ICCPR

The article briefly reviews the UN Human Rights Committee’s (HRC) decision in the case Teitiota v New Zealand. At stake was the applicant’s claim that New Zealand should not send him back to Kiribati, his country of origin, as the effects of climate change there put him at risk of being exposed to life-threatening events and indecent living conditions. Despite a disappointing outcome for the applicant, the ruling has been hailed by commentators as a 'landmark determination’. After providing a brief introduction to the facts, the article will offer some comments on certain aspects of the decision, as well as a few suggestions on how the applicant could recalibrate his litigation strategy before UN treaty monitoring bodies.

The death penalty is a legal concept mentioned in legal science in general and the science of criminal law in particular. This is the harshest punishment for extremely serious crimes. Historically, the death penalty has been applied since the initial formation of the state and legal system. Today, the death penalty is still applied in many countries around the world notwithstanding the level of socioeconomic development. However, in recent years, the death penalty has been an internationally controversial issue. There are two opposing opinions on this issue, namely maintaining or abolishing this penalty. These controversies focus on two main topics: the morality and legality of the death penalty. Despite the lack of consensus, the general trend of the world today is minimizing the death penalty and moving towards the complete abolishment. Even in the case of countries that do not have a specific roadmap to abolish this penalty in the short term, they tend to reform the execution measures to improve the humanity of such sentence. To achieve the progress of decreasing and moving towards the elimination of death penalty, the United Nations (UN) has played an important role as a driving force \. On 15 December 1989, the Second Optional Protocol of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter referred to as the OP2) to abolish the death penalty was adopted by the UN General Assembly in New York (entered into force on 11 July 1991). Currently, this Protocol has 88 member states. The adoption of this Protocol by the General Assembly (UN) demonstrates its determination to mobilize countries to reduce, postpone, and eliminate the death penalty. On a broader scale, based on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and its OP2, the UN also shows the goal of ensuring fair trials and humane treatment for death row inmates. Vietnam is not out of this trend. In recent years, Vietnam has been reforming gradually its criminal law towards reducing the scope of application the capital sentence. This is evident through amendments and supplements of the Penal Code over the years. 3 With the above-mentioned trend of judicial reform, Vietnam may ratify the 2 nd Optional Protocol ICCPR in the future. However, at present, there are still many obstacles preventing Vietnam from joining the Protocol under practical and legal perspectives. Practically, the first thing that Vietnam needs to do to join the Protocol is abolishing the death penalty. However, this faces difficulty-controversial public opinions. From the legal perspective, due to the influence of the above-mentioned social life practices, Vietnam still faces the greatest difficulty that the domestic law is incompatible with the provisions of the 2 nd Optional Protocol ICCPR. Therefore, this topic was selected for research to clarify the issues of the death penalty, the roles of the 2 nd Optional Protocol ICCPR in promoting the elimination of the death penalty, obstacles to Vietnam's future accession, when Viet Nam joins this Protocol.

Approximately three decades ago, two of us, Terrell Carter and Kempis Songster, were sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. The U.S. Supreme Court has said that this sentence, effectively an order to die in prison, represented a legal determination that we were irredeemable. In this Article, with insights from our coauthor and friend, human rights scholar Rachel López, we ask: What does it mean for the law to judge some human beings as incapable of redemption? Isn't the capacity for change core to the human condition, and shouldn't that be reflected in the law? This Article marries human rights law with our lived experience to argue that the capacity for redemption is an innate human characteristic. By documenting the dehumanizing effect of codified condemnation and the struggle for humanity after a person has been found irredeemable in a court of law, we seek to show why all humans should have a legal right to redemption-a right embedded in the Eighth Amendment through the latent concept of human dignity. The reading of the Eighth Amendment we call for would require a dramatic reimagination of the U.S. criminal legal system into one that elevates humanity, not deprives it. One that creates the opportunity for healing and human development, not denies it. One that facilitates the human capacity for redemption, not forbids it. One, in other words, that recognizes that change is always possible. Redeeming justice thus requires that legal systems not make unalterable decisions about a human being's capacity for change. At a bare minimum, this means that all sentences should be reviewable, with release possible after someone redeems herself. No person should be permanently deprived of her hope for freedom.

In Joslin v. New Zealand (2002), the UN Human Rights Committee rejected the claim that marriage equality could be grounded in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Some scholars have argued that emerging state practice and a proper understanding of the drafting of the convention now justify the argument for marriage equality. Instead, this paper argues that a project of human rights integration reveals, paradoxically, additional legal challenges. Taking a departure point in relevant regional and national judgments, the chapter sets out a three-tiered cumulative argument for a right to same-sex marriage in Article 23(2) of the ICCPR. The crux of the argument is that the Committee will be able to recognise marriage equality when the ordinary meaning of 'marriage' becomes ambiguous as to the gender identity of spouses.

