Pub Date : 2019-01-14DOI: 10.1017/9781780688367.008
J. Spratt
{"title":"Made in Canada: A Failed War on Drugs","authors":"J. Spratt","doi":"10.1017/9781780688367.008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780688367.008","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11239,"journal":{"name":"Doing Peace the Rights Way","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89362522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-14DOI: 10.1017/9781780688367.010
James K. Stewart
{"title":"The Deterrence Rationale in a Criminal Justice Accountability Regime","authors":"James K. Stewart","doi":"10.1017/9781780688367.010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780688367.010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11239,"journal":{"name":"Doing Peace the Rights Way","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"91208916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-14DOI: 10.1017/9781780688367.012
L. Oldring
{"title":"“Exceptional Measures” in Times of Crisis: Terrorism, National Security and the Rule of Law","authors":"L. Oldring","doi":"10.1017/9781780688367.012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780688367.012","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11239,"journal":{"name":"Doing Peace the Rights Way","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83310844","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-14DOI: 10.1017/9781780688367.019
A. Prentice, Camille Marquis Bissonnette
{"title":"Come a Long Way and a Long Way to Go: UNSCR 1325 and Women's Participation in Peace-Making","authors":"A. Prentice, Camille Marquis Bissonnette","doi":"10.1017/9781780688367.019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780688367.019","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11239,"journal":{"name":"Doing Peace the Rights Way","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82520259","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-01DOI: 10.1017/9781780688367.016
T. McCormack
{"title":"Revisiting Challenges to International Humanitarian Law","authors":"T. McCormack","doi":"10.1017/9781780688367.016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780688367.016","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11239,"journal":{"name":"Doing Peace the Rights Way","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88917863","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-01-01DOI: 10.1017/9781780688367.006
Alana Klein
INTRODUCTION The turn of the last millennium launched a period of renewed dynamism around social and economic rights (SERs) or human rights to food, housing, health care, education, and the like. Although these rights have formed part of the contemporary human rights canon, at least since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and are included in the majority of contemporary constitutions, there has been little dispute that SERs have been neglected relative to civil and political rights. The reasons are historical, methodological, and deeply political. By the year 2000, however, new constitutions were increasingly including such rights. Courts were beginning to develop ways to adjudicate them across the world, most famously in South Africa and India. Prominent US scholars observing these developments were reversing long-held positions and were now opining that such rights could indeed be enforceable in courts. International institutions and organizations were finally beginning to prioritize them. Canada's judiciary was not immune from this millennial energy. In the fall of 2002, soon aft er I became a law clerk for Supreme Court of Canada Justice Louise Arbour, the Court handed down its decision in Gosselin v. Quebec , its first response to an explicit constitutional, social and economic rights-based social welfare claim. The province of Quebec had introduced a law decreasing social assistance payments to persons under 30 who, for any reason, failed to participate in a workfare program. Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms makes no specific mention of rights to welfare or to an adequate or minimum standard of living, and so Ms. Gosselin argued that the constitutional guarantees of life, liberty and security of the person in s. 7 of the Charter ought to be broadly interpreted so as to invalidate the law. The majority of the Court denied the claim on the basis that Ms. Gosselin had not demonstrated “actual hardship,” though it left open the possibility that positive SERs might be read into s. 7 in a future case. Justice Arbour, in a famous dissent, would have allowed the claim.
