Repositioning the international human rights protection system: the UN Human Rights Council

The creation of a UN human rights mechanism was meant to address systematically the international protection and promotion of human rights within the context of international relations. Over the years, the Human Rights Commission has dealt with human rights issues in ways which some commentators have labelled unsatisfactory. The United Nations High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, set up by Kofi Anna to conduct an in‐depth study on global threats, and provide an analysis of future challenges to peace and security, recommended a review of HR mechanisms. This led to the establishment of the Human Rights Council, replacing the Human Rights Commission. One of the mechanisms introduced was the Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights. This article looks at how the UPR process has progressed so far and makes some assessment as to where it is heading.     

Deregulation,property rights,and legal system

During regulation the regulator carries out an intermediary role between shareholders and managers, consequently affecting property rights and the agency relation between the two. Deregulation implies that this intermediary role ceases to exist. This article analyses how government deregulation changes property rights, differentiating between firms of network and non-network structures. Changes in property rights affect the agency relation between shareholders and managers, increasing information asymmetry and agency costs. I argue that the way to reduce agency costs depend to a great extent on the country’s legal system classified as of common or civil law tradition.

Raz on Rights: Human Rights,Fundamental Rights,and Balancing

After clarifying the outlines of Raz's interest theory of rights and its relationship to aspects of the principles theory of rights, I consider how his recent observations on human rights manage to fit (or fail to fit) into the interest theory. I then address two questions. First, I elaborate on Raz's definition of morally fundamental rights, arguing that he is right in claiming that there are no such rights. I then show that the interest theory accommodates the notion that rights may take qualitative precedence over conflicting considerations—a question that has become increasingly relevant in light of recent writing on rights.     

Social rights,child rights,discrimination and devolution: untangling the web

Abstract

This article examines judicial reviews of two areas of social security policy and practice in the UK – the household benefit cap and the restriction of bereavement benefits to bereaved spouses and civil partners. While each case ostensibly concerned discrimination against claimants, in practice much of the legal argument centred on the impact on claimants’ children. The judiciary is revealed to be deeply divided on the lawfulness of the acknowledged discrimination. The article considers what lessons can be drawn about the relative weight that ought to be afforded to claimants’ property rights, the best interests of affected children, anti-discrimination provisions and the state’s stated policy imperatives of cost control and administrative convenience. Insights are also sought into whether devolutionary differences can be identified between the approaches of courts in London and Belfast.     

Still in Deficit: Rights,Regulation, and Democracy in the EU1

Abstract: Critics of the EU's democratic deficit standardly attribute the problem to either sociocultural reasons, principally the lack of a demos and public sphere, or institutional factors, notably the lack of electoral accountability because of the limited ability of the European Parliament to legislate and control the executive powers of the Commission and the Council of Ministers. Recently two groups of theorists have argued neither deficit need prove problematic. The first group adopts a rights‐based view of democracy and claims that a European consensus on rights, as represented by the Charter of Fundamental European Rights, can offer the basis of citizen allegiance to EU wide democracy, thereby overcoming the demos deficit. The second group adopts a public‐interest view of democracy and argues that so long as delegated authorities enact policies that are ‘for’ the people, then the absence of institutional forms that facilitate democracy ‘by’ the people are likewise unnecessary—indeed, in certain areas they may be positively harmful. This article argues that both views are normatively and empirically flawed. This is because there is no consensus on rights or the public interest apart from the majority view of a demos secured through parliamentary institutions. To the extent that these remain absent at the EU level, a democratic deficit continues to exist.     

弘扬法制保障人权反对邪教(笔谈)

几名"法轮功"痴迷者受李洪志驱使在天安门广场自焚的事件,再一次证明,邪教"法轮功"危害极大,必须坚决铲除.我们必须充分认识到同邪教"法轮功"斗争的尖锐性、严重性、复杂性和长期性,决不可麻痹松懈.为此,我刊特组织了本期笔谈,从法律角度揭批"法轮功"邪教组织本质,探讨如何用法律武器对其予以严厉打击.     

职业知识产权人：知识产权人才培养新模式探析

知识产权已经成为自主创新的目标和主要标志,知识产权人才成为实施国家知识产权战略、建设创新型国家的重要支撑和基础条件之一.适应形势发展需求,构建满足不断增长的人才需求,是当前大学知识产权教学和知识产权人才培育的重要课题之一. "职业知识产权人"概念及其内涵的研究,有助于探索新时期知识产权人才培养新模式.     

Negative governmentality through fundamental rights: The far side of the European Convention on Human Rights

This essay analyses those statements that mention legal norms in negative terms. Specifically, it analyses those statements that define a legal system by mentioning how legal protection does not work and where legal protection ends, and those statements that identify what rights‐holders do not have to with their legally protected free capacities. This essay argues that these statements address a systemic question. It calls such a dynamic as negative governmentality. The argument proceeds in four steps. It introduces the concept of negative governmentality by arguing that the idea of freedom requires both the positive affirmation of moral agency and the constraining of moral agency (Section 2 ). It then explores how rights constitute freedom by limiting rights or making exceptions to them (Section 3 ). Later, it analyses how rights‐based norms prevent abuse of rights by holders of rights (Section 4 ). Finally, it sees how rights‐based norms constrain the legal guarantor of rights, i.e., a state (Section 5 ). The essay concludes by mentioning the importance of negative governmentality (Section 6 ).     

The third way in mental health policy: negative rights, positive rights, and the Convention

Mentally disordered patients may be said to have rights in two senses: negative rights to freedom from arbitrary detention or interference with their person; and positive rights to expect a certain minimum standard of service, be that in terms of treatment as an in-patient, or as a patient in the community. The Labour government has appointed a 'scoping group' to carry out a root-and-branch review of the Mental Health Act 1983. The 1983 Act was mainly concerned with in-patient treatment. The group is to look at the scope for introducing further compulsory powers in the community, enhancing the rights of carers and relatives, and is to take account of recent British and Strasbourg case law. The primary impact of the Convention on psychiatric patients has been in relation to protection against arbitrary detention under Article 5, unsoundness of mind being one of the permitted grounds of deprivation of liberty under Article 5(1)(e). This article explores the potential impact of Convention rights in developing what Gostin referred to in the early 1980s as a 'new legalism'. The new legalism linked concern for traditional rights to due process and review by the courts or other external bodies with the 'ideology of entitlement' to adequate treatment and services. The article outlines the current policy context of mental health services and looks at the development by the European Court of Human Rights of positive Convention rights to services out of Article 5, whose purpose seems at first sight to be the protection of due process rights. It examines the relevance of Convention rights to community powers.