In 2021, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) decided two cases for advancing the increasing jurisprudence on the implementation of human rights and business standards, yet there is still a gap to fill. Despite the important development with regards to the State obligation to supervise business operations, the decisions do not introduce further definitions of companies’ responsibilities on human rights nor the potential of creating mandatory remedies standards for private agents. Through the analysis of the 2021 case law, this article concludes that the IACtHR has been increasingly using the UN Guiding Principles to argue for its rulings but has missed the opportunity to generate greater accountability for companies and private actors in its decision-making.
{"title":"Expanding and Contracting the UN Guiding Principles: an Analysis of Recent Inter-American Human Rights Court Decisions","authors":"S. Smart","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad025","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In 2021, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) decided two cases for advancing the increasing jurisprudence on the implementation of human rights and business standards, yet there is still a gap to fill. Despite the important development with regards to the State obligation to supervise business operations, the decisions do not introduce further definitions of companies’ responsibilities on human rights nor the potential of creating mandatory remedies standards for private agents. Through the analysis of the 2021 case law, this article concludes that the IACtHR has been increasingly using the UN Guiding Principles to argue for its rulings but has missed the opportunity to generate greater accountability for companies and private actors in its decision-making.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47424724","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}
Danielle de Andrade Moreira, Ana Lucia B Nina, Carolina de Figueiredo Garrido, Maria Eduarda Segovia Barbosa Neves
This article presents a systematic analysis of climate litigation in the Brazilian Supreme Court. It argues that climate litigation in Brazil is centred on the protection of human rights and the court is ready (and eager) to draw a closer connection between climate and human rights. The climate litigation movement in Brazil follows in the wake of more than 40 years of a rich environmental legal framework and jurisprudence. This long trajectory includes adopting a chapter in the 1988 Brazilian Constitution dedicated to the right to an ecologically balanced environment. The Constitution determines this is a fundamental human right, encompassing the present and future generations. Building on this context, recent climate litigation cases question how climate stability fits within this constitutional framework. As the country’s constitutional tribunal, the Supreme Court recently received important climate cases addressing Brazil’s climate policy implementation. This article proceeds in three parts. First, the article contextualizes the climate litigation movement in Brazil’s broader environmental legal framework. Second, the article describes the Supreme Court climate docket of concentrated control cases. It focuses on the human right to an ecologically balanced environment and its connections with other constitutionally protected human rights. Third, the article examines the cases’ judicial reasoning, considering how the Supreme Court addressed climate change in the decisions (interlocutory or on the merits) available thus far. The ultimate goal of this article is to deepen the understanding of how the Supreme Court approaches climate as a human right through the methodical examination of the court’s pronouncements.
{"title":"Rights-Based Climate Litigation in Brazil: An Assessment of Constitutional Cases Before the Brazilian Supreme Court","authors":"Danielle de Andrade Moreira, Ana Lucia B Nina, Carolina de Figueiredo Garrido, Maria Eduarda Segovia Barbosa Neves","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad023","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article presents a systematic analysis of climate litigation in the Brazilian Supreme Court. It argues that climate litigation in Brazil is centred on the protection of human rights and the court is ready (and eager) to draw a closer connection between climate and human rights. The climate litigation movement in Brazil follows in the wake of more than 40 years of a rich environmental legal framework and jurisprudence. This long trajectory includes adopting a chapter in the 1988 Brazilian Constitution dedicated to the right to an ecologically balanced environment. The Constitution determines this is a fundamental human right, encompassing the present and future generations. Building on this context, recent climate litigation cases question how climate stability fits within this constitutional framework. As the country’s constitutional tribunal, the Supreme Court recently received important climate cases addressing Brazil’s climate policy implementation. This article proceeds in three parts. First, the article contextualizes the climate litigation movement in Brazil’s broader environmental legal framework. Second, the article describes the Supreme Court climate docket of concentrated control cases. It focuses on the human right to an ecologically balanced environment and its connections with other constitutionally protected human rights. Third, the article examines the cases’ judicial reasoning, considering how the Supreme Court addressed climate change in the decisions (interlocutory or on the merits) available thus far. The ultimate goal of this article is to deepen the understanding of how the Supreme Court approaches climate as a human right through the methodical examination of the court’s pronouncements.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43562845","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}
Daragh Murray, P. Fussey, Kuda Hove, W. Wakabi, Paul Kimumwe, Otto Saki, A. Stevens
States are increasingly developing and deploying large scale surveillance and AI-enabled analytical capabilities. What is uncertain, however, is the impact this surveillance will have. Will it result in a chilling effect whereby individuals modify their behaviour due to the fear of the consequences that may follow? Understanding any such effect is essential: if surveillance activities interfere with the processes by which individuals develop their identity, or undermine democratic processes, the consequences may be almost imperceptible in the short term but profound over the long term. Currently, surveillance-related chilling effects are not well understood, meaning that insufficient weight is given to their potentially society-wide impacts. This article seeks to help redress this balance. Drawing on empirical research in Zimbabwe and Uganda it highlights how State surveillance has chilled behaviour, with significant implications for rights essential to individual development and democratic functioning, specifically the rights to freedom of expression and to freedom of assembly. Importantly, this qualitative research identifies a pattern of common themes or consequences associated with surveillance in general, allowing us to move beyond hypothetical or individual experiences, and providing a greater understanding of the nuances of surveillance-related effects that can help inform decision-making surrounding large scale digital surveillance.