上个千年之交开启了一个围绕社会和经济权利(SERs)或粮食、住房、保健、教育等人权重新焕发活力的时期。尽管这些权利至少自《世界人权宣言》以来已成为当代人权准则的一部分，并被纳入大多数当代宪法，但与公民权利和政治权利相比，SERs被忽视的说法几乎没有争议。原因有历史的、方法论的和深刻的政治意义。然而，到2000年，新宪法越来越多地包括这些权利。世界各地的法院开始发展对此类案件进行审判的方式，其中最著名的是南非和印度。观察到这些发展的著名美国学者正在改变长期以来的立场，现在他们认为，这些权利确实可以在法庭上强制执行。国际机构和组织终于开始优先考虑这些问题。加拿大的司法系统也未能幸免于这种千禧一代的能量。2002年秋天，在我成为加拿大最高法院大法官路易斯·阿尔布尔(Louise Arbour)的法律助理后不久，最高法院宣布了戈塞林诉魁北克案(Gosselin v. Quebec)的判决，这是最高法院第一次对明确的宪法、社会和经济权利为基础的社会福利诉求作出回应。魁北克省制定了一项法律，减少对30岁以下的人的社会援助支付，这些人由于任何原因没有参加工作福利方案。加拿大的《权利和自由宪章》没有具体提到享有福利或适足或最低生活水平的权利，因此戈塞林女士认为，《宪章》第7条中宪法对人身的生命、自由和安全的保障应该得到广泛的解释，以便使法律无效。法院的多数法官驳回了这一说法，理由是戈塞林没有表现出“实际的困难”，尽管在未来的案件中，肯定的SERs可能会被解读为第7条。阿尔布尔大法官，在一个著名的异议中，会允许这一主张。
{"title":"Social and Economic Rights and the Legal Imagination","authors":"Alana Klein","doi":"10.1017/9781780688367.006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780688367.006","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION The turn of the last millennium launched a period of renewed dynamism around social and economic rights (SERs) or human rights to food, housing, health care, education, and the like. Although these rights have formed part of the contemporary human rights canon, at least since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and are included in the majority of contemporary constitutions, there has been little dispute that SERs have been neglected relative to civil and political rights. The reasons are historical, methodological, and deeply political. By the year 2000, however, new constitutions were increasingly including such rights. Courts were beginning to develop ways to adjudicate them across the world, most famously in South Africa and India. Prominent US scholars observing these developments were reversing long-held positions and were now opining that such rights could indeed be enforceable in courts. International institutions and organizations were finally beginning to prioritize them. Canada's judiciary was not immune from this millennial energy. In the fall of 2002, soon aft er I became a law clerk for Supreme Court of Canada Justice Louise Arbour, the Court handed down its decision in Gosselin v. Quebec , its first response to an explicit constitutional, social and economic rights-based social welfare claim. The province of Quebec had introduced a law decreasing social assistance payments to persons under 30 who, for any reason, failed to participate in a workfare program. Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms makes no specific mention of rights to welfare or to an adequate or minimum standard of living, and so Ms. Gosselin argued that the constitutional guarantees of life, liberty and security of the person in s. 7 of the Charter ought to be broadly interpreted so as to invalidate the law. The majority of the Court denied the claim on the basis that Ms. Gosselin had not demonstrated “actual hardship,” though it left open the possibility that positive SERs might be read into s. 7 in a future case. Justice Arbour, in a famous dissent, would have allowed the claim.","PeriodicalId":11239,"journal":{"name":"Doing Peace the Rights Way","volume":"71 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75527867","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2015-08-08DOI: 10.1017/9781780688367.003
A. Clapham
This contribution looks at recent developments concerning the accountability of armed groups and corporations under international law. In particular it looks at corporate criminal responsibility and the new AU Protocol providing for a criminal chamber to prosecute corporations, developments in investment law, and new approaches by the UN towards reporting on human rights violations committed by armed groups.
{"title":"Human Rights Obligations for Non-State Actors: Where Are We Now?","authors":"A. Clapham","doi":"10.1017/9781780688367.003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781780688367.003","url":null,"abstract":"This contribution looks at recent developments concerning the accountability of armed groups and corporations under international law. In particular it looks at corporate criminal responsibility and the new AU Protocol providing for a criminal chamber to prosecute corporations, developments in investment law, and new approaches by the UN towards reporting on human rights violations committed by armed groups.","PeriodicalId":11239,"journal":{"name":"Doing Peace the Rights Way","volume":"312 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2015-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75276312","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：