IN THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

AT THE PEACE PALACE, THE HAGUE

THE CASE CONCERNING THE TREATMENT OF A DETAINED PERSON

MEMORIAL FOR THE APPLICANT

SUMMARY OF PLEADINGS

This Court has jurisdiction to hear the present dispute between Azushika and Ruzaomis. Since all local remedies have been exhausted, Azushika may espouse the claim on behalf of Mr. Yoshirai, who is its own national. However, even if the local remedies have not been exhausted, there is an exception to this rule, such as when Azushika suffered direct moral injury and when all the local remedies in Ruzaomis are futile. In the present case Ruzaomis‟s Courts have rejected Mr.Yoshirai‟s claims as the local court will not review any foreign claims anymore. Moreover, there is a consistent line of precedents adverse to the foreign which subsequently causing Mr.Yoshirai to lose his suit.

The Respondent has breached Article 2, Article 4, Article 10, Article 11, Article 12, Article 13, and Article 14 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment (“CAT”). The acts done by the Respondent fulfills the definition of Article 1 of the CAT. The gravity of the act done upon Mr. Yoshirai when he was gagged, tied down and being handcuff so as to make him immovable constitutes the act of torture, The Respondent is bound by the principal of jus cogens norm and erga omnes and required to abide when they became a party to the CAT.

Even if the Respondent claimed that their act has not constituted torture in any way. However, it still will constitutes the act of cruel, inhuman and degrading. This is based on the definition of Article 16 of the CAT. This Article defined it as “which do not amount to torture as defined in article I.” The situation that happened to Mr. Yoshirai is akin to an act of cruel, inhuman and degrading.

Therefore, in particular the Respondent has breached Article 10, Article 11, Article 12, Article 13, and Article 14 of the CAT which prohibits the act of cruelty, inhuman and degrading as what happened to Mr. Yoshirai. The Respondent is cannot invoke the defence of necessity. To claim necessity, certain conditions established in the ILC Articles on State Responsibility must be fulfilled which in this case were not met. The state of necessity only applies when all legitimate means to mitigate the possible damage have been exhausted and proved to be of no avail. In this case, there are other alternatives ways to control Mr. Yoshirai‟s behavior such as by using minor tranquilizer as practiced by States worldwide.

As a member of the United Nation, the UN Charter is bound upon the Respondent ipso facto. Any inconsistent act which goes against the purposes and principles of the United Nations will incur the Respondent a serious international responsibility.

Consequently, the Respondent has breached the international customary law concerning human rights when they subsequently breached Article 2, Article 7, Article 9, Article 10, and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Violation of recognized norm of customary international law will constitute an internationally wrongful act and nothing precludes the wrongfulness of any act of a State which is not in conformity with an obligation arising under a peremptory norm of general international law. The Respondent has breached its international obligation for the failure to abstain from causing harm to foreign citizens, which in this case refers to Mr. Yoshirai. Accordingly, Ruzaomis owes compensation to Mr. Yoshirai for the violation of CAT and other customary international law concerning human rights and all consequences thereof.

Therefore based on the foregoing reasons this honourable Court should adjudge and declare that The Government of Ruzaomis has breached the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment and Punishment and other international customary law concerning human rights such as the United Nations Charter and the ICCPR, and as a result, Mr. Yoshirai, a national of Azusika, suffered damage.

Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) merupakan isu terpenting baik permasalahan di tingkat nasional, regional maupun internasional. Sejak dideklarasikannya Universal Declaration on Human Rights (DUHAM) penghormatan akan hak asasi manusia gencar ditegakkan. Manusia semenjak lahir memiliki sebuah hak yang melekat sebagai hak kodrati atau alamiah yang pemenuhannya tidak dapat dikurangi (non-derogable). Pada tahun 1966, Majelis Umum PBB melalui Resolusinya membagi HAM menjadi dua macam yaitu Hakhak Sipil dan Politik serta Hak-hak Ekonomi, Sosial, dan Budaya dengan disahkannya ICCPR dan ICESCR. Hak sipil dan politik adalah hak yang harus dipenuhi pemenuhannya oleh pemerintah/negara. Dalam hak-hak sipil terdapat hak kebebasan beragama dan berkeyakinan (freedom of religion and concience). Konstitusi Indonesia mengatur tentang kebebasan beragama dan semenjak tahun 26 Februari 2006 Indonesia telah meratifikasi ICCPR dengan mengesahkan menjadi UU No. 12 tahun 2005. Di dalam ICCPR kebebasan beragama diatur dimana hak tersebut termasuk hak yang tidak boleh disimpangi pemenuhannya oleh setiap negara yang meratifikasinya. Dalam penerapannya, kebebasan beragama di Indonesia masih auh dari harapan. Tindakan diskriminasi, pelanggaran-pelanggaran dan pembatasan-pembatasan kebebasan beragama terjadi dimana-mana, yang mana seharusnya keamanan akan kebebasan beragama, berkeyakinan, dan beribadah dijamin oleh Undang-undang. Misalnya kasus kaum Syiah di Sampang Madura, kasus pembangunan Gereja HKBP (Huria Kristen Batak Protestan) di Bekasi, dan kasus lainnya. Sebuah kejadian yang sangat bertolak belakang dengan semangat semboyan Indonesia yakni "Bhinneka Tunggal Ika" yang artinya "berbeda-beda tetapi tetap satu jua". Namun, berbagai upaya terus dilakukan oleh Pemerintah guna mengatasi permasalahan yang terkait dengan HAM khususnya kebe-basan beragama dan keyakinan di Indonesia.

