human Rights Council (HRC), focus on member state efforts to protect themselves and allies from external pressure for human rights implementation. Even though HRC members still shield rights abusers, the new Universal Periodic Review (UPR) subjects all states to regular scrutiny, and provides substantial new space for domestic NGOs to externalize domestic human rights demands. This paper offers an institutional account of the expansion of NGO externalization opportunities from the CHR to the HRC, and during UPR institution building and Egypt’s 2010 UPR. It draws on 45 longitudinal, open-ended interviews with Egyptian human rights activists, donors, and other observers conducted in 2007 and 2010.     

An Umbrella With Holes: Respect for Non-Derogable Human Rights During Declared States of Emergency, 1996–2004

This paper examines the effects of non-derogability status for seven human rights during declared states of emergency from 1996 to 2004 in 195 countries. For this purpose, we create several original measures of countries?? state of emergency status. Our analysis finds the intended protections from the special legal status of non-derogable rights to be anemic, at best, during declared emergencies. This finding begs a reconsideration of both the utility of the ??non-derogable?? categorization in both international and municipal law, and the conditions under which declared states of emergency might be justified.     

What can Post‐Democracy tell us about TNCs and Extraterritorial Violations of Human Rights?

This article considers the problem of extraterritorial human rights violations committed by transnational corporations (TNCs), and draws on Crouch's framework in Post‐democracy to illustrate why the issue has proved so difficult for states to regulate. I begin by examining the problem of corporate regulation more generally, and set out Crouch's analysis to show why and how corporations have become so influential. The second section considers the area of business and human rights, and explains why there is ‘a governance gap’ in relation to extraterritorial human rights violations committed by corporations. The third section describes efforts at the international and domestic levels to regulate corporations in relation to this issue. It concludes that while new international principles and innovative hybrid schemes are playing a valuable role in norm creation and standard‐setting, the enforcement of these principles remains limited. Corporations have largely succeeded to date in their lobbying efforts to remain free of any direct obligations under international law.     

Obama’s Human Rights Policy: Déjà vu with a Twist

In US history, much human rights policy developed in four waves during the twentieth century. These waves were triggered by similar circumstances, but all proved short-lived as structural constraints such as limited US power over other countries’ domestic actions, competing US policy priorities, a US hesitance to join multilateral institutions, and the continued domestic political weakness of human rights advocates led to setbacks. As Barack Obama took office, his campaign comments and the past patterns led to widespread expectations that he would introduce new human rights initiatives. His policies, though, would continue to face the structural constraints and would be affected by the Bush administration’s legacy. It was predictable that many of Obama’s initiatives would be only partially implemented and only partially successful. As expected, Obama’s first years have seen mixed results, but the Obama administration has advanced US human rights policies sufficiently in half-dozen key areas to say that a fifth wave of human rights policy development is underway.     

Domestic law and human rights treaty commitments: The Convention against Torture

How human rights treaties will be incorporated and applied domestically must affect how eager states will be to ratify those treaties. This article focuses on two characteristics of domestic legal systems that shape the relationship between international law and domestic law: whether treaties are directly incorporated into domestic law and whether treaties can override ordinary statute. The analysis probes two arguments as to why domestic legal institutions influence ratification decisions, one emphasizing the potential costs associated with ratification and the other emphasizing congruence between domestic values and treaty norms. Survival analysis of ratification of the Convention against Torture reveals that both judicial independence and making treaties equal or superior to statute increase the likelihood of ratification, which is consistent with the norm-congruence thesis. The results suggest new avenues for investigating the relationships between human rights treaties and domestic legal institutions.     

Human Rights,Public Budgets,and Epistemic Challenges

Ideally, governing institutions would be designed so that they would produce and implement with certainty ‘human rights-compatible budgets’, i.e. budgets that adequately reflect the obligations enshrined in human rights. However, there are various reasons why a government may ultimately fail to produce such budgets. This article focuses on under-examined challenges for budgeting for human rights: epistemically oriented challenges. More specifically, the article engages in ‘horizon scanning’, and it maps key underlying factors that can be conducive to epistemically oriented challenges to produce and implement human rights-compatible budgets. In addition, the article considers the road ahead from the perspective of institutional design.     

Rethinking Human Rights in York as a Human Rights City

Human rights is in crisis in the UK. It lacks significant political backing and public support. This ‘insider account’ of York becoming a human rights city suggests that there is a need to rethink approaches to human rights. The article looks at the strategies adopted in the city; the annual city‐based indicator report which provides the key reference point for all local activities; and the declaration of York as a ‘human rights city’ in 2017 alongside its subsequent impact. The discussion is linked to two debates within human rights: how to define and build a culture of human rights, and what it means for human rights to be truly relevant at a local level. The new approach advocated can be summarised as participatory, locally informed, and related to everyday concerns.     

Justifying Human Rights: Does Consensus Matter?

This paper is a critical examination of a widely accepted method of human rights justification. The method defends the universality of human rights by appeal to diverse worldviews that converge on human rights norms. By showing that the norms can be justified from the perspective of diverse worldviews, human rights theorists suggest that there is reason to believe that human rights are universal norms that should govern the institutions of all societies. This paper argues that the evidence of plural foundations of human rights fails to increase our confidence in the universality of human rights. The paper defends the following claims: (1) the convergence on human rights is better explained as an accidental outcome than as an indicator of the universality of human rights, (2) the plurality of human rights justification is superfluous to the explanation of why human rights apply to all societies, (3) the aggregation of justifications decreases rather than increases the reliability of the universality belief, and (4) the reasonable disagreement among conflicting justifications generates an epistemic dilemma.     

Human Rights Reporting: Rights,Responsibilities, and Challenges

This essay critically examines the intersections between news media and human rights in the context of the existing human rights framework. A survey of the fundamental provisions of international human rights law and of the evolving case law of human rights organs relating to media freedom and responsibilities reveals that existing gaps and underspecified obligations render problematic the normative guidance offered by the framework in addressing the pertinent human rights issues. However, this is part of the story. The problems associated with normative guidance are compounded by media practitioners’ contending approaches on the role of the media as “promoters of human rights.” The interplay between these factors is then examined through the prism of the two communities’ converging commitment to “truth-seeking.” This commitment can provide entry points to a more constructive engagement between the news media and the human rights community.     

Human Rights in US Courts: Alien Tort Claims Act Litigation after Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain

In Filartiga v. Pena-Irala (1980), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that victims of human rights violations could sue their oppressors civilly in US courts under an eighteenth century law now called the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA). Controversy raged over the Filartiga decision and the proper interpretation of the ATCA for 24 years. Then in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain (2004), the Supreme Court issued its first ATCA decision. This essay analyzes the effect of the Sosa decision on the development of human rights law in US courts. I find that while the federal judiciary is responding to some of the Supreme Court’s directives, lower courts still retain a great deal of discretion in handling ATCA cases.

---