Distributed rights protection: The 2000 Hague Convention on the International Protection of Adults and the challenge of securing fundamental rights across borders

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q1 LAW International Journal of Law and Psychiatry Pub Date : 2023-09-14 DOI:10.1016/j.ijlp.2023.101936
Alex Ruck Keene KC (Hon) , Chiara Cordone
{"title":"Distributed rights protection: The 2000 Hague Convention on the International Protection of Adults and the challenge of securing fundamental rights across borders","authors":"Alex Ruck Keene KC (Hon) ,&nbsp;Chiara Cordone","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2023.101936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The 2000 Hague Convention on the International Protection of Adults (‘the 2000 Convention’) entered into force on 1 January 2009, is cast as a private international law convention (i.e. one providing tools to minimise procedural, debates about cross-border matters affecting individuals). However, in little-known, and even less explored fashion, it has significant implications for the exercise of both administrative and legal powers by States over those in their territory in zones that are conventionally held close to the metaphorical heart of State power, for instance those experiencing mental ill health, or with impaired decision-making capacity. Even less explored are the consequences for the individuals at the centre of such situations, in particular as regards the protection of their fundamental rights. As we examine in this paper, focusing on both problems of abduction and of cross-border placement into circumstances of deprivation of liberty, such protection has to be distributed between jurisdictions; we suggest that this is a phenomenon which requires to be addressed in a transparent fashion, so that all concerned can be clear as to the implications for its effectiveness.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":"91 ","pages":"Article 101936"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252723000791","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The 2000 Hague Convention on the International Protection of Adults (‘the 2000 Convention’) entered into force on 1 January 2009, is cast as a private international law convention (i.e. one providing tools to minimise procedural, debates about cross-border matters affecting individuals). However, in little-known, and even less explored fashion, it has significant implications for the exercise of both administrative and legal powers by States over those in their territory in zones that are conventionally held close to the metaphorical heart of State power, for instance those experiencing mental ill health, or with impaired decision-making capacity. Even less explored are the consequences for the individuals at the centre of such situations, in particular as regards the protection of their fundamental rights. As we examine in this paper, focusing on both problems of abduction and of cross-border placement into circumstances of deprivation of liberty, such protection has to be distributed between jurisdictions; we suggest that this is a phenomenon which requires to be addressed in a transparent fashion, so that all concerned can be clear as to the implications for its effectiveness.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
分布式权利保护:2000年《国际保护成年人海牙公约》和跨境保障基本权利的挑战
《2000年海牙国际保护成年人公约》(“2000年公约”)于2009年1月1日生效,被视为一项国际私法公约(即提供工具,尽量减少关于影响个人的跨国界事项的程序性辩论)。然而,它以一种鲜为人知、甚至鲜为人探索的方式,对国家对其领土上传统上接近国家权力隐喻核心的地区的人行使行政和法律权力,例如那些患有精神疾病或决策能力受损的人,产生了重大影响。对处于这种情况中心的个人的后果,特别是在保护他们的基本权利方面的后果,探讨得更少。正如我们在本文中所研究的那样,重点关注绑架问题和跨境安置在剥夺自由的情况下的问题,这种保护必须在各司法管辖区之间分配;我们认为,这是一种需要以透明的方式加以解决的现象,以便所有有关方面都能清楚地了解其有效性的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.70%
发文量
54
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Law and Psychiatry is intended to provide a multi-disciplinary forum for the exchange of ideas and information among professionals concerned with the interface of law and psychiatry. There is a growing awareness of the need for exploring the fundamental goals of both the legal and psychiatric systems and the social implications of their interaction. The journal seeks to enhance understanding and cooperation in the field through the varied approaches represented, not only by law and psychiatry, but also by the social sciences and related disciplines.
期刊最新文献
The response of the secretary of state and the “supervised discharge” provision of the UK mental health bill 2022: Potential problems and opportunities in the wake of Secretary of State for Justice v MM [2018] UKSC 60 Capacity and incapacity: An appropriate border for non-consensual interventions? Child maltreatment and suicidal ideation among justice–and welfare–involved adolescents in Nigeria: Investigating the mediating role of social support and emotion regulation Editorial Board Recent research involving consent, alcohol intoxication, and memory: Implications for expert testimony in sexual assault cases
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1