Thesis ini akan menjelaskan bagaimana pola kepatuhan Indonesia terhadap ICCPR dan kaitannya dengan penerapan Hukuman Mati di Indonesia. Penerapan eksekusi mati Indonesia ini berada ditengah Perkembangan norma HAM tentang penghapusan (abolisi) hukuman mati yang gencar digaungkan oleh PBB juga oleh actor non-negara seperti Amnesti internasional, Tesis ini akan memulai pembahasan dengan menganalisis proses dan alasan serta logika apa yang dipakai Indonesia dari mulai mengapa Indonesia meratifikasi ICCPR dan disisi lain tetap menerapkan Hukuman mati. Mengacu pada negara Indonesia yang telah berkomitmen dengan telah meratifikasi perjanjian ICCPR dan juga sudah melakukan legalisasi kedalam undang undang dalam negeri. Logika tersebut memunculkan pola kepatuhan yang dilakukan oleh Indonesia dalam menjalankan peraturan dan kebijakan rezim internasional. Dalam thesis ini penulis melihat bahwa meskipun terdapat pola kepatuhan Indonesia terhadap ICCPR tetapi Indonesia cenderung tidak patuh terhadap norma-norma ICCPR dan terdapat faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi ketidakpatuhan tersebut faktor-faktor tersebut berkaitan dengan enforcement yang ada dan diterima oleh Indonesia Kata kunci : ICCPR, HAM, Hukuman Mati ,Indonesia, kepatuhan

Co-authors: Willy Fautré, Mark Barwick, Alfiaz Vaiya, Sebastian Walch and Nathan Black

Freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) is a universal human right guaranteed by Article 18 of the UN International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
In 2013, the European Union adopted the EU Guidelines on Freedom of Religion or Belief for which Human Rights Without Frontiers International was pleased to be involved in the drafting process along with religious communities and other civil society organisations. The Guidelines are an important reference tool for EU institutions in third countries for identifying FoRB violations and assisting citizens who have been discriminated against on the basis of their religion or beliefs. The Guidelines also set out the actions and measures that the EU can take at multilateral-fora, regional and bi-lateral levels with regard to countries which fail to respect FoRB.
The purpose of this report ‘In Prison for their Religion or Beliefs’ is to highlight those states which imprison people for practices that are protected by Article 18 of the ICCPR and Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The report also makes policy recommendations to the EU and other international institutions which are in a position to put pressure on the relevant countries to better respect and uphold FoRB.

Willy Fautré
Executive Director of Human Rights Without Frontiers Int’l

Η παρούσα εργασία καταπιάνεται με την θεματική του τεκμηρίου αθωότητας. Πρωτίστως, ο συγγραφέας αναφέρεται εν συντομία στην θέση που κατέχει στο Κοινοδίκαιο και στην Κυπριακή έννομη τάξη. Ακολούθως, επεκτείνεται στην υπερεθνική του διάσταση, όπου επικεντρώνεται, κατά ένα μεγάλο μέρος, στην ανάλυση του τεκμηρίου αθωότητας υπό το πρίσμα της Νομολογίας του ΕΔΑΔ δίδοντας έμφαση στις κυριότερες θεματικές του, όπως η νομική του φύση, το χρονοδιάγραμμα προστασίας και το περιεχόμενο του. Εν συνεχεία, δράττεται της ευκαιρίας να αναφερθεί σε μια ειδική έκφανση του τεκμηρίου και συγκεκριμένα στο δικαίωμα της σιωπής και μη αυτοενοχοποίησης, το οποίο επεξηγεί με πληρότητα. Ενόψει της ανάλυσης περί υπερεθνικής διάστασης του τεκμηρίου, ο συγγραφέας αναφέρεται και στην νομική υπόσταση του τεκμηρίου αθωότητας κατά τον Χάρτη Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, καθοδηγούμενος από την Νομολογία του ΔΕΕ. Σημειωτέο ότι σε όλη την έκταση της παρούσας εργασίας γίνεται ουσιαστική μνεία στις κυριότερες πρόνοιες της πολυσυζητημένης και σχετικά πρόσφατης Ευρωπαϊκής Οδηγίας 2016/343/ΕΕ, όπου αυτή σχετίζεται ή διαφοροποιείται κυρίως με τα προαναφερόμενα υπερεθνικά νομοθετήματα. Εν κατακλείδι, ο συγγραφέας παραθέτει σε συντομία τις θέσεις του.