{"title":"The Chilling Effects of Surveillance and Human Rights: Insights from Qualitative Research in Uganda and Zimbabwe","authors":"Daragh Murray, P. Fussey, Kuda Hove, W. Wakabi, Paul Kimumwe, Otto Saki, A. Stevens","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad020","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 States are increasingly developing and deploying large scale surveillance and AI-enabled analytical capabilities. What is uncertain, however, is the impact this surveillance will have. Will it result in a chilling effect whereby individuals modify their behaviour due to the fear of the consequences that may follow? Understanding any such effect is essential: if surveillance activities interfere with the processes by which individuals develop their identity, or undermine democratic processes, the consequences may be almost imperceptible in the short term but profound over the long term. Currently, surveillance-related chilling effects are not well understood, meaning that insufficient weight is given to their potentially society-wide impacts. This article seeks to help redress this balance. Drawing on empirical research in Zimbabwe and Uganda it highlights how State surveillance has chilled behaviour, with significant implications for rights essential to individual development and democratic functioning, specifically the rights to freedom of expression and to freedom of assembly. Importantly, this qualitative research identifies a pattern of common themes or consequences associated with surveillance in general, allowing us to move beyond hypothetical or individual experiences, and providing a greater understanding of the nuances of surveillance-related effects that can help inform decision-making surrounding large scale digital surveillance.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45696241","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}
Disability inclusion has been firmly established as a human rights issue in humanitarian action. Numerous stakeholders have entered into commitments and designed policies to make their services inclusive and accessible for persons with disabilities. In practice, however, persons with disabilities are still excluded from participating in humanitarian action and cannot access the services they need. Drawing on evidence from the Rohingya refugee response in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh and the civil war in South Sudan, this policy and practice note shows that humanitarians often lack the knowledge and confidence to make their services inclusive for persons with different types of impairments. To anchor disability inclusion in all programmes and operations, it should be treated as a strategic issue. It requires sustainable and reliable funding, capacity development at the individual, organizational and strategic level of the humanitarian response, better coordination, robust and reliable data collection based on quantitative and qualitative assessments, and meaningful participation with organizations of persons with disabilities that represent the diversity of persons with disabilities.
{"title":"Making it Work: Closing the Inclusion Gap for Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Crises","authors":"Carolin Funke","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad028","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Disability inclusion has been firmly established as a human rights issue in humanitarian action. Numerous stakeholders have entered into commitments and designed policies to make their services inclusive and accessible for persons with disabilities. In practice, however, persons with disabilities are still excluded from participating in humanitarian action and cannot access the services they need. Drawing on evidence from the Rohingya refugee response in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh and the civil war in South Sudan, this policy and practice note shows that humanitarians often lack the knowledge and confidence to make their services inclusive for persons with different types of impairments. To anchor disability inclusion in all programmes and operations, it should be treated as a strategic issue. It requires sustainable and reliable funding, capacity development at the individual, organizational and strategic level of the humanitarian response, better coordination, robust and reliable data collection based on quantitative and qualitative assessments, and meaningful participation with organizations of persons with disabilities that represent the diversity of persons with disabilities.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41501751","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}
Global disparities in access to COVID-19 vaccines have illuminated long-standing tensions between intellectual property rights and the right to health. Debates over solutions to these disparities have focused on a waiver to the TRIPS Agreement and a prospective pandemic treaty which will attempt to regulate the impact of intellectual property rights on access to essential pandemic health goods. These disparities and debates underscore the imperative for effective legal solutions capable of addressing the restrictive impact of intellectual property rights on the affordability and production of essential health products. Yet from a legal perspective, a claim for affordable medicines is at its essence a fundamental human right, especially that of the right to health. While the right to health has long been entrenched within international human rights law, the legal and political force of a right to medicines is less clear. Accordingly, this article broadly analyses the legal and political state of play of a right to medicines in international law. It proceeds in the following ways: (1) it explores how health fits into the conceptual foundations of human rights; (2) it considers evidence from international law and policy of the legal and political emergence of a right to medicines as part of rights to health and science; (3) it considers the implications of the TRIPS waiver and of a prospective pandemic treaty for the development of this right; (4) it concludes with thoughts about what these developments imply for the legal and political force of a right to medicines in international law.
