Pub Date : 2022-03-05DOI: 10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132003
Gualtiero Michelini
Starting from the evolution of jurisdictions vis-à-vis European and international law, and the challenges of globalization and immigration, this contribution focuses on the concept and different declinations of multiculturalism, and on the role of social sciences, including anthropology, in treating and adjudicating judicial cases, in particular, from the perspective of the Italian judiciary. As the cultural issue is an aspect that is frequently at stake in judicial decisions, the use of cultural expertise in trials is addressed both through cases which have benefited from it and by examining the substantial and procedural aspects that need to be considered.
{"title":"Cultural Expertise","authors":"Gualtiero Michelini","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132003","url":null,"abstract":"Starting from the evolution of jurisdictions vis-à-vis European and international law, and the challenges of globalization and immigration, this contribution focuses on the concept and different declinations of multiculturalism, and on the role of social sciences, including anthropology, in treating and adjudicating judicial cases, in particular, from the perspective of the Italian judiciary. As the cultural issue is an aspect that is frequently at stake in judicial decisions, the use of cultural expertise in trials is addressed both through cases which have benefited from it and by examining the substantial and procedural aspects that need to be considered.","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115190416","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 : 2022-03-05DOI: 10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132006
Joshua Isaak Bishay
This paper extends existing research on cultural expertise in domestic settings to international courtrooms where several cultures, religions and worldviews are represented. This exercise reduces the widespread knowledge gap on the cultural particularities of post-conflict communities. In the interim, such research also can bridge the gap between the Western lawyers who currently are the most prevalent in international courts, and the members of post-conflict communities who usually appear on its docket. This article suggests that by including cultural expertise, the ICC can take one more step toward becoming a truly international court.
{"title":"Cultural Experts at the International Criminal Court (ICC)","authors":"Joshua Isaak Bishay","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132006","url":null,"abstract":"This paper extends existing research on cultural expertise in domestic settings to international courtrooms where several cultures, religions and worldviews are represented. This exercise reduces the widespread knowledge gap on the cultural particularities of post-conflict communities. In the interim, such research also can bridge the gap between the Western lawyers who currently are the most prevalent in international courts, and the members of post-conflict communities who usually appear on its docket. This article suggests that by including cultural expertise, the ICC can take one more step toward becoming a truly international court.","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"170 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129414395","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 : 2022-03-05DOI: 10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132004
N. Higgins
This paper focuses on the engagement of Indigenous peoples with the international legal framework which seeks to protect world heritage. Significant concerns have been raised as to the role which Indigenous expertise can play in this framework.There have been numerous criticisms regarding the Eurocentric nature of the framework, and concerns over its the decision-making processes, e.g. in respect of inscription of sites on the World Heritage List. All 3 of the UN mechanisms specific to Indigenous peoples (UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) have called on the World Heritage Committee, UNESCO and heritage advisory bodies to take remedial measures and to expand the role of Indigenous peoples in the protective framework. There have also been recommendations made as to how the World Heritage Committee, UNESCO and States can align the implementation of the World Heritage Convention with the principles and requirements of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. As part of the move to be more inclusive of Indigenous voices, an Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on World Heritage was established in 2017, however an Indigenous expertise deficit still remains within the world heritage framework. As cultural expertise is necessary to appreciate the context and background of cultural sites, and their status as ‘culture’, deserving of recognition under the world heritage framework, this paper addresses the role of Indigenous expertise as cultural expertise in the world heritage framework and underlines why Indigenous expertise is necessary in order to ensure that the framework is representative and valid.