Over the past few years, states have been entering into international agreements that increasingly displace their non-refoulement obligations. Non-refoulement is a legal norm that protects vulnerable people from being expelled and returned to a state where they might face serious mistreatement. This rule has been a cornerstone of the law on international migration and forced movement for a considerable period, even being viewed as a human right by some. However, recently states have begun entering into international agreements and treaties that overcome the non-refoulement obligation through a number of arrangements. This study will proceed by looking at three forms of contracting out of non-refoulement: agreements that establish facts, agreements that establish jurisdiction or agreements creating competing norms. This article seeks to draw attention to these effects, criticize them and emphasize that we should not lose sight of the need to protect vulnerable people from expulsion to situations of serious mistreatment.

Nigeria's militant Islamist group Boko Haram haves caused unrest in the north eastern Nigerian since 2009.  The group promotes a belief which makes it 'haram',  for Muslims to take part in any political or social activity, associated with Western society; including, but not limited to, receiving a secular education.  More than 15,000 people are estimated to have been killed by Boko Haram, with about 6,000 in 2015 alone, making it one of world’s deadliest terrorist groups. According to UN estimates, roughly 2.8 million people have been displaced by Boko Haram-related violence in the Lake Chad Basin region; and approximately 5.6 million are in need of emergency food aid.

In an attempt to curb the activities of Boko Haram, the Nigerian government declared a state of emergency in the three states where the group is most prominent. With the Joint Task Force (JTF) leading the offensive, the state of emergency led to tensions in those areas as well as increased violence between the security forces and the group.  In the course of counter terrorism, it is alleged that the government of Nigeria, through its military and the JTF, are responsible for the violation of fundamental human rights of people dwellers in the region.  It has been argued that the methods adopted by the government has been excessive, unjustified, and short of  does not encompass the best practice acceptable in  counter-terrorism.

Art 40.3.3 (the 8th amendment) of the Irish Constitution enshrined the right to life of the unborn, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother. On 25th May 2018, thirty-five years after its adoption, this Irish electorate voted to remove this provision from the Constitution by referendum. This signalled an historic turning point for Ireland given that it was traditionally a highly conservative Catholic country with one of the most restrictive abortion frameworks in the world. However, despite this referendum result, considerable uncertainty continues because the repeal of the 8th amendment does not legalise abortion in Ireland. Instead, it remains to be seen how the Oireachtas will give effect to this vote, what laws will be introduced to facilitate abortion access in Ireland, and most importantly, how these laws will be interpreted and applied by medical practitioners to facilitate abortion access and by courts should disputes arise.

We argue that this uncertainty around the provision for abortion services in Ireland makes Ireland’s international law obligations in this context of particular importance. As will be demonstrated, even though Ireland’s restrictive framework recognizes some exceptional circumstances where abortions can be provided, Ireland has a long history of interpreting and applying these exceptions in a highly restrictive fashion, and we argue that this tendency may be difficult to shift even after the repeal of the 8th amendment. In short, this article argues that international law has a significant role to play as Ireland moves towards broadening its abortion framework, by (1) ensuring at a minimum that new abortion laws are drafted in a way which respects Ireland’s international law obligations; (2) ensuring that laws are interpreted and implemented in a way which facilitates practical and effective access to abortion, and (3) providing avenues to challenge obstacles to securing legally available abortion services in Ireland.

The concept of human rights has developed during the last 60 years mainly through multilateral treaties as a positivist branch of public international law. However, key positivist doctrines such as pacta sunt servanda or state sovereignty pose significant obstacles to the effective realization of a modern human rights regime. The universal, inherent and inalienable nature of fundamental human rights, deriving from their natural law origins, are often set aside by such doctrines and annulled. Through close examination of reservations to human rights treaties, this study sheds new light on the deep interplay of naturalistic and legal positivist doctrines on the progress and implementation of human rights law (CEDAW, HR Committee, ILC). It is argued that the positions of apex human rights bodies regarding reservations reveal that establishing a human rights concept within a legal positivist environment, without a systematic methodological foundation, endangers its basic sustainability.

Bezien wordt of het in oktober 2013 in Nederland ingevoerde buitengewone rechtsmiddel 'herziening ten nadele' voldoet aan de eisen die het Europees Verdrag voor de rechten van de mens en het Internationaal Verdrag voor de burgerrechten en politieke rechten stellen.
Getoetst wordt aan het ne bis in idem-recht, het recht op een eerlijk proces, de redelijke termijn, de onschuldpresumptie en het strafrechtelijk legaliteitsbeginsel. Ook de voorgenomen retentieregeling voor DNA en vingerafdrukken van vrijgesprokenen, met het oog op een eventueel toekomstig herzieningsverzoek wordt getoetst, aan het recht op privacy.

Communication to United Nations Human Rights Committee re the violation by the Philippine government of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, pursuant to the committee's individual complaint mechanism. Filed on the occasion of International Human Rights Day on 10 December 2005, as a culmination of struggle by Filipino street children and child prisoners, who originally sued then Philippine president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo before the Ombudsman on 10 December 2003 for human rights violations stated in this communication to the UN Human Rights Committee. Identity and identifying information of the children prisoner petitioners had been deleted.

