To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
El tema de la justicia transicional mexicana, materializado a través de una Fiscalía Especial que funcionó entre 2001 y 2006, sigue siendo ignorado en la academia. La mayoría de los estudios existentes supone que la Fiscalía Especial fue creada para generar resultados que contribuirían a la consolidación de la democracia mexicana: particularmente, verdad y justicia. También señalan que esta institución fracasó, porque no obtuvo verdad ni justicia. No coinciden, sin embargo, sobre las razones detrás de dicho fracaso: falta de voluntad política, ausencia de personal capacitado, elaboración de estrategias jurídicas torpes. Este artículo se aleja de estas interpretaciones y rastrea la genealogía de la Fiscalía Especial. Para hacerlo, analiza críticamente el papel crucial que desempeñó en la justicia transicional la Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos (CNDH), institución que hasta ahora ha sido ignorada en los estudios sobre el tema. El argumento que enmarca esta investigación es que, en México, la justicia transicional fue diseñada por la CNDH de tal manera que contribuyó a perpetuar la injusticia. Este artículo busca mostrar que no es que la Fiscalía Especial haya fracasado en la marcha, sino que desde su origen fue pensada para otorgar un indulto a los perpetradores de crímenes.
This commentary conveys appreciation for a recent review of the rates of complex post-traumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) among refugees, describes the relevance of CPTSD to the refugee experience and discusses implications for assessment and treatment, the effective development of which requires collaboration among researchers, clinicians and individuals with lived experience.
This chapter explores the relationship between human rights and the environment. It begins by asking ‘who we think we are’ to understand the forms of subjecthood and subjectivity produced by human rights. It argues that human rights normalize a series of false conceptions about our collective self that have detrimental social and ecological consequences. The chapter next examines the question of ‘where we think we are’, probing the ontological rift between humans as subjects of rights and ‘the environment’ as the repository of resources with which to satisfy human entitlements. The chapter challenges human rights as a hubristic organizing category and observes that the ‘who’ and ‘where’ questions, artificially separated in the chapter, serve to show that the way humans treat each other is inextricable from the way we treat nature. To undo relationships of mastery, ownership, and violence between the subjects and objects of human rights law, projects for human wellbeing and environmental struggles need to engage with and understand each other outside the unproductive rubric of rights discourse.
International legal discourses clash in violent ways within the state. For example, the international discourse on human rights identifies some individuals who oppose state-sanctioned projects as Indigenous peoples while the international discourse about terrorism may identify them as terrorists. These clashes are occurring throughout the world, particularly surrounding extractive resource projects, but this article considers one example from the Philippines where some B'laan individuals and communities oppose the Tampakan Copper-Gold Mine, and examines how various actors identify those individuals and communities. It explores how some identify them as Indigenous peoples while others identify them as terrorists. In highlighting the violent effects of international law, it investigates how discourse inhibits appreciation of violent erasures and the continuing coloniality of extractive resource development.
How to build an ecosystem of trust in digital health? The availability of large amounts of personal data, combined with AI and ML capacities, Internet of Things and strong computational platforms, has the potential to transform healthcare systems in a disruptive way. The emergence of personalised medicine offers opportunities and raises new legal, ethical and societal challenges. A silent shift towards data-driven preventive and personalised medicine may improve diagnosis and therapies while reducing public health costs. In order to build trust, risks such as data breaches, privacy issues, discrimination and eugenics must be addressed. This chapter presents the disruptive nature of AI and ML technologies in healthcare, and makes specific recommendations to build a trustworthy digital health system. Special attention is given to governance by international institutions as well as key principles like transparency, accountability and decision-making processes in a medical context. We first identify the key parameters to advance the field of digital health in a responsible way. Second, we propose possible solutions to shape a sound policy in digital health taking into account a rights-based governance framework. The last part of the chapter is dedicated to the accountability scheme.
This chapter examines the rules that place limits on the negative externalities of international energy transactions. It begins with a discussion of certain rules which appear in the very instruments enabling and protecting the transaction (investment, trade and transit). The advantages and disadvantages of including these ‘special’ externality-relevant rules in such instruments are analysed in the light of some illustrations. Subsequently, it examines the ‘general’ externality-relevant rules, namely those laid down in instruments whose main purpose is not the organisation of international energy transactions but the regulation of their negative externalities. The discussion is organised in four steps based on whether the relevant rules focus on cost-internalisation, prevention, response or reparation.
This introduction offers background problematics and theoretical frameworks of this book, in addition to introducing all other chapters. First, I note that the minimum core of human dignity can be captured by such conceptions as elevated rank, intrinsic worth, and anti-humiliation. Since the 1970s autonomy has risen to prominence. Second, populism and polarization in Western democracies, insofar as it is related to what Ronald Inglehart and Pippa Norris call “cultural backlash,” signals tension between dignity as individual autonomy and other competing social and communal values. Third, in the post-Asian-values-debate era, a great part of Asia has progressed toward or become liberal democracies, and human dignity and human rights are embraced as universal values. This book regards culture as contestable and fluid set of meanings and symbols that is subject to change, even though cultural changes may be path-dependent and cultures cannot be totally fluid in its entirety at a limited historical period. Fourth, Asian countries have already and will continue to work out the full implications of these universal values by applying different conceptions of dignity to concrete issues.