{"title":"From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to a Pandemic Treaty: Will a Right to Medicines Forever be ‘Under Construction’?","authors":"L. Forman","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad026","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Global disparities in access to COVID-19 vaccines have illuminated long-standing tensions between intellectual property rights and the right to health. Debates over solutions to these disparities have focused on a waiver to the TRIPS Agreement and a prospective pandemic treaty which will attempt to regulate the impact of intellectual property rights on access to essential pandemic health goods. These disparities and debates underscore the imperative for effective legal solutions capable of addressing the restrictive impact of intellectual property rights on the affordability and production of essential health products. Yet from a legal perspective, a claim for affordable medicines is at its essence a fundamental human right, especially that of the right to health. While the right to health has long been entrenched within international human rights law, the legal and political force of a right to medicines is less clear. Accordingly, this article broadly analyses the legal and political state of play of a right to medicines in international law. It proceeds in the following ways: (1) it explores how health fits into the conceptual foundations of human rights; (2) it considers evidence from international law and policy of the legal and political emergence of a right to medicines as part of rights to health and science; (3) it considers the implications of the TRIPS waiver and of a prospective pandemic treaty for the development of this right; (4) it concludes with thoughts about what these developments imply for the legal and political force of a right to medicines in international law.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41606016","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}
Africa is a promising regional venue for climate change-related complaints—not least because it is distinctively vulnerable to climate harms. Yet, neither the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights nor the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights have been theatres to such disputes at the time of writing. In anticipation that climate litigation will emerge before the African human rights system, this practice note provides information to the non-State actors and their lawyers on the procedural challenges that may arise, demonstrating how such challenges may be circumventable in the African context.
{"title":"Climate Change Litigation before the African Human Rights System: Prospects and Pitfalls","authors":"Yusra Suedi, Marieta Fall","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad024","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Africa is a promising regional venue for climate change-related complaints—not least because it is distinctively vulnerable to climate harms. Yet, neither the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights nor the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights have been theatres to such disputes at the time of writing. In anticipation that climate litigation will emerge before the African human rights system, this practice note provides information to the non-State actors and their lawyers on the procedural challenges that may arise, demonstrating how such challenges may be circumventable in the African context.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47437158","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}
States often use strategic messaging in order to defend their human rights violations. Such messaging often relies on promoting exclusionary ideologies or referencing national security doctrines in order to justify a breach of human rights. Less understood, however, are the specific mechanisms that makes such justifications so effective, especially when they aim to excuse unthinkable human rights atrocities. This is important to understand in order to prevent states from relying on these strategies and to hold them accountable when they violate human rights. To address this, the article demonstrates the role that emotion plays in the politics of human rights. Specifically, the article argues that states employ emotionally manipulative/deceptive strategies in attempts to either defend or obscure their human rights abuses. It builds on recent research in both the political and psychological sciences that evidence the role that emotion plays in issues of morality, rights, and justice. Research in this area refers to ‘moral emotions’ which are implicated in informing and communicating moral judgements, as well as motivating moral behaviour. This article argues that states effectively work to manipulate, or ‘disengage’, those emotional processes involved in moral judgements in attempts to reconstrue their human rights abuses as morally acceptable. In doing so, it advances our understanding as to how human rights violations persist, while also contributing to the literature on human rights theory and the role that emotion plays in the politics of human rights.