How does international law have influence and impact in and on the world? Daniel Joyce's new book asks this question from a viewpoint that has received surprisingly limited scholarly attention: the role of the media and an engaged public. A wide-ranging and original work, the book raises pivotal questions about power and legitimacy, patterns of influence, and agency. My reading rests on my disciplinary specialisation at the intersection of anthropology-in particular the study of international organisations, documents, bureaucracy, and expertise 1-and international law, complemented by research on the history of human rights and human rights education. 2 Joyce's book is loosely divided into two distinct areas of inquiry. The first of these regards the long, complex, and still-evolving path of media regulation under international law. My attention is drawn to the book's second part, particularly Chapters 4-6, in which he discusses the role of an informed public and informed media in the sustained legitimacy and influence of international law. In this essay, I will bring Joyce's book into conversation with my ethnography of the UN Human Rights Committee, the treaty body that monitors state compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Who is indigenous is a question which is often difficult to answer from the perspective of non-indigenous law. Lovelace v. Canada is one of the key cases of indigenous rights law. It forms an important precedent but it does not establish an unlimited subjective right to be indigenous within the framework of the ICCPR. The decision in Lovelace v. Canada cannot be construed as requiring states which are parties to the ICCPR to allow anybody to claim indigenous identity without the consent of the indigenous people in question. ILO 169 strengthens the position of indigenous peoples in this regard. Selfidentification has multiple dimensions: collective self-identification as indigenous, individual self-identification as indigenous, and collective identification of the self through the identification of an individual as indigenous. Only indigenous peoples can decide who is a member. This decision is a sovereign right of the collective.

Abstrak

Perkembangan dan masalah Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) di Indonesia dari waktu ke waktu semakin kompleks, seperti pemulangan Warga Negara Indonesia (WNI) eks-ISIS. Mereka ingin kembali ke Indonesia namun mendapatkan penolakan dari Pemerintah dengan mempertimbangkan masalah status kewarganegaraan dan keamanan nasional. Dari sikap pemerintah tersebut timbul pertanyaan bagaimana status kewarganegaraan dan implikasi hukumnya serta pertanggungjawaban pemerintah terhadap permasalahan tersebut. Untuk menemukan jawaban dari pertanyaan tersebut, kami menggunakan metode pendekatan penelitian secara normatif. Status kewarganegaraan WNI eks-ISIS dapat merujuk kepada Pasal 23 Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2006 mengenai Kehilangan Kewarganegaraan Republik Indonesia. Ditemukan bahwa WNI eks-ISIS masih berstatus sebagai WNI karena tidak memenuhi syarat-syarat seseorang kehilangan Kewarganegaraan Indonesia. Implikasi hukum dari status kewarganegaraan WNI eks-ISIS adalah ada atau tidaknya perlindungan serta pemenuhan hak-hak yang dimilikinya sebagai seorang warga negara. Kesimpulannya adalah status kewarganegaraan WNI eks-ISIS ternyata masih memiliki status Kewarganegaraan Indonesia beserta implikasi hukum yang dapat diterimanya berupa perlindungan dan pemenuhan atas hak-haknya serta pertanggungjawaban pemerintah atas pemulangan ke Indonesia khususnya bagi kaum rentan dengan memperhatikan hukum, kemanusiaan dan stabilitas keamanan nasional.

Kata Kunci: HAM, Implikasi, Pemulangan, Pertanggungjawaban pemerintah, Status kewarganegaraan

18 апреля 2018 г. Рабочая группа Национального собрания Республики Беларусь по изучению проблематики смертной казни как инструмента наказания, применяемого в Республике Беларусь провела совместно с Советом Европы круглый стол на тему «Правовые аспекты отмены смертной казни». Это мероприятие, как и ранее проведенные, можно охарактеризовать словом «рутина». Даже комментарии наиболее высокопоставленных участников можно было легко предугадать. И все же, тема круглого стола важна и требует продолжения всестороннего исследования.   

Вообще, писать на тему смертной казни в Беларуси – дело неблагодарное: с одной стороны, экспертных материалов и научно-практических статей в избытке (и не только со стороны НГО), с другой стороны, нельзя сказать, что СМИ (с обеих «сторон») часто выходят за пределы простого информирования о причинах смертного приговора и факте его исполнения, вкупе с отражением реакции Запада. Впрочем есть еще один жанр – информирование о зарубежных злодеяниях, повлекших смертную казнь, как в США (а мы чем хуже?), или наоборот, лишение свободы в комфортной тюрьме, как в Норвегии (до чего либерализм довел!).

В тоже время, тема конкретизации юридических механизмов, способных воспрепятствовать смертным казням в Беларуси или даже их упразднить, раскрыта не полностью. Изучение же правовых механизмов отмены смертной казни, в том числе позволит обновить каталог аргументов в пользу аболиционизма.