{"title":"Indigenous Expertise as Cultural Expertise in the World Heritage Protective Framework","authors":"N. Higgins","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132004","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on the engagement of Indigenous peoples with the international legal framework which seeks to protect world heritage. Significant concerns have been raised as to the role which Indigenous expertise can play in this framework.There have been numerous criticisms regarding the Eurocentric nature of the framework, and concerns over its the decision-making processes, e.g. in respect of inscription of sites on the World Heritage List. All 3 of the UN mechanisms specific to Indigenous peoples (UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) have called on the World Heritage Committee, UNESCO and heritage advisory bodies to take remedial measures and to expand the role of Indigenous peoples in the protective framework. There have also been recommendations made as to how the World Heritage Committee, UNESCO and States can align the implementation of the World Heritage Convention with the principles and requirements of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. As part of the move to be more inclusive of Indigenous voices, an Indigenous Peoples’ Forum on World Heritage was established in 2017, however an Indigenous expertise deficit still remains within the world heritage framework. As cultural expertise is necessary to appreciate the context and background of cultural sites, and their status as ‘culture’, deserving of recognition under the world heritage framework, this paper addresses the role of Indigenous expertise as cultural expertise in the world heritage framework and underlines why Indigenous expertise is necessary in order to ensure that the framework is representative and valid.","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126554084","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 : 2022-03-05DOI: 10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132001
Jon Campbell
In this paper I draw on my experience as an anthropologist, twenty-six years work as a country expert and extensive research on asylum and immigration law and practice to assess how litigation has shaped the role of country experts and the way their evidence is evaluated by Judges who sit in United Kingdom’s Immigration and Asylum Tribunal (IAT) and in the English Court of Appeal. I begin by looking at the history of applied work in Anthropology and my growing involvement as an Anthropological ‘expert’ involved in asylum and immigration law. I then examine litigation in the British courts which has attempted to define and regulate the role of experts and their evidence. Finally, I discuss my work as a country expert and how the courts have assessed the ‘validity’ of my evidence by drawing on a diverse range of asylum claims. The paper concludes that while experts confront a range of constraints imposed by the law, they can successfully challenge judges to rethink their assumptions and ensure that vulnerable refugees are granted protection. In the mid-1990s I received an unsolicited email from a barrister asking me to write an ‘expert’ report for a child who was claiming asylum in the UK. I had never heard of ‘country experts’ nor was I aware of the form which the report should take or what issues it should address. It took me an entire week to draft a short report at the expense of my obligations as an academic in a British university. I never heard the outcome of that appeal. Since that inauspicious beginning I have written over six hundred reports and I have conducted extensive fieldwork and research on the British asylum system. This paper examines the provision of ‘cultural expertise’, a term which Holden (2019) and Henderson et al (2020) have used to describe a specific role take up by academics who provide expert evidence to the courts which enables judges/mediators to better understand key socio-cultural and other issues which are relevant to the case. Holden is particularly interested in the engagement of anthropologists as experts in the legal process. In this sense, cultural expertise should not be confused with the ability attributed to anthropologists of understanding a society’s ‘culture’ based on ethnographic research. Section (i) examines how my career as an academic anthropologist became intertwined with work as a ‘country expert’, and how expert witnessing expanded from a part-time preoccupation to become the focus of my professional work and research. Section (ii) provides an overview of litigation which has sought to regulate the work of country experts. In section (iii) I draw on my experience as an anthropological expert to show the tensions between experts and the judiciary and how my work has sought to challenge judicial interpretations in an attempt to secure protection for refugees.
{"title":"Experts and the Judiciary","authors":"Jon Campbell","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132001","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper I draw on my experience as an anthropologist, twenty-six years work as a country expert and extensive research on asylum and immigration law and practice to assess how litigation has shaped the role of country experts and the way their evidence is evaluated by Judges who sit in United Kingdom’s Immigration and Asylum Tribunal (IAT) and in the English Court of Appeal. I begin by looking at the history of applied work in Anthropology and my growing involvement as an Anthropological ‘expert’ involved in asylum and immigration law. I then examine litigation in the British courts which has attempted to define and regulate the role of experts and their evidence. Finally, I discuss my work as a country expert and how the courts have assessed the ‘validity’ of my evidence by drawing on a diverse range of asylum claims. The paper concludes that while experts confront a range of constraints imposed by the law, they can successfully challenge judges to rethink their assumptions and ensure that vulnerable refugees are granted protection. \u0000In the mid-1990s I received an unsolicited email from a barrister asking me to write an ‘expert’ report for a child who was claiming asylum in the UK. I had never heard of ‘country experts’ nor was I aware of the form which the report should take or what issues it should address. It took me an entire week to draft a short report at the expense of my obligations as an academic in a British university. I never heard the outcome of that appeal. Since that inauspicious beginning I have written over six hundred reports and I have conducted extensive fieldwork and research on the British asylum system. This paper examines the provision of ‘cultural expertise’, a term which Holden (2019) and Henderson et al (2020) have used to describe a specific role take up by academics who provide expert evidence to the courts which enables judges/mediators to better understand key socio-cultural and other issues which are relevant to the case. Holden is particularly interested in the engagement of anthropologists as experts in the legal process. In this sense, cultural expertise should not be confused with the ability attributed to anthropologists of understanding a society’s ‘culture’ based on ethnographic research. \u0000Section (i) examines how my career as an academic anthropologist became intertwined with work as a ‘country expert’, and how expert witnessing expanded from a part-time preoccupation to become the focus of my professional work and research. Section (ii) provides an overview of litigation which has sought to regulate the work of country experts. In section (iii) I draw on my experience as an anthropological expert to show the tensions between experts and the judiciary and how my work has sought to challenge judicial interpretations in an attempt to secure protection for refugees.","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125279540","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 : 2022-03-05DOI: 10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132008
M. de Koning
In this rejoinder to Wiersinga’s article which deals with my role as an Expert Witness in a Dutch terrorism trial, I will respond based upon my notes at the time and my subsequent reflections about it. As I will show, the anthropologist and the judge can, and should, meet but this also turns the neutrality of the researcher into a matter debate. Furthermore, in this meeting anthropological knowledge becomes entangled with other logics and methods which raises many ethical questions as Wiersinga has rightfully pointed out. These questions and issues are not specific for the case I was involved in but has a bearing on the issue of cultural expertise in a broader sense for the time. I end my contribution with two pleas: one for more reflection among anthropologists on ethical issues in relation to cultural expertise and another to academic institutions to support their scholars in court.
