Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Do States, through their military forces, have legal obligations under human rights treaties towards the local civilian population during UN-mandated peace operations? It is frequently claimed that it is unrealistic to require compliance with human rights treaties in peace operations and this has led to an unwillingness to hold States accountable for human rights violations. In this book, Kjetil Larsen criticises this position by addressing the arguments against the applicability of human rights treaties and demonstrating that compliance with the treaties is unrealistic only if one takes an 'all or nothing' approach to them. He outlines a coherent and more flexible approach which distinguishes clearly between positive and negative obligations and makes treaty compliance more realistic. His proposals for the application of human rights treaties would also strengthen the legal framework for human rights protection in peace operations without posing any unrealistic obligations on the military forces"-- Provided by publisher"

"Summary "Do States, through their military forces, have legal obligations under human rights treaties towards the local civilian population during UN-mandated peace operations? It is frequently claimed that it is unrealistic to require compliance with human rights treaties in peace operations and this has led to an unwillingness to hold States accountable for human rights violations. In this book, Kjetil Larsen criticises this position by addressing the arguments against the applicability of human rights treaties and demonstrating that compliance with the treaties is unrealistic only if one takes an 'all or nothing' approach to them. He outlines a coherent and more flexible approach which distinguishes clearly between positive and negative obligations and makes treaty compliance more realistic. His proposals for the application of human rights treaties would also strengthen the legal framework for human rights protection in peace operations without posing any unrealistic obligations on the military forces"-- Provided by publisher.Contents Machine generated contents note: 1. Introduction and overview; 2. The emerging relevance of human rights law in UN-mandated peace operations; 3. The other side of the coin: the alleged inappropriateness of applying human rights treaties in UN-mandated peace operations; 4. The argument of non-applicability ratione personae; 5. The argument of non-applicability ratione loci; 6. The applicability of human rights law during armed conflicts; 7. Derogations; 8. Norm conflicts between UN Security Council mandates and human rights treaties; 9. Legal challenges relating to the interrelationship between troop contributing states; 10. Selected issues relating to the application of substantive provisions; 11. Conclusions."

"This book examines the crucial issues affecting human rights education in contexts of culture, religious and societal diversity. This book considers a variety of connected content and methodological issues in three major sections : philosophical and policy perspectives, gender discourses, and discourses on narratives as safe spaces. The focus of the various chapters succeeds in establishing both a foundation and platform for dialogue surrounding human rights and human rights education in modern policy and governance. Aptly named “Safe spaces”, the edition offers in-depth and credible (“safe”) nuances (“spaces”), in terms of the somewhat reified concept of human rights, at a time when human rights remains a highly topical and contested international issue. "

""The effective implementation of human rights treaty obligations in national law is subject to increasing attention. The main responsibility for the international monitoring of national implementation at the global level is entrusted to the UN human rights treaty bodies. These bodies are established by the respective human rights conventions and are composed of independent experts. This book examines three aspects of these bodies: the legal aspects of their structure, functions and decisions; their effectiveness in ensuring respect for human rights obligations; and the legitimacy of these bodies and their decisions. Containing contributions from a variety of eminent legal experts, including present and former members of the treaty bodies, the analysis should be read in light of the ongoing effort to strengthen treaty bodies under the auspices of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and with the involvement of relevant stakeholders"-- Provided by publisher."

"This book analyzes, first part describes the soft threats to human rights, derived from the devaluation of the politics and the productive economy with regard to the finance. It entails the concealment of the reality in the shape of exploitation as the tax havens and in the shape of marginalization of the persons with different abilities. The second part include a study of hard threats to human rights and examines two cases of failed states, Afghanistan and Somalia, in which the violence has supplanted the politics and the economy. In view of these situations it is necessary to rethink the force of classic ius gentium and the humanitarian right. The third part presents the European Union as a legal and political space in which conditions of a worthy life are better defended by means of the primacy of practical reason and social state of law, and by the requirement of peace as the main rule of international relations. "

"For hundreds of years people have debated what a human is. Some claim humans are those with human DNA. Some claim humans are those with certain traits like rationality. Others say humans are those who are made in the image of God. Scholars in this debate think that if society accepts the wrong definition of a human, people will look at their neighbor as more of an animal, object, or machine-making maltreatment more likely. Despite their seriousness, these claims have never been empirically investigated. This book focuses on human rights as exemplary treatment, and shows that the definitions of a human promoted by biologists and philosophers actually are associated with less support for human rights. Those members of the public who agree with these definitions are less willing to sacrifice to stop genocides, and are more supportive of buying organs from poor people, experimenting on prisoners against their will, torturing people to potentially save lives, and having terminally ill people commit suicide to save money. It appears that the critics are right. However, few Americans agree with these definitions of a human, and looking at how most of the public defines a human, we see a much more nuanced picture, and the presently dominant definitions of a human are unlikely to lead to human rights abuses. Therefore, the critics are right about the definitions of a human promoted by academic biologists and philosophers, but because few Americans agree with these views, concern about widespread maltreatment is overblown."

""This collection of essays draws together innovative scholars to examine the relationship between two legal and political phenomena: the shrinking of the state as a monopoly of power in favour of the expansion of power over individuals in private hands, and the change in the nature of rights. The authors expertly discuss the implications of the changing boundaries of state power, the legal responses to this development, its application to human rights, and re-conceptualizations of public life as obligations are handed over to private hands. This innovative book deals with an important set of problems and offers a fresh perspective of different legal themes in an integrated fashion"--"