Indonesia as a part of the international society has ratified The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) through Law Number 12 of the Year 2005. Rule witihin the ICCPR that is used to be an analytical basis for this essay is Article 6 of the ICCPR that regulates the right to life and matters about the restriction of the death penalty penalization within states that have not abolished the death penalty. In Indonesia’s own positive law, the death penalty is one of  the primary penalty forms according to Article 10 of the Penal Code of Indonesia. The Constitutional Court of Indonesia through Decision Number 2-3/PUUV/2007 also has decided the constitutionality of the death penalty. In the agenda of Indonesian criminal law reform, there is the Draft of the Penal Code of Indonesia which also regulates about the penalization of the death penalty but the regulation is essentially different with the regulation in the Penal Code of Indonesia that exists now. How is the connection between the ICCPR rules and Indonesian national law about the death penalty? To provide a proper answer to this question, the author investigates and analyses the layers of rules that regulate the death penalty in the ICCPR, the Penal Code of Indonesia, the Decision of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia Number 2-3/PUU-V/2007 and the Draft of the Penal Code of Indonesia.

Through a multi-layered, overlapping collection of international and regional treaties, one solution for child statelessness is emerging: the obligation of the birth state to grant nationality to otherwise stateless children. The 1961 Statelessness Convention imposes this obligation partly, but has limited adherence. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides for a right to a nationality, but does not expressly identify which state is responsible. In addition, treaties in Europe and Africa only cover the right implicitly and partially, though treaties in the Americas cover the right expressly. The interpretation of these disparate treaty obligations is now coalescing into an coherent obligation. In combination with the obligation to take all decisions in a child's best interests under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, we can now identify the birth state as the state responsible for ensuring that every child is born with a nationality.

On 5 August, India abrogated Article 370 from its constitution through presidential order. The erasure of the Article ceased the autonomous status of Indian held Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) and bifurcated the Muslim-majority state into two union territories with Buddhist-majority Ladakh getting detached from J&K. The Indian decision of revoking Article 370 came after days of uncertainty and massive military build-up in the disputed territory. Coupled with massive military build-up, a crackdown was imposed in the state by virtually cutting it off from the rest of the world both physically and virtually. This piece of writing will analyze the violations of fundamental human rights in J&K by the imposition of crackdown through international human rights law.

Cette note explore l’extension des obligations internationales dans le temps et l’égalité des sexes comme condition de la protection des droits des autochtones à l’occasion des constatations adoptées par le Comité des droits de l’Homme.

This note explores the extension of international obligations in time and the equality of sexes as a condition of the protection of indigenous peoples’ right upon the view adopted by the Human Rights Committee.

Bab ini menganalisis pendapat yang menyatakan telah terjadi “defisit demokrasi” di WTO. Adanya defisit memunculkan sangsi terhadap legitimasi dan keragu-raguanan terhadap cita-cita yang hendak dicapai oleh segala aturan main WTO.  Pertama-tama, bab ini akan mengupas proses pengajuan klaim di internal WTO. Misalnya, jalannya negosiasi dan penyelesaian sengketa yang justru melemahkan kapasitas anggota karena wajib mengambil kebijakan sejalan dengan keinginan anggota WTO lainnya berdasar hasil voting. Hal ini merupakan yang ingin dikaji dalam bagian pembukaan bab ini. Di samping itu, bab ini juga menganalisis proses jalannya kelembagaan WTO yang merugikan konstituen tertentu, yaitu bagi negara-negara berkembang dan kepentingan keadilan sosialnya. Kedua, membahas isu-isu di atas yang beresonansi terhadap hukum HAM internasional, khususnya hak partisipasi politik dalam Pasal 25 ICCPR 1966, sebagaimana akan diuraikan nanti. Ketiga, membahas dugaan banyaknya defisit demokrasi dari dan di dalam WTO yang berdampak pada rezim hukum internasional lainnya. Untuk memeriksanya, perlu mengomparasikan dua rezim hukum tersebut, dengan maksud mengidentifikasi kebenaran terjadinya defisit demokrasi di WTO. Hal ini penting mendapat perhatian lebih dibanding terjadinya defisit demokrasi yang terjadi dalam ranah tata kelola internasional lain pada umumnya. Keempat, saya beranjak membahas secara argumentatif mengenai dampak dari praktik demokrasi di WTO secara singkat. Subbab tersebut akan membahas subtansi dari pertanyaan apakah WTO benar-benar merangsang pengembangan demokrasi di setiap negara anggotanya terlepas dari minimnya legitimasi demokrasi di lingkup domestiknya. Subbab kelima membahas proposisi terkait benarkah adanya WTO bertujuan untuk meningkatkan kemampuan negara berkembang dalam memenuhi kewajiban HAM-nya terlepas dari kelemahan tata kelola pemerintahan nasionalnya. Subbab keenam berisi simpulan bab ini.

International human rights law has long recognised the right of every child to have their birth registered. However, what is less clear, is what this right encompasses. For example, does the normative content of the right to birth registration include a right to a birth certificate? This is a question that has become very relevant to Indigenous Australians many of whom are experiencing difficulties acquiring a birth certificate. This article argues that the right to birth registration, as set out in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, implicitly includes the right to a birth certificate. This conclusion is reached following an analysis of the work of the Human Rights Committee and the Committee on the Rights of the Child.

