Set against previous stages of minority protection under international law, this book discusses the role of courts and court-like bodies, particularly in the Americas, Africa and Europe in articulating and accommodating the interests and needs of ethno-cultural minority groups as part of the human rights discourse. Conceptually, it exposes different moments of intervention by such bodies involving the recognition of group existence or identity, the adjustment of human rights norms to accommodate the group's perspectives, the establishment of processes designed to address the complexities resulting from competing claims, and the expansion of procedural avenues within litigation. The result is a fresh comparative practical and theoretical perspective on international jurisprudence as an emerging distinctive component in the complex history of the field.
Challenging questions arise in the effort to adequately protect the cultural rights of individuals and communities worldwide, not the least of which are questions concerning the very understanding of ‘culture’. In Cultural Rights in International Law and Discourse: Contemporary Challenges and Interdisciplinary Perspectives, Pok Yin S. Chow offers an account of the present-day challenges to the articulation and implementation of cultural rights in international law. Through examining how ‘culture’ is conceptualised in different stages of contemporary anthropology, the book explores how these understandings of ‘culture’ enable us to more accurately put issues of cultural rights into perspective. The book attempts to provide analytical exits to existing conundrums and dilemmas concerning the protections of culture, cultural heritage and cultural identity.
This book examines the interpretation and application of the right to freedom of religion and belief of new minorities formed by recent migration by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC). New minorities are increasingly confronted with restrictions of their religious practices and have addressed their rights claims both to the ECtHR and the HRC through their individual complaint procedures, which resulted in several contradicting decisions. Based on a quantitative and qualitative empirical analysis of the relevant case law, focusing in particular on the reasoning adopted by the two bodies, this book finds that the HRC in its practice offers a significantly higher level of protection to new minorities than the ECtHR. Such divergence may be explained by various institutional and conceptual differences, of which the concept of the margin of appreciation is the most influential. It is contended that the extensive use of the concept of the margin of appreciation by the ECtHR in the case law regarding new minorities’ right to freedom of religion and belief, and the absence of such concept in the HRC’s case law, could be explained by different understandings of the role of an international human rights body in conflicts between the majority and minorities. This book argues that such divergence could be mitigated with various tools, such as the inclusion of cross-references to the case law of other relevant bodies as well as to instruments specifically established for the protection of minorities. The book will be of interest to academics, researchers and practitioners in the area of international human rights law, international public law in general and law and religion.
Now in its fourth edition, Bantekas and Oette's textbook on international human rights law is the key text around the globe for both undergraduate- and graduate-level courses in law and other disciplines with a human rights dimension. It covers theoretical approaches to rights as well its practice, from grassroots activism to strategic litigation. In addition to classical topics of human rights, the book includes chapters on the interface between investment/trade and human rights, terrorism, the protection of vulnerable persons (such as LGBTQIA+, persons with disabilities, older persons and others), the rights of women, international criminal and humanitarian law, the right to development and sustainable development, reparations and victims' rights, and many others. It has been widely adopted by instructors across the globe for LLM/JD and LLB courses.
The Concept of Group Rights in International Law offers a critical appraisal of the concept of group rights in international law on the basis of an extensive survey of existing group rights in contemporary international law. Among some of its findings is the observation that an ideological way of arguing about this legal category is widespread among scholars as well as practitioners; it sees this ideological framing as one of the main reasons why international law has so far been very reluctant to provide group rights and to call them by their name. Accordingly, the book re-evaluates the concept based on the experience with existing group rights in international law and pleads for a more pragmatic approach. Despite limitations with the concept, the overall thesis is that there is a role for group rights as a pragmatic tool allowing for a principled approach to substate groups through international law. Such an approach could turn group rights into an arguably minor, but nevertheless, highly relevant legal category of international law.
The Sovereignty of Human Rights advances a legal theory of international human rights that defines their nature and purpose in relation to the structure and operation of international law. Professor Macklem argues that the mission of international human rights law is to mitigate adverse consequences produced by the international legal deployment of sovereignty to structure global politics into an international legal order. The book contrasts this legal conception of international human rights with moral conceptions that conceive of human rights as instruments that protect universal features of what it means to be a human being. The book also takes issue with political conceptions of international human rights that focus on the function or role that human rights plays in global political discourse. It demonstrates that human rights traditionally thought to lie at the margins of international human rights law - minority rights, indigenous rights, the right of self-determination, social rights, labor rights, and the right to development - are central to the normative architecture of the field.
We live in a world of legal pluralism, where a single act or actor is potentially regulated by multiple legal or quasi-legal regimes imposed by state, substate, transnational, supranational and nonstate communities. Navigating these spheres of complex overlapping legal authority is confusing and we cannot expect territorial borders to solve all these problems. At the same time, those hoping to create one universal set of legal rules are also likely to be disappointed by the sheer variety of human communities and interests. Instead, we need an alternative jurisprudence, one that seeks to create or preserve spaces for productive interaction among multiple, overlapping legal systems by developing procedural mechanisms, institutions and practices that aim to manage, without eliminating, the legal pluralism we see around us. Global Legal Pluralism provides a broad synthesis across a variety of legal doctrines and academic disciplines and offers a novel conceptualization of law and globalization.
This book provides a critical evaluation of the ways in which EU law engages with minority rights protection: at its core is an analysis of EU law and minority rights. Unlike the UN or ECHR, the EU has no competence to set standards on minority protection and this has been a point of disappointment for minority rights advocates. Indeed, this book will demonstrate that, in EU law, binding standards really only exist in the sphere of non-discrimination and are at their strongest in the field of employment. As such, binding standards within EU law affect only a small proportion of the canon of minority rights. However, the EU does have competence to promote diversity and facilitate redistribution of power and resources across the EU. According to a broad understanding of minority rights protection, acts of promotion and facilitation -alongside those of standard-setting - constitute essential underpinnings for minority protection. The EU's existing competences do therefore play a key role in minority protection. In order to support these conclusions, the book undertakes a comprehensive examination of the impact of EU law on minority rights protection. The book examines a broad range of the EU's legal provisions and principles which may affect minority protection, before undertaking in-depth analyses of the examples of minority cultural rights and minority linguistic rights. In addition, the final substantive chapter of the book contextualises the impact of EU law within the perspective of the overall needs of a specific group - the Roma minority. The concluding chapter draws together the EU's contribution to minority rights. In short, the EU can be seen as a promoter, but not a protector, of minority rights. Although not ideal, especially from the perspective of minorities, it is worth at least exploring such a view. Such an exploration would enable the EU most easily to build upon its existing competences and regulatory capacities. This book will be of interest to lawyers and activists concerned with minority rights and Roma rights protection within the EU. It will also be of relevance to those interested in understanding the dynamics between the EU and the international law community in overlapping areas of rights protection, and exploring how this informs our perception of the capacity of the EU to be a central actor in the field of rights protection.
In A Dialogical Concept of Minority Rights, Hanna H. Wei demonstrates that a more plausible and realistic concept of minority rights should consist of not only rights against the state but also rights against the group. She formulates and defends three separate but related rights to dialogue, and thoroughly analyses how they may operate not only to maintain a healthy balance between the minorities’ need to be culturally distinct and their need to relate to and belong in the larger society, but also that they address the generalisations and presuppositions on which the debate of multiculturalism has been based, and constitute the first step of a possible solution to many of the theoretical and practical difficulties of minority protection.
