Abstract: The main focus of the paper is to reflect analytically on the likely place/role of international solidarity in global refugee protection context in the coming years. Following a short introduction, the paper begins with brief discussions of certain preliminary questions related to the nature of the concept of international solidarity. These discussions are followed by a consideration of some discrete issues related to the “norm/practice chasm” in the operation of international solidarity in global refugee protection (including positive expressions of international solidarity in that context; gaps in human rights-based international solidarity in that same field; and the abusive deployment of international solidarity in the same area). Thereafter, the future of international solidarity in the global refugee protection context is pondered in its duality and complexity, especially the claim that the future of international solidarity is likely to be shaped by a harsher trend that is styled “de-solidarity” in the paper. PubDate: 2021-03-01
Abstract: Does public condemnation or shaming of human rights abuses by the United Nations influence foreign aid delivery calculus across Western donor states' I argue that countries shamed in the United Nations Human Rights Council (formerly known as the United Nations Commission on Human Rights) encourage donor states to channel more aid via international and local non-governmental organizations. Furthermore, I find this effect to be more pronounced with increased media coverage. The findings of this paper suggest that international organizations do influence advanced democracies’ foreign policy. Moreover, the paper also finds that donor governments do not punish recipient leaders by scaling back on government-to-government aid, which is more fungible, despite public condemnations of their human rights practices owing largely to strategic concerns. These results are robust to a number of alternative data and estimation techniques. PubDate: 2021-02-11
Abstract: A distinguishing feature of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) is its “whole-of-society” approach, which includes states, but also engages a “broad multi-stakeholder” partnership to address global migration “in all its dimensions” (GCM 2018, para 15). As one of the stakeholders that participated in the shaping and implementation of this new global normative instrument, we suggest that a spirit of international solidarity can be located in the cooperative and consensual processes and platforms that make up its architecture. Drawing on the English school’s conception of international society, we argue that the GCM has advanced international solidarity in the acceptance by stakeholders of agreed core principles relating to migration governance and in the creation of spaces and platforms for whole-of-society dialogue. It is within these emergent spaces of the GCM that the possibility of concrete and meaningful improvement in the lives of migrants and other people on the move can be made. PubDate: 2021-01-06 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00611-z
Abstract: After the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) were adopted in 2011, an international treaty has been being negotiated since 2014. The two instruments reveal similarities and also conflicts regarding the adequate organization of the global economy based on human rights. The focus in this article will be on the processes leading to these instruments, because they themselves mirror different understandings of governance in the field of business and human rights as well as the struggle over the power of definition and legitimacy. The UNGPs were developed on the basis of global multi-stakeholder consultations, underlining legitimacy through broad inclusion. There are varying judgements as to the success of this approach. The process towards the treaty follows the traditional path of negotiations at UN level. These negotiations reveal a struggle for recognition of the legitimacy of the process itself. Both procedures have shortcomings with regard to legitimacy and show the need for a revision concerning the inclusion of stakeholders. The complementarity of a soft and hard law instrument may enhance the creation of a level playing field in the global economy, thereby strengthening human rights. PubDate: 2021-01-05 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00612-y
Abstract: The freedom of expression is vital to our ability to convey opinions, convictions, and beliefs, and to meaningfully participate in democracy. The state may, however, ‘limit’ the freedom of expression on certain grounds, such as national security, public order, public health, and public morals. Examples from around the world show that the freedom of individuals to express their opinions, convictions, and beliefs is often imperilled when states are not required to meet a substantial justificatory burden when limiting such freedom. This article critiques one of the common justificatory approaches employed in a number of jurisdictions to frame the state’s burden to justify limitations on the freedom of expression—the proportionality test. It presents a case for an alternative approach that builds on the merits and addresses some of the weaknesses of a typical proportionality test. This alternative may be called a ‘duty-based’ justificatory approach because it requires the state to demonstrate—through the presentation of publicly justifiable reasons—that the individual concerned owes others a duty of justice to refrain from the expressive conduct in question. The article explains how this approach is more normatively compelling than a typical proportionality test. It also illustrates how such an approach can better constrain the state’s ability to advance majoritarian interests or offload its positive obligations by limiting the freedom of expression of minorities and dissenting voices. PubDate: 2020-11-01 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00608-8
Abstract: The adoption of the French Duty of Vigilance law has been celebrated as a milestone for advancing the transnational business and human rights regime. The law can contribute to harden corporate accountability by challenging the “separation principle” of transnational companies and by obligating companies to report on their duty of vigilance. However, the question of whether the law actually contributes to human rights and environmental protection along global supply chains requires empirically grounded research that connects processes in home and host state countries. This paper contributes to such a new research agenda by linking political ecology literature and empirical insights from the Global South to research on due diligence regulations. With reference to field research data on contestations between the oil and gas company Total E&P and indigenous communities in Bolivia, I argue that the burden of proof and contestations over valid knowledge represent major obstacles when trying to establish legal liability. PubDate: 2020-10-24 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00607-9
Abstract: The modern corporation offers significant potential to contribute to the human rights project, in part because it is free from the challenges posed by national sovereignty. That promise has begun to be realized in businesses practicing corporate due diligence with regard to the human rights of persons involved in or affected by those enterprises. Yet due diligence preserves the self-seeking orientation of the conventional corporation and seeks only to protect itself from committing human rights abuses. This approach, typified by the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, does not address background conditions for and root causes of vulnerability to human rights abuses. My alternative, the human rights corporation, takes an other-regarding orientation that advances human rights within the corporation and in its human, social, economic, and natural environments. It moves beyond the due diligence carrot-and-stick model to a model in which the corporation produces not only goods and services but also human rights consciousness and practice as well. PubDate: 2020-10-22 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00605-x