{"title":"Human Rights Violations, Moral Emotions, and Moral Disengagement: How States use Moral Disengagement to Justify their Human Rights Abuses","authors":"Ben Luongo","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad017","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 States often use strategic messaging in order to defend their human rights violations. Such messaging often relies on promoting exclusionary ideologies or referencing national security doctrines in order to justify a breach of human rights. Less understood, however, are the specific mechanisms that makes such justifications so effective, especially when they aim to excuse unthinkable human rights atrocities. This is important to understand in order to prevent states from relying on these strategies and to hold them accountable when they violate human rights. To address this, the article demonstrates the role that emotion plays in the politics of human rights. Specifically, the article argues that states employ emotionally manipulative/deceptive strategies in attempts to either defend or obscure their human rights abuses. It builds on recent research in both the political and psychological sciences that evidence the role that emotion plays in issues of morality, rights, and justice. Research in this area refers to ‘moral emotions’ which are implicated in informing and communicating moral judgements, as well as motivating moral behaviour. This article argues that states effectively work to manipulate, or ‘disengage’, those emotional processes involved in moral judgements in attempts to reconstrue their human rights abuses as morally acceptable. In doing so, it advances our understanding as to how human rights violations persist, while also contributing to the literature on human rights theory and the role that emotion plays in the politics of human rights.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44117194","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}
M. Hopman, Guleid Ahmed Jama, O. Zvonareva, Artūrs Hoļavins
In this article, we reply to ‘Ethics and Epistemic Injustice in the Global South’ (Kaur et al. 2023), a response to the original article ‘Covert Qualitative Research as a Method to Study Human Rights Under Authoritarian Regimes’ (Hopman 2022). Our reply is written by authors who have expertise and direct experience with the issues at stake (authoritarianism, Global North/Global South relations, covert research methods, epistemic injustice). We show that while there are some interesting points raised in the response article, in general, it does not do justice to the arguments presented in the original article. Instead it constructs a ‘straw man’ by misrepresenting claims in the original article, attributing to it assumptions that were not there, and lumping together notions such as authoritarian zones and Global South, that were not equated in the original article. After providing arguments for this position and discussing the main topics of the critique, we present two new elements: first, a contribution by someone from Moroccan controlled Western Sahara (MCWS), who experienced covert research as a research participant. Second, an overview of lessons learned from this exchange. These include: 1) instead of authoritarian zones, ‘authoritarian situations’ is a more appropriate concept; 2) projects using covert research should strive to include overt and participatory elements; 3) a response article alleging epistemic injustice should create space for the people concerned to speak for themselves.
{"title":"Speaking of Epistemic Injustice: A Reply","authors":"M. Hopman, Guleid Ahmed Jama, O. Zvonareva, Artūrs Hoļavins","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad019","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In this article, we reply to ‘Ethics and Epistemic Injustice in the Global South’ (Kaur et al. 2023), a response to the original article ‘Covert Qualitative Research as a Method to Study Human Rights Under Authoritarian Regimes’ (Hopman 2022). Our reply is written by authors who have expertise and direct experience with the issues at stake (authoritarianism, Global North/Global South relations, covert research methods, epistemic injustice). We show that while there are some interesting points raised in the response article, in general, it does not do justice to the arguments presented in the original article. Instead it constructs a ‘straw man’ by misrepresenting claims in the original article, attributing to it assumptions that were not there, and lumping together notions such as authoritarian zones and Global South, that were not equated in the original article. After providing arguments for this position and discussing the main topics of the critique, we present two new elements: first, a contribution by someone from Moroccan controlled Western Sahara (MCWS), who experienced covert research as a research participant. Second, an overview of lessons learned from this exchange. These include: 1) instead of authoritarian zones, ‘authoritarian situations’ is a more appropriate concept; 2) projects using covert research should strive to include overt and participatory elements; 3) a response article alleging epistemic injustice should create space for the people concerned to speak for themselves.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44085061","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}
Emese Ilyés, Melania Chiponda, Sukti Dhital, Margaret L. Satterthwaite, Aakanksha Badkur, Antonio Gutiérrez, Bethany A. Carson, Dyari Mustafa, Felipe Mesel, F. Feruglio, Noor Mushin, Poorvi Chitalkar, Shreyashi Sen, Tim Kakuru, Tom Weerachat, Tyler Walton
Community-based and participatory methods are often marginalized within institutions of power. In this article, we—a group of community advocates, lawyers, scholars, and researchers from across the globe including Thailand, India, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Italy, Iraq, Argentina, the UK, Puerto Rico, and the United States—have collectively gathered ways that community based, participatory legal empowerment research has been delegitimized across these contexts, and offer practical strategies to break out of this white supremacist colonial imagination and interrupt and respond to these instances of silencing and erasure. Our gatherings enable us to bring to life the rich particulars of each of our unique contexts and through this richness begin to see how larger dynamics span the globe. The micro illuminates the mechanics of the macro. This critical analysis that is possible in such a participatory space allowed us to identify these strategies of delegitimation that we were experiencing despite our very different positionalities and histories. These techniques of delegitimation fall into three broad themes: using traditional research as defence, attacking the credibility of communities including denying their humanity, and acts of self-invalidation. These techniques, whether enacted by donors, companies, government agencies, or academic institutions, seek to disempower the lived experiences of community members involved in legal empowerment. By cataloguing these experiences we hope to better understand techniques of silencing and oppression, and to trace the ways that systems of power reinforce their standing through these immediate and interpersonal responses to the voice of the collective.