The draft General Comment is highly ambitious and develops the content of the right to life beyond the Human Rights Committee’s existing jurisprudence. However, the Rapporteurs pay insufficient attention to the claims of marginalized sectors of the population, in particular women, and persons with disabilities, that are enshrined in norms both under and outside the Covenant but are not adequately reflected in the draft.

Although not generally acknowledged as lex specialis in the sense of being an entirely separate regime, non-discrimination treaties and their associated jurisprudence contribute specialized expertise to the development of customary law, and constitute lex specialis in the sense of specialized legislation within the human rights treaty framework. The Human Rights Committee should incorporate such norms into its interpretive work, as additional rules of law binding on an overwhelming majority of states parties to the Covenant

Π.Νάσκου-Περράκη, Μηχανισμοί Προτασίας Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου. Διεθνείς πράξεις, θεωρία και πρακτική, Β'έκδοση, Εκδόσεις Θέμις, Αθήνα 2014,

http://www.ekdoseisthemis.gr/?product=978-960-9664-62-2

Το διεθνές δίκαιο διέρχεται μια περίοδο σημαντικών αλλαγών, ιδιαίτερα στον τομέα της προστασίας των δικαιωμάτων του ανθρώπου. Εξήντα και πλέον χρόνια μετά την υιοθέτηση της Οικουμενικής Διακήρυξης Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου, παρατηρούμε θεσμικές αλλαγές στο πλαίσιο του ΟΗΕ, με το νέο Συμβούλιο Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου, ενώ μια σειρά Πρωτοκόλλων αναβαθμίζουν την αποτελεσματικότητα και τον έλεγχο εφαρμογής δικαιωμάτων που κατοχυρώνονται σε διεθνείς πράξεις. Έτσι, μετά το Πρωτόκολλο στη Σύμβαση για την εξάλειψη όλων των μορφών διακρίσεων κατά των γυναικών, υιοθετήθηκαν τρία Πρωτόκολλα στη Σύμβαση για τα δικαιώματα του παιδιού, το Πρωτόκολλο που εγκαθιδρύει το Αφρικανικό Δικαστήριο Δικαιοσύνης και Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου και το Πρωτόκολλο στο Σύμφωνο του ΟΗΕ για τα Οικονομικά, Κοινωνικά και Πολιτιστικά Δικαιώματα κ.ά.

Με την παρούσα β’ έκδοση επιθυμούμε να προσφέρουμε στον ερευνητή και ασχολούμενο με τα ζητήματα της διεθνούς προστασίας δικαιωμάτων του ανθρώπου, μια πλήρη ενημερωμένη καταγραφή των μηχανισμών που προβλέπονται από διεθνή όργανα, και κυρίως από διεθνείς πράξεις προστασίας δικαιωμάτων του ανθρώπου και της σχετικής νομολογίας.

Vietnam's Cyber Security Law, which officially came into effect on the first day of 2019, is considered by the Vietnamese authorities to be an important advance of the Vietnamese legal system in catching up with new information technology issues and addressing the challenges of the Revolution 4.0. The legislation, however, did not come without opposition. Specifically, international dissatisfaction with the law was clearly articulated in January 2019 in the Universal Periodic Review—a major human rights protection mechanism under the management of the UN Human Rights Council; and also, in the Human Rights Committee hearing on Vietnam's implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in March of that year.

Within its limited resources, this article first tries to identify and evaluate recommendations and comments during the two events in relation to the Cyber Security Law, made by international actors including states, non-governmental organizations, and authoritative United Nations institutions. With the data, the article can then categorize three vital human rights concerns regarding the law, according to international perception. They comprise (1) the legal philosophy of ‘national security’; (2) obligations imposed on internet businesses; and (3) judicial review/remedy. Finally, the research engages in an extensive comparative analysis between these concerns and international practices to reach different conclusions on their compatibility and possible solutions.

The authors believe that constructive criticisms from the international community can be carefully garnered in order to contribute to the refinement of Vietnam’s cyber-security laws in the future.

This submission is based on an analysis of laws and practices in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, which remains characterised by a security-based legal framework and policies curbing fundamental freedoms, including freedom of peaceful assembly. Given the geographical scope of MENA Rights Group’s mandate, this submission also aims at highlighting pressing issues in law and practice in the MENA region. Such practices may alert the members of the Human Rights Committee to persistent issues which lead to civil society space being severely restricted, and may also highlight the need for international legal standards to effectively protect the right to peaceful assembly in all contexts.

This article brings together the United Nations’ International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and John McMurtry’s theory of value. In this perspective, the ICESCR is construed as a prime example of “civil commons,” while McMurtry’s theory of value is proposed as a tool of interpretation of the covenant. In particular, McMurtry’s theory of value is a hermeneutical device capable of highlighting: (a) what alternative conception of value systemically operates against the fulfilment of the rights enshrined in the ICESCR; (b) the increased relevance of the ICESCR with regard to the current global economic crisis; (c) the parameters to determine the degree to which the rights at issue have been realized. Reflections on environmental implications of both the ICESCR and McMurtry’s axiology conclude the article.