{"title":"An Anthropologist in Court and out of Place","authors":"M. de Koning","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132008","url":null,"abstract":"In this rejoinder to Wiersinga’s article which deals with my role as an Expert Witness in a Dutch terrorism trial, I will respond based upon my notes at the time and my subsequent reflections about it. As I will show, the anthropologist and the judge can, and should, meet but this also turns the neutrality of the researcher into a matter debate. Furthermore, in this meeting anthropological knowledge becomes entangled with other logics and methods which raises many ethical questions as Wiersinga has rightfully pointed out. These questions and issues are not specific for the case I was involved in but has a bearing on the issue of cultural expertise in a broader sense for the time. I end my contribution with two pleas: one for more reflection among anthropologists on ethical issues in relation to cultural expertise and another to academic institutions to support their scholars in court.","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129094424","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 : 2022-03-05DOI: 10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132002
Martine de Maximy
This paper will highlight the mandate of the juvenile judge in the context of intercultural justice in France, in which juvenile judges are at the same time civil judges and criminal judges. Their role is to both pass judgement on juvenile offenders as well as to protect minors who may be at risk. It may even be the same adolescent who has committed a crime who is also a child at risk. Through the guidance process (children at risk), the judge must respect — as is necessary for all judges — the principles that all must have the opportunity to contradict the charges leveled against them. These decisions are made in the context of a hearing where the parties may be present with or without counsel, where reasoning must be given and will be subject to appeal. We therefore have the obligation to listen to the appeals of both parents and children; some juvenile judges will even accept the presence of other members of the family or other persons whose presence is desired and may help to establish a dialogue.
{"title":"Intercultural Justice in France: Origins and Evolution","authors":"Martine de Maximy","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132002","url":null,"abstract":"This paper will highlight the mandate of the juvenile judge in the context of intercultural justice in France, in which juvenile judges are at the same time civil judges and criminal judges. Their role is to both pass judgement on juvenile offenders as well as to protect minors who may be at risk. It may even be the same adolescent who has committed a crime who is also a child at risk. Through the guidance process (children at risk), the judge must respect — as is necessary for all judges — the principles that all must have the opportunity to contradict the charges leveled against them. These decisions are made in the context of a hearing where the parties may be present with or without counsel, where reasoning must be given and will be subject to appeal. We therefore have the obligation to listen to the appeals of both parents and children; some juvenile judges will even accept the presence of other members of the family or other persons whose presence is desired and may help to establish a dialogue.","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122610175","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 : 2022-03-05DOI: 10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132005
Maria Giuliana Civinini
This paper emphasises the use of cultural knowledge and cultural expertise in court, with specific reference to civil proceedings. It adopts background scenarios characterised by the presence of ex officio judicial powers that introduce knowledge into trials regarding family and juvenile proceedings, guardianship of ill and elderly people, and immigration and asylum proceedings. The assumption of this paper is that when a situation involving intercultural elements is brought to the attention of the court, the usual background knowledge of the judge may be insufficient to render meaningful judgement. In this situation, thanks to ex officio powers (in introducing facts, gathering evidence, raising legal and factual questions), the judge should be able to establish the elements to be examined through the lens of cultural diversity. The paper uses examples to illustrate judicial practices and then draws a set of initial conclusions about the status of cultural expertise in Italian civil procedures, the challenges of the present, and initiatives to be taken in a short-term perspective (training, panels of experts, deontological requirements for experts).