{"title":"Human Rights Beyond the Colonial Imagination: Legal Empowerment and Techniques of Delegitimation","authors":"Emese Ilyés, Melania Chiponda, Sukti Dhital, Margaret L. Satterthwaite, Aakanksha Badkur, Antonio Gutiérrez, Bethany A. Carson, Dyari Mustafa, Felipe Mesel, F. Feruglio, Noor Mushin, Poorvi Chitalkar, Shreyashi Sen, Tim Kakuru, Tom Weerachat, Tyler Walton","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Community-based and participatory methods are often marginalized within institutions of power. In this article, we—a group of community advocates, lawyers, scholars, and researchers from across the globe including Thailand, India, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Italy, Iraq, Argentina, the UK, Puerto Rico, and the United States—have collectively gathered ways that community based, participatory legal empowerment research has been delegitimized across these contexts, and offer practical strategies to break out of this white supremacist colonial imagination and interrupt and respond to these instances of silencing and erasure. Our gatherings enable us to bring to life the rich particulars of each of our unique contexts and through this richness begin to see how larger dynamics span the globe. The micro illuminates the mechanics of the macro. This critical analysis that is possible in such a participatory space allowed us to identify these strategies of delegitimation that we were experiencing despite our very different positionalities and histories. These techniques of delegitimation fall into three broad themes: using traditional research as defence, attacking the credibility of communities including denying their humanity, and acts of self-invalidation. These techniques, whether enacted by donors, companies, government agencies, or academic institutions, seek to disempower the lived experiences of community members involved in legal empowerment. By cataloguing these experiences we hope to better understand techniques of silencing and oppression, and to trace the ways that systems of power reinforce their standing through these immediate and interpersonal responses to the voice of the collective.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44341149","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}
This paper is a study of 14 media houses in Malawi and it looks at coverage of human rights issue from various dimensions. A questionnaire was administered to journalists of diverse levels at these media houses to gather data concerning the research. The targeted media houses are located in the main urban centres of Malawi and include radio, television and newspaper publishers. The findings indicate that training, lack of specialised units in newsrooms, inadequate reference materials and reluctance by officials to give out required information are some of the issues that are hampering coverage of human rights stories in the country. The paper also looks at suggestions made by journalists to help improve reportage of human rights in Malawi. It then makes recommendations based on evidence gathered through the questionnaires on how the media and other concerned stakeholders can work together for better human rights reporting in the country.
{"title":"Coverage of Human Rights Issues in Malawian Newsrooms: Challenges and Prospects","authors":"Joe Mlenga","doi":"10.1093/jhuman/huad010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huad010","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This paper is a study of 14 media houses in Malawi and it looks at coverage of human rights issue from various dimensions. A questionnaire was administered to journalists of diverse levels at these media houses to gather data concerning the research. The targeted media houses are located in the main urban centres of Malawi and include radio, television and newspaper publishers. The findings indicate that training, lack of specialised units in newsrooms, inadequate reference materials and reluctance by officials to give out required information are some of the issues that are hampering coverage of human rights stories in the country. The paper also looks at suggestions made by journalists to help improve reportage of human rights in Malawi. It then makes recommendations based on evidence gathered through the questionnaires on how the media and other concerned stakeholders can work together for better human rights reporting in the country.","PeriodicalId":45407,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Rights Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41503377","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：