《非洲人权和人民权利宪章》和《尼日利亚儿童权利公约》的执行:造成不负责任的父母和孝敬的孩子?

M. Adigun
{"title":"《非洲人权和人民权利宪章》和《尼日利亚儿童权利公约》的执行:造成不负责任的父母和孝敬的孩子?","authors":"M. Adigun","doi":"10.1080/07329113.2019.1675988","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines the implementation of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child in Nigeria together with the Junkun native law and custom. The article finds that these are multiple laws reflecting legal pluralism within the social field of the relationship between parents and their offspring. The article further finds that children are obliged to take care of their parents when they are in need for the rest of their lives under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act whereas under the Children’s Rights Act, parents are no longer responsible to their children after the children have attained the age of 18 years. Thus, the implementation of the two treaties can create irresponsible parents and dutiful children most especially where children are given more rights under customary law beyond 18 as expressed in the Junkun native law and custom. In resolving this situation of legal pluralism, the article subjects the situation to the interrogation of pluralistic archetypes such as legal pluralism of indifference, legal pluralism of accommodation, combative legal pluralism, legal pluralism of mutual support or complementary legal pluralism and offers solution by way of strategies to be adopted in balancing rights with duties through bridging, harmonization, incorporation, subsidization, or repression. The study argues that the Children’s Rights Act appears to be in a combative relationship with the Junkun native law and custom while the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act appears to be in a situation of indifference to Children’s Rights Act. Also, the Nigerian Constitution 1999 also appears indifferent to the Junkun native law and custom. The study therefore recommends subsidization and harmonization as strategies to be adopted by the law making organs in Nigeria and urges them to amend the Nigerian Constitution 1999 to accommodate customary law where it offers a better protection. In addition, the study recommends that pending the amendment, judges should be permitted rule shopping or norm shopping as a repressive strategy to supplant any norm that will do injustice where an alternative norm will do otherwise. The study concludes that by having the Constitution amended, the legislative process as a manifestation of the state's legal power or authority in Nigeria will acquire legitimacy. Also, by adopting a repressive strategy, the judicial process as a manifestation of the state's legal power or authority in Nigeria will acquire legitimacy.","PeriodicalId":44432,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The implementation of the African charter on human and peoples’ rights and the convention on the rights of the child in Nigeria: the creation of irresponsible parents and dutiful children?\",\"authors\":\"M. Adigun\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/07329113.2019.1675988\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article examines the implementation of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child in Nigeria together with the Junkun native law and custom. The article finds that these are multiple laws reflecting legal pluralism within the social field of the relationship between parents and their offspring. The article further finds that children are obliged to take care of their parents when they are in need for the rest of their lives under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act whereas under the Children’s Rights Act, parents are no longer responsible to their children after the children have attained the age of 18 years. Thus, the implementation of the two treaties can create irresponsible parents and dutiful children most especially where children are given more rights under customary law beyond 18 as expressed in the Junkun native law and custom. In resolving this situation of legal pluralism, the article subjects the situation to the interrogation of pluralistic archetypes such as legal pluralism of indifference, legal pluralism of accommodation, combative legal pluralism, legal pluralism of mutual support or complementary legal pluralism and offers solution by way of strategies to be adopted in balancing rights with duties through bridging, harmonization, incorporation, subsidization, or repression. The study argues that the Children’s Rights Act appears to be in a combative relationship with the Junkun native law and custom while the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act appears to be in a situation of indifference to Children’s Rights Act. Also, the Nigerian Constitution 1999 also appears indifferent to the Junkun native law and custom. The study therefore recommends subsidization and harmonization as strategies to be adopted by the law making organs in Nigeria and urges them to amend the Nigerian Constitution 1999 to accommodate customary law where it offers a better protection. In addition, the study recommends that pending the amendment, judges should be permitted rule shopping or norm shopping as a repressive strategy to supplant any norm that will do injustice where an alternative norm will do otherwise. The study concludes that by having the Constitution amended, the legislative process as a manifestation of the state's legal power or authority in Nigeria will acquire legitimacy. Also, by adopting a repressive strategy, the judicial process as a manifestation of the state's legal power or authority in Nigeria will acquire legitimacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2019.1675988\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07329113.2019.1675988","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要本文结合尼日利亚君昆族的本土法律和习俗,考察了《非洲人权和人民权利宪章》和《儿童权利公约》在尼日利亚的执行情况。