On 27 January 2021, the UN Human Rights Committee rendered its decisions in S.A. and Others v. Italy and S.A. and Others v. Malta, dealing with the failure of the respondent States to rescue more than two hundred migrants who, following a shipwreck, perished in the Mediterranean high sea in 2013. The two cases marked a significant development in the interpretation of extraterritorial juris- diction inasmuch as the Committee applied for the very first time the functional model of jurisdic- tion it articulated in General Comment No. 36. Indeed, while the extraterritorial application of human rights treaties can well be deemed to be a cornerstone of contemporary international human rights law, there are still several uncertainties concerning the factual and legal elements which trigger States’ human rights obligations beyond their borders. Starting from the reasoning underpin- ning the Views of the Committee in S.A. and Others v. Italy, this work aims at appraising the effec- tiveness, advantages and shortcomings of a functional approach to extraterritorial jurisdiction, criti- cally analysing the possible far-reaching impact of the decision.

This is the PDF-Powerpoint of the paper I prepared for the Webinar HISTORY OF LEGAL SCIENCE: TRANSFORMATION OF IDEAS AND IMAGES, III International Scientific-Methodological Seminar, which was held on Wednesday, 14th April 2021 and was organised by the Department of History of State and Law of the Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL). The title of the Webinar was: MYTHOLOGEMS OF LAW: IRRATIONAL IN LAW.

The importance of family planning in human rights law appears to be self-explanatory. However, what constitutes the content of family planning is debated and contested. While determining the role of the United Nations in this regard, attention goes back to the 1990's [reference to the International Conference on Population and Development], wherein family planning was incorporated as an integral part of the State's mandate to ensuring the health and well-being of women. To give effect to the developments of the 1990's various meanings have been attributed to the UN agenda on family planning by treaty bodies [treaty jurisprudence under ICCPR, CEDAW, ICESCR]. Following are a few themes that emerge for consideration: First, family planning as an integral part of women's human right to sexual and reproductive rights. Second, family planning as an integral part of right to family and choice of spouses over the number of children to have. Third, family planning as state's mandate towards the promotion , provision, and protection of the said right. Fourth, family planning as a global objective/agenda as widely incorporated in the Sustainable Development Goals etc. involving multi-stakeholder partnerships to cater to the right [private investment in family planning].

На мой взгляд, одной из причин противоправного посягательства на жизнь человека (приговоренного к смертной казни) может стать пробел в ст. 175 Уголовно-исполнительного кодекса Республики Беларусь (УИК), которая не предусматривает, что приговор к смертной казни, вступивший в законную силу, обращается к исполнению, в частности, после получения официального сообщения Комитета ООН по правам человека (КПЧ ООН) об отсутствии нарушений права на жизнь осужденного либо о неприемлемости поданной жалобы, в случае если таковой осужденный обращался в КПЧ ООН и последний направил просьбу Республики Беларусь не исполнять смертный приговор до окончания рассмотрения жалобы Комитетом.

В настоящий момент УИК предусматривает в качестве предпосылок исполнения вступившего в законную силу смертного приговора отклонение 1) жалоб, направленных в порядке надзора, и 2) ходатайства о помиловании. Обе предпосылки исполнения смертного приговора конкретизируют соответствующие нормы Конституции (ст. 84; ст.ст. 60 и 115).

В тоже время Конституция предусматривает также право каждого в соответствии с международно-правовым актами, ратифицированными Республикой Беларусь, обращаться в международные организации с целью защиты своих прав и свобод, если исчерпаны все имеющиеся внутригосударственные средства правовой защиты (ст. 61).

Очевидно, что казнь осужденного, обратившегося в КПЧ ООН с соответствующей жалобой, до окончания ее рассмотрения, лишает смысла ст. 61 Конституции, т.к. осужденный в любом случае не узнает результата, а положительный для него результат рассмотрения не вернет его к жизни. В результате ст. 61 Конституции превращается не просто в декоративную норму, но даже издевательскую (над правом и моралью).

Соответственно, выходом из сложившейся ситуации является дополнение ч. 1 ст. 175 УИК необходимостью дождаться от КПЧ ООН официального сообщения об отсутствии нарушений права на жизнь или неприемлемости поданной жалобы, как одной из обязательных предпосылок для обращения приговора к смертной казни к исполнению.

В качестве альтернативы можно предложить дополнение УИК нормой о моратории на исполнение смертного приговора на время подготовки и доставки жалобы в КПЧ ООН после получения официального сообщения об отклонении  жалоб, направленных в порядке надзора, и ходатайства о помиловании.

The Courts in criminal cases, usually with respect to fraud, cheating, misappropriation etc. to grant a relief of bail require the accused to make deposit or payment, which is very much against the principles of Criminal Justice Administration, Right to life and Liberty, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 and the principle that an accused is considered to be innocent till he is held guilty on completion of trial.

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is the treaty that established the International Criminal Court. It was adopted at a diplomatic conference in Rome, Italy on 17 July 1998 and it entered into force on 1 July 2002. As of November 2019, 123 states are party to the statute