Transitional justice – the act of reckoning with a former authoritarian regime after it has ceased to exist – has direct implications for democratic processes. Mechanisms of transitional justice have the power to influence who decides to go into politics, can shape politicians' behavior while in office, and can affect how politicians delegate policy decisions. However, these mechanisms are not all alike: some, known as transparency mechanisms, uncover authoritarian collaborators who did their work in secret while others, known as purges, fire open collaborators of the old regime. After Authoritarianism analyzes this distinction in order to uncover the contrasting effects these mechanisms have on sustaining and shaping the qualities of democratic processes. Using a highly disaggregated global transitional justice dataset, the book shows that mechanisms of transitional justice are far from being the epilogue of an outgoing authoritarian regime, and instead represent the crucial first chapter in a country's democratic story.
The use and development of algorithms in health care, including machine learning, contributes to the discovery of better treatments for patients and offers promising perspectives in the fight against cancer and other diseases. Yet, algorithms are not a neutral health product since they are programmed by humans, with the risk of propagating human rights infringements. In the medical area, human rights impact assessments need to be conducted for applications involving AI. Apart from offering a consistent and transversal substantive approach to AI, human rights law, and in particular the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, would allow the targeting of all stakeholders, including the corporations developing health care algorithms. Such an approach would establish a chain of duties and responsibilities bringing more transparency and consistency in the overall process of developing AI and its later uses. Although this approach would not solve all AI challenges, it would offer a framework for discussion with all relevant actors, including vulnerable populations. An increase in human rights education of medical doctors and data scientists, and further collaboration at the initial stages of algorithm development would greatly contribute to the creation of a human rights culture in the techno-science space.
The universal system of protection against torture established by the United Nations (UN) is confronted with daily incidents of torture and other cruelties in all regions of the world. Moreover, despite the ratification of UN treaties, most governments lack a genuine commitment to address these abuses. In contrast, the anti-torture safeguards under the UN Convention against Torture and its Optional Protocol are currently being implemented in Taiwan, even though Taiwan is not part of the UN and cannot participate in the international human rights dialogue. The process of incorporation of UN anti-torture documents by a non-UN member is all but easy. This article shows, however, that commitment to combat torture goes beyond the UN treaty system and might be a welcome contribution towards the current debate on fostering compliance with human rights treaties both in Asia-Pacific and around the globe.
Payne offers an account of the unsettling effects of confessions of violence by armed left guerillas or revolutionary fighters in Argentina in two moments in Argentine history. The chapter considers how the timing of these confessions shaped responses to them. In the years shortly after the transition from authoritarian rule, contentious debate moved toward a full accounting on the left for its role in past violence. In recent years, this proved less possible. As the right reconsolidated its political power, the confessional narratives from the Argentine armed left fueled fears of a backlash against the left, reinforcing a view of the left’s shared responsibility with the authoritarian regime for human rights violations, and a call for its prosecution. This silencing of open debate over the left’s past actions prevented the process of condemning violations regardless of who committed them. The prescriptive dimension to this observation highlights the need for urgency in thinking self-critically, to reflect broadly on the motives and consequences of violence, and to use moments of political advantage to condemn those parts of the (temporarily) dominant power’s past that deserve condemnation.
The report explains how, while it had hardly been recognized in the early years of independence, State responsibility gradually developed in French-speaking Africa from the 1990s onwards under the dual influence of French administrative law and the emergence of pluralist democracy. The development of pluralist democracy led to a renewal of constitutionalism and of administrative law, thereby creating the conditions for a better protection of citizens’ liberties and rights. In spite of this positive evolution, the analysis of African case law shows that redress for injury caused by public authorities appears to be doubly deficient, both in the amounts allocated and in its execution by the administration. At the same time, however, redress for human rights violations is making concrete progress in all African regions (English speaking, French speaking, Arabic speaking, etc.), thanks in particular to the significant role played by the African Commission of Human Rights. Ultimately, the chapter argues that the full implementation of public institutions’ responsibility is highly dependent on the permeation of a rule of law culture in the African States.
This chapter argues that Amnesty International’s chief sovereign accomplishment in Lived Sovereignty is organizing a global human rights polity from disparate transnational publics. However, shadow relations between Amnesty and governments related to funding, country access, and negotiating reforms in its first two decades threatened to derail the moral purity that undergirds the protection of human rights in Idealized Sovereignty. Successfully navigating shadow hybridity has thus been a central yet understudied feature of Amnesty. The historical analysis contextualizes the difficult choices Amnesty made to become the world’s leading INGO. Amnesty thus helps us see that hybrid relations endure even when the stakes are very high, exemplifying the pervasiveness of hybrid sovereignty in global politics.
