Remanding Women in Custody: Concerns for Human Rights

Concern about the increasing population of women in prison has tended to focus on the sentencing of female offenders. It is often overlooked that about one in five women held in custody is there on remand, awaiting trial or sentence, and that most of them will not receive a prison sentence at the end of the process. This article examines the legal grounds for a custodial remand and explores the extent to which individual rights guaranteed under the European Convention are adequately protected. It is argued that women are particularly disadvantaged by the laws governing bail and by their practical application in the criminal justice system; and that the pre-trial detention of so many women routinely violates the spirit of the Convention by allowing questionable claims to social utility to prevail over the right to liberty and to a fair trial.     

The future of claims to resist removal by non-nationals suffering from HIV/AIDS

The focus of this article is to consider the difficulties facing non-nationals suffering HIV/AIDS to resist removal to their countries of origin where there is no or inadequate medical treatment. The link between HIV/AIDS and migration will be explored illustrating the vulnerability of displaced people to the virus. The current UK legal position for those attempting to resist removal in such circumstances will be explored. The article will explore two potential avenues that may prevent removal of non-nationals with HIV/AIDS to countries with limited access to the necessary treatment. In the first instance consideration of Article 3 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) will be made with particular emphasis on mother and child claims. The second argument will examine the potential for refugee claims under Article 1A (2) Refugee Convention 1951 where an applicant may be able to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution because of membership to a particular social group. The authors will particularly emphasise the argument that in certain countries sufferers will experience ostracism and victimisation where its severity may amount to treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR and persecution under the Refugee Convention. Vanessa Bettinson and Dr Alwyn Jones, senior lecturers, De Montfort University. The authors would like to thank Professor Tony Barnett at London School of Economics for his useful and invaluable thoughts and comments. We would also like to thank our colleague Gavin Dingwall and the students in our 2006/07 Immigration and Refugee Law seminars for their very helpful feedback.     

法行为的性质

法行为是法所要规范的核心内容,但对法行为的认识在法学界一直存在着争议,特别是在当代混合社会和信息社会条件下,这种争议的条件已经发生了较大的变化。这时,重新认识法行为的性质,使其摆脱传统法律思想的束缚而面对现实,对当代立法和司法具有重要的指导意义。特别是我国正处于一个建立和完善社会主义法律体系时期,这一研究就显得更加重要。法行为实质上是一种权利义务(权力职责)的统一。     

Reaching out to the people? Assessing the relationship between parliament and citizens in Finland

Despite the Open Government (Parliament) initiatives and notions of a ‘democratic parliament’, the relationship between legislatures and citizens remains seriously under-researched. This article introduces a comprehensive analytical framework, combining the normative principles of visibility, accessibility, and permeability with practical indicators (parliament as public space, sharing of information, contact with MPs, media and digital engagement, transparency of legislative process, and actual participation in legislative decision-making) for assessing the public engagement of parliaments. Applying this framework to the Finnish Eduskunta, the authors show that despite recent reforms that have partially ‘opened up’ parliamentary proceedings and attempted to connect citizens to democratic process, there remains scope for reforms and innovations. The Eduskunta should embrace a more positive approach towards new forms of civic participation, particularly regarding how its influential committees operate. The findings reflect the tensions between, or the difficulties in reconciling, traditional forms of representative democracy with alternative and more direct channels of political participation.     

Religion in the Workplace: Eweida and Others v United Kingdom

The European Court of Human Rights judgment in Eweida and Others v United Kingdom dealt with the increasingly controversial questions of religious symbols at work and the clash between free conscience and anti‐discrimination norms. In a change of approach, it held that the right to resign could no longer be seen as adequate protection for religious freedom and that workplace norms that restrict religious liberty must satisfy a proportionality test. However, it accorded a wide margin of appreciation to States in reconciling freedom of conscience and freedom from discrimination, ruling that the importance of non‐discrimination could justify a failure to exempt a religious individual from complying with a policy forbidding discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation.     

Los cuidados de salud para los ancianos. Entre las limitaciones presupuestarias y el derecho a un mínimo existencial

The author contextualizes the effects of the realities of public finances on the (legislative) creation and judicial review of healthcare for the elderly. He establishes the relationship between economic factors and the conflicts arising out the claims and expectations of individuals, on the one hand, and the healthcare provided for by law, the public budget and administrative procedures. The author considers that the lack of financial resources and budgetary resources, while threatening to impose limitations on the judicial protection of such rights, is not necessarily an obstacle to the enforceability of healthcare rights, nor does it prevent the exercise of any other subjective rights created by law. Finally, the author points out the need for a better understanding of the expression an existential minimum (existenzminimum).     

Conceptions Of Liberty Deprivation

This article adopts a theoretical and comparative perspective on the prisoner's legal status in England and Wales. Applying the principles of human rights, legality and proportionality, it argues that the prisoner's legal status must rest on a divisible conception of liberty. Such a conception must distinguish clearly between the liberty lost, and the rights restricted, by the imposition of the custodial sentence as opposed to the administration of prisons (the key distinction). In order for this to be achieved, the conception of the prisoner's legal status must also establish the purpose or purposes of the custodial sanction as distinct from the purpose of prison administration. Through comparison with Germany, the article demonstrates that the common law concept of the prisoner's legal status is unstable. Vacillating between a divisible and indivisible conception of the prisoner's liberty, the English conception of the prisoner's legal status lacks a foundation firm enough to satisfy the principles of human rights, legality and proportionality.