{"title":"塞舌尔国内法院对国际法解释《权利与自由宪章》和/或其他国内法的依赖","authors":"Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi","doi":"10.1163/22131035-12010003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nUnlike the Constitutions of some African States such as Kenya, South Africa, Zimbabwe and Comoros, the Constitution of Seychelles is silent on the status of international law (both treaty law and customary international law) in the Seychelles legal system. However, Article 48 of the Constitution requires courts to, inter alia, ensure that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter) is ‘interpreted in such a way so as not to be inconsistent with any international obligations of Seychelles relating to human rights and freedoms.’ Article 64(4) of the Constitution provides that for Seychelles to be bound by a treaty, such a treaty has to be ratified by Parliament. In this article, the author illustrates how Seychelles courts (the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court and the Court of Appeal) have applied or interpreted Articles 48 and 64 of the Constitution. The author submits, inter alia, that there is room for the argument that Seychelles courts may also refer to treaties which have not been ratified by Seychelles when interpreting the Charter of Rights. It is also argued that for courts to refer to a treaty when interpreting the Charter, there is no requirement for such a treaty to have been domesticated in Seychelles. It is argued further that in the absence of a constitutional provision to the contrary, customary international law is part of Seychelles law.","PeriodicalId":13730,"journal":{"name":"International Human Rights Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Domestic Courts’ Reliance on International Law to Interpret the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and/or other Domestic Law in the Seychelles\",\"authors\":\"Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/22131035-12010003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nUnlike the Constitutions of some African States such as Kenya, South Africa, Zimbabwe and Comoros, the Constitution of Seychelles is silent on the status of international law (both treaty law and customary international law) in the Seychelles legal system. However, Article 48 of the Constitution requires courts to, inter alia, ensure that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter) is ‘interpreted in such a way so as not to be inconsistent with any international obligations of Seychelles relating to human rights and freedoms.’ Article 64(4) of the Constitution provides that for Seychelles to be bound by a treaty, such a treaty has to be ratified by Parliament. In this article, the author illustrates how Seychelles courts (the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court and the Court of Appeal) have applied or interpreted Articles 48 and 64 of the Constitution. The author submits, inter alia, that there is room for the argument that Seychelles courts may also refer to treaties which have not been ratified by Seychelles when interpreting the Charter of Rights. It is also argued that for courts to refer to a treaty when interpreting the Charter, there is no requirement for such a treaty to have been domesticated in Seychelles. It is argued further that in the absence of a constitutional provision to the contrary, customary international law is part of Seychelles law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13730,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Human Rights Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Human Rights Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-12010003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Human Rights Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22131035-12010003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Domestic Courts’ Reliance on International Law to Interpret the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and/or other Domestic Law in the Seychelles
Unlike the Constitutions of some African States such as Kenya, South Africa, Zimbabwe and Comoros, the Constitution of Seychelles is silent on the status of international law (both treaty law and customary international law) in the Seychelles legal system. However, Article 48 of the Constitution requires courts to, inter alia, ensure that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter) is ‘interpreted in such a way so as not to be inconsistent with any international obligations of Seychelles relating to human rights and freedoms.’ Article 64(4) of the Constitution provides that for Seychelles to be bound by a treaty, such a treaty has to be ratified by Parliament. In this article, the author illustrates how Seychelles courts (the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court and the Court of Appeal) have applied or interpreted Articles 48 and 64 of the Constitution. The author submits, inter alia, that there is room for the argument that Seychelles courts may also refer to treaties which have not been ratified by Seychelles when interpreting the Charter of Rights. It is also argued that for courts to refer to a treaty when interpreting the Charter, there is no requirement for such a treaty to have been domesticated in Seychelles. It is argued further that in the absence of a constitutional provision to the contrary, customary international law is part of Seychelles law.
期刊介绍:
The International Human Rights Law Review (HRLR) is a bi-annual peer-reviewed journal. It aims to stimulate research and thinking on contemporary human rights issues, problems, challenges and policies. It is particularly interested in soliciting papers, whether in the legal domain or other social sciences, that are unique in their approach and which seek to address poignant concerns of our times. One of the principal aims of the Journal is to provide an outlet to human rights scholars, practitioners and activists in the developing world who have something tangible to say about their experiences on the ground, or in order to discuss cases and practices that are generally inaccessible to European and NorthAmerican audiences. The Editors and the publisher will work hands-on with such contributors to help find solutions where necessary to facilitate translation or language editing in respect of accepted articles. The Journal is aimed at academics, students, government officials, human rights practitioners, and lawyers working in the area, as well as individuals and organisations interested in the area of human rights law. The Journal publishes critical articles that consider human rights law, policy and practice in their various contexts, at global, regional, sub-regional and national levels, book reviews, and a section focused on an up-to-date appraisal of important jurisprudence and practice of the UN and regional human rights systems including those in the developing world.