Abstract: This article conceptualizes corporate accountability under international law and introduces an analytical framework translating corporate accountability into seven core elements. Using this analytical framework, it then systematically assesses four models that could be used in a future business and human rights (BHR) treaty: the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights model, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights model, the progressive model, and the transformative model. It aims to contribute to the BHR treaty negotiation process by clarifying different options and possible trade-offs between them, while taking into account political realities. Ultimately, the article argues in favour of the BHR treaty embracing a progressive model of corporate accountability, which combines ambitious development of international law with realistic prospects of state support. PubDate: 2020-10-17 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00606-w
Abstract: During the Danish cartoons controversy in 2005–2006, a group of ambassadors to Denmark representing eleven predominantly Muslim countries requested a meeting with the Danish Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, to protest against the cartoons. Rasmussen interpreted their viewpoint as one of demanding limits to freedom of speech and he ignored their request for a meeting. Drawing on this case study, the article argues that it is an appropriate, and potentially effective, moral criticism of anyone who is in a position of political power—taking into account reasonable constraints of feasibility and practicality—that they have refused to receive information, ideas, or opinions from individuals, or their representatives, with dissenting viewpoints. The article also articulates one possible theoretical ground for such a moral criticism: that they could be violating a fundamental (cosmopolitan) moral right of people to submit information, ideas, or opinions to those who wield power over them and to be meaningfully heard—a right which can span state borders. PubDate: 2020-10-15 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00602-0
Abstract: The identification of contemporary forms of slavery is often problematically demarcated by reference to transatlantic enslavement as the definitive archetype. Such an approach overlooks other historic slaveries and neglects the totality of the maangamizi—the African holocaust. This article addresses the problematics of positioning the transatlantic system as the paradigm and unpacks the constituent elements of de jure slavery to construct an understanding of slavery as a condition as well as a status. By identifying the core features of de jure chattel slavery through time, this paper displaces the assumption that legal status is determinative, giving meaning to the concept of slavery in the contemporary world. PubDate: 2020-09-03 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00604-y
Abstract: To ensure the protection and promotion of human rights at the African regional level, the African human rights system was established and has been in existence for over three decades. In realisation of its mandates, three supervisory mechanisms have been established to adjudicate human rights cases and issue decisions accordingly. To enhance compliance with these decisions, human rights non-governmental organisations, civil society organisations (NGOs/CSOs) and the supervisory bodies themselves often act as sources of pressure by exploring different follow-up mechanisms. However, despite their best efforts, the attitude of member states towards compliance with the decisions of the supervisory bodies has been relatively poor. Against this background, this article argues that in improving compliance, civil society—particularly the electorates—in member states can equally be engaged to act as a complementary domestic source of pressure with the aim of raising domestic costs in pressuring member states towards compliance. PubDate: 2020-08-04 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00603-z
Abstract: While human rights treaties provide a formidable set of principles on education and values, domestic Courts often tend to adjudicate claims in terms of local arguments for or against each particular educational practice. This article explores how international human rights law could inspire the interpretation of domestic law and educational practice, without neglecting specific cultural aspects. Firstly, the article reviews the sociological debate on values in education and shows its importance for the legal discussion. Secondly, some critical contestations of international cultural human rights are outlined, as well as certain arguments to justify the importance of this model. The study of international law follows: the UN, the European Court of Human Rights, and three relevant African Charters, as well as every reference to education made by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and by the African Court is examined. Lastly, a comparative section reveals a certain cultural commonality inspired by the UN treaties, but also reflects some cultural and institutional differences between the European and the African regional systems. PubDate: 2020-07-21 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00599-6
Abstract: The scale of homelessness in Europe throws a stark light on the right to housing that exists in many European states and in European and International Law. This disparity between legal right and the social reality of homelessness and housing precarity begs the question as to the efficacy of a rights-based approach to housing. This article examines the ‘enforceable’ right to housing in France, in place since 2007, to explore the efficacy of approaching a chronic lack of housing through justiciable rights. The lack of progress in over a decade of jurisprudence highlights the challenges posed to legal advocacy in this area, particularly when combined with a lack of political will. The article concludes by reflecting on alternative approaches, in which justiciable rights have played less of a role, stressing the need for political and financial commitment over legal rights. PubDate: 2020-07-13 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00598-7
Abstract: How does the presence of women’s INGOs relate to restrictions on women’s civil society' Although women’s INGOs may help protect against civil society restrictions in most situations, we contend that the presence of women’s INGOs within a country may lead to increased restrictions on women’s civil society when countries are extremely economically or politically vulnerable. At these times, women’s INGOs are more likely to be seen as an outside instigator, possibly leading to more political or economic change. In an effort to retain power, leaders may use women’s INGOs as scapegoats; attention to them and restrictions on women’s civil society more generally may be a tactic taken by a leader that is politically or economically vulnerable. We test our hypotheses in a cross-national sample of non-OECD countries from 1975 to 2013, using new data on civil society restrictions and the involvement of women’s INGOs. We find evidence in support of our central argument: economic and political vulnerability may condition the relationship between women’s INGOs and future restrictions on women’s civil society. PubDate: 2020-06-29 DOI: 10.1007/s12142-020-00597-8
Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
[2652 journals]