This chapter examines Uruguay’s radical shift from an almost complete denial of its Afro-Uruguayan population to official state recognition. While Uruguay follows a larger Latin American movement for multiculturalism that began in the late twentieth century, Uruguay is unique in the specific path it took to overcome the invisibility of its black population, a change critically tied to the military government’s treatment of Afro-Uruguayans from 1973–1985. This chapter argues that the push for legal visibility occurred as a result of the twin pressures of Afro-Uruguayan mobilization in the aftermath of the dictatorship, combined with a larger global shift towards support for state-sponsored ethnoracial recognition. Using interviews and sources from Uruguayan and international archives, it locates the importance of official recognition in the context of building a powerful civil rights movement that has had tangible policy outcomes, such as inclusion in the census and an affirmative action law.
Radicalization in prison is a well-developed field of research that, particularly in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, has involved academics and practitioners in the attempt to highlight possible push and pull factors and dynamics, as well as useful strategies for preventing and countering extremism inside the facilities. Like every subject of great interest, it has given rise to numerous theories about the possible approaches to radical violence, some even at odds with each other. However, there is almost unanimous agreement that isolation from external society and the inadequate management of the right to profess one’s religious faith within prisons may be elements that increase the risk of intramural radicalization. In Italy, the COVID-19 pandemic interfered heavily not only in the lives of people belonging to free society but also – and perhaps even more – in the lives of prisoners, resulting in the total isolation of prison facilities from the outside community. The dramatic efforts to protect public health have effectively eclipsed every other right, including – for prisoners – practising one’s faith with the guidance of authorized religious leaders. The present article explores how and why these anti-virus changes in the management of the Italian penitentiary could have influenced the risk of intramural radicalization.
To rally support within Africa for America’s boycott of the Moscow Olympic Games, President Carter sent Muhammad Ali as his personal diplomat to Tanzania, Kenya, Nigeria, Liberia, and Senegal in an attempt to gain political and popular support for the boycott. The mission had limited success, but it inspired a public forum across the continent for criticisms of American foreign policy toward Africa. By analyzing these discussions, primarily within the press, Ivey shows how America was interpreted in Africa and how the issues of the Cold War were considered of secondary importance to the more immediate struggle against apartheid and independent foreign policy.
Clinicians should be aware of the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court in providing a ‘safety net’ to protect ‘vulnerable’ adults who are not within the scope of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) or the Mental Health Act (MHA) 1983. Many situations in which the inherent jurisdiction has been deployed have been to safeguard vulnerable adults where there is abuse, coercion or undue influence, but the person does not lack decision-making capacity under the MCA. We explain the nature of the inherent jurisdiction, including descriptions of concepts surrounding ‘vulnerability’; as an intervention of last resort, we consider what statutory alternatives may exist, including safeguarding law under the Care Act 2014; we discuss decision-making capacity in relation to contact with others and, using real cases, the types of order that may be made under the court's inherent jurisdiction. It is important to be mindful that although there may be a legal remedy to safeguard this ‘vulnerable but capacitous’ group, there is a delicate and challenging balance between protecting those at risk and respecting their autonomy.
Chapter 6 presents the second of the three case studies: Protecting the Individual Human Being from Mass Atrocities. The case study offers a critical discussion of the literature and the development of R2P. The chapter then analyses the discourse on Libya and Syria concerning actions to protect civilians and the potential use of force to do so. The analysis focuses mainly on UN Security Council deliberations. Finally, the chapter demonstrates how the individual human being appears in the discourse on protection as innocent civilians or guilty perpetrators or terrorists. As will be demonstrated, this matters for enabling a politics of protection. By analysing the debate on the intervention in Libya in 2011 and dealing with the conflict in Syria, mainly focusing on the years 2011 to 2015, respectively, I demonstrate how these politics of protection play out
Since gaining independence in 1991, Georgia has struggled to transform the old-Soviet mental health care structure into a humane system to meet basic human rights standards.
The current version of the mental health law was introduced in 2007, which instituted the new practice that required court decisions for involuntary hospitalization and several practical procedures.
The Public Defender’s Office (Special reports, 2019-2021) revealed gaps and contradictions within the law that lead to human rights violations and malpractices in involuntary hospitalization.
Currently, the group of Georgian experts with international support from Expertise France- French Development Agency, at the request of the Ministry, are working on the new version of the mental health law, which will be in line with international requirements and standards.
It is likely that those planning, managing or commissioning mental health services will be able to create changes that make them more effective for people seeking asylum. There are some recurrent themes in publications about what changes are needed. However, priorities are different in different situations and from different perspectives. One approach to choosing how to use limited resources is to consider what guiding principles are most important. We consider the implications of adopting each of six principles: anti-racist and anti-discriminatory practice; ‘first do no harm’; a human rights approach; evidence-based care; using public health principles; working with organisational values. An alternative approach to deciding on what actions to prioritise is to identify specific goals. We discuss what might be done towards the following nine goals: involving people seeking asylum; improving