本文认为,这些都是体现亲子关系社会领域内法律多元化的多重法律。该条还认为,根据《非洲人权和人民权利宪章(批准和执行)法》,儿童有义务在其父母余生有需要时照顾他们,而根据《儿童权利法》,在子女年满18岁后,父母不再对子女负责。因此,这两项条约的执行可能造成不负责任的父母和孝顺的子女,尤其是在习惯法赋予儿童超过18岁的权利的情况下,如君坤本地法律和习俗所表达的那样。在解决这一法律多元主义局面的过程中,本文对冷漠的法律多元主义、通融的法律多元主义、好斗的法律多元主义、相互支持的法律多元主义或互补的法律多元主义等多元主义原型进行了拷问,并提出了通过衔接、协调、合并、补贴或压制等方式平衡权利与义务所采取的策略。该研究认为,《儿童权利法》似乎与君昆土著法律和习俗处于敌对关系,而《非洲人权和人民权利宪章(批准和执行)法》似乎对《儿童权利法》漠不关心。此外,1999年的尼日利亚宪法也对君昆族的本土法律和习俗表现出漠不关心。因此,研究报告建议将补贴和协调作为尼日利亚法律制定机构应采取的战略,并敦促它们修订尼日利亚1999年《宪法》,以适应习惯法,因为习惯法能提供更好的保护。此外,该研究建议,在修正案出台之前,应该允许法官购买规则或购买规范,作为一种压制性策略,以取代任何会造成不公正的规范,而另一种规范则不会。该研究的结论是,通过修改宪法,尼日利亚的立法程序作为国家法律权力或权威的体现将获得合法性。此外,通过采取镇压策略,司法程序作为尼日利亚国家法律权力或权威的体现将获得合法性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The implementation of the African charter on human and peoples’ rights and the convention on the rights of the child in Nigeria: the creation of irresponsible parents and dutiful children?
Abstract This article examines the implementation of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child in Nigeria together with the Junkun native law and custom. The article finds that these are multiple laws reflecting legal pluralism within the social field of the relationship between parents and their offspring. The article further finds that children are obliged to take care of their parents when they are in need for the rest of their lives under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act whereas under the Children’s Rights Act, parents are no longer responsible to their children after the children have attained the age of 18 years. Thus, the implementation of the two treaties can create irresponsible parents and dutiful children most especially where children are given more rights under customary law beyond 18 as expressed in the Junkun native law and custom. In resolving this situation of legal pluralism, the article subjects the situation to the interrogation of pluralistic archetypes such as legal pluralism of indifference, legal pluralism of accommodation, combative legal pluralism, legal pluralism of mutual support or complementary legal pluralism and offers solution by way of strategies to be adopted in balancing rights with duties through bridging, harmonization, incorporation, subsidization, or repression. The study argues that the Children’s Rights Act appears to be in a combative relationship with the Junkun native law and custom while the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act appears to be in a situation of indifference to Children’s Rights Act. Also, the Nigerian Constitution 1999 also appears indifferent to the Junkun native law and custom. The study therefore recommends subsidization and harmonization as strategies to be adopted by the law making organs in Nigeria and urges them to amend the Nigerian Constitution 1999 to accommodate customary law where it offers a better protection. In addition, the study recommends that pending the amendment, judges should be permitted rule shopping or norm shopping as a repressive strategy to supplant any norm that will do injustice where an alternative norm will do otherwise. The study concludes that by having the Constitution amended, the legislative process as a manifestation of the state's legal power or authority in Nigeria will acquire legitimacy. Also, by adopting a repressive strategy, the judicial process as a manifestation of the state's legal power or authority in Nigeria will acquire legitimacy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: As the pioneering journal in this field The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law (JLP) has a long history of publishing leading scholarship in the area of legal anthropology and legal pluralism and is the only international journal dedicated to the analysis of legal pluralism. It is a refereed scholarly journal with a genuinely global reach, publishing both empirical and theoretical contributions from a variety of disciplines, including (but not restricted to) Anthropology, Legal Studies, Development Studies and interdisciplinary studies. The JLP is devoted to scholarly writing and works that further current debates in the field of legal pluralism and to disseminating new and emerging findings from fieldwork. The Journal welcomes papers that make original contributions to understanding any aspect of legal pluralism and unofficial law, anywhere in the world, both in historic and contemporary contexts. We invite high-quality, original submissions that engage with this purpose.
期刊最新文献
Construing the transformed property paradigm of South Africa’s water law: new opportunities presented by legal pluralism? Wait, what are we fighting about? – Kelsen, Ehrlich and the reconciliation of normative jurisprudence and sociology of law Interview article: water movements’ defense of the right to water. From the European arena to the Dutch exception Scientific versus folk legal pluralism An exploration of legal pluralism, power and custom in South Africa. A conversation with Aninka Claassens
×
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