{"title":"Cultural Expertise in Civil Law in Italy","authors":"Maria Giuliana Civinini","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132005","url":null,"abstract":"This paper emphasises the use of cultural knowledge and cultural expertise in court, with specific reference to civil proceedings. It adopts background scenarios characterised by the presence of ex officio judicial powers that introduce knowledge into trials regarding family and juvenile proceedings, guardianship of ill and elderly people, and immigration and asylum proceedings. The assumption of this paper is that when a situation involving intercultural elements is brought to the attention of the court, the usual background knowledge of the judge may be insufficient to render meaningful judgement. In this situation, thanks to ex officio powers (in introducing facts, gathering evidence, raising legal and factual questions), the judge should be able to establish the elements to be examined through the lens of cultural diversity. The paper uses examples to illustrate judicial practices and then draws a set of initial conclusions about the status of cultural expertise in Italian civil procedures, the challenges of the present, and initiatives to be taken in a short-term perspective (training, panels of experts, deontological requirements for experts).","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125313393","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 : 2022-03-05DOI: 10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132007
H. C. Wiersinga
As a judge, I have the feeling that culture is related with anything and everything – and with nothing at all. In most criminal cases, it hides underground, not visible, not recognized and is rarely, if ever, brought up as an argument by the participants. In my experience, even though an anthropologist can see remarkable cultural features given the way proceedings are organized, the judge, in managing the proceedings, will try to keep such features out of sight. As such, in my view, anthropologists offer an outsider’s view whilst the judge, as part of the legal system, is an insider. This paper starts from a sceptical standpoint about cultural knowledge, in which I argue that the judge, as a legal professional, does not need to take into consideration that law and procedures are embedded in a dominant culture because they are more interested in a case-by-case approach, trying individuals for their concrete deeds. This paper elaborates on the potential common ground between anthropological and legal methods and concludes with my first-hand experience on the so-called Context case in which an anthropologist was appointed as expert for a well-known terrorism case in the Netherlands. This case epitomizes, in my view, the challenges and the potential benefits of integrating cultural expertise in court.
{"title":"The Judge and the Anthropologist","authors":"H. C. Wiersinga","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.132007","url":null,"abstract":"As a judge, I have the feeling that culture is related with anything and everything – and with nothing at all. In most criminal cases, it hides underground, not visible, not recognized and is rarely, if ever, brought up as an argument by the participants. In my experience, even though an anthropologist can see remarkable cultural features given the way proceedings are organized, the judge, in managing the proceedings, will try to keep such features out of sight. As such, in my view, anthropologists offer an outsider’s view whilst the judge, as part of the legal system, is an insider. This paper starts from a sceptical standpoint about cultural knowledge, in which I argue that the judge, as a legal professional, does not need to take into consideration that law and procedures are embedded in a dominant culture because they are more interested in a case-by-case approach, trying individuals for their concrete deeds. This paper elaborates on the potential common ground between anthropological and legal methods and concludes with my first-hand experience on the so-called Context case in which an anthropologist was appointed as expert for a well-known terrorism case in the Netherlands. This case epitomizes, in my view, the challenges and the potential benefits of integrating cultural expertise in court.","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129495382","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 : 2022-03-03DOI: 10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.131999
Livia Holden
{"title":"Cultural Expertise and the Legal Professions","authors":"Livia Holden","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.131999","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.vi11.131999","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124377478","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 : 2021-04-05DOI: 10.7146/nnjlsr.v1i10.125695
Effie Fokas
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or, the Court) is a formidable player in the development of legal approaches to Islam: its jurisdictional remit (covering over 800 million people across 47 countries) is vast; it is a standard setter for human rights protection in general on a global scale; and it has a rapidly growing body of case law relevant to Islam which has influenced states’ engagements with Islam within Europe and beyond. Besides the Court’s ‘direct effects’, in terms of impact on relevant legislation, through its decisions to do with Islam, it also has a significant ‘indirect’, social effect though the messages those decisions communicate about Islam and its place in society. This contribution examines the role of the Court in its direct and indirect effects on Islam, law and Europeanisation.
{"title":"Islam at the European Court of Human Rights","authors":"Effie Fokas","doi":"10.7146/nnjlsr.v1i10.125695","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/nnjlsr.v1i10.125695","url":null,"abstract":"The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or, the Court) is a formidable player in the development of legal approaches to Islam: its jurisdictional remit (covering over 800 million people across 47 countries) is vast; it is a standard setter for human rights protection in general on a global scale; and it has a rapidly growing body of case law relevant to Islam which has influenced states’ engagements with Islam within Europe and beyond. Besides the Court’s ‘direct effects’, in terms of impact on relevant legislation, through its decisions to do with Islam, it also has a significant ‘indirect’, social effect though the messages those decisions communicate about Islam and its place in society. This contribution examines the role of the Court in its direct and indirect effects on Islam, law and Europeanisation.","PeriodicalId":130064,"journal":{"name":"NAVEIÑ REET: Nordic Journal of Law and Social Research","volume":"305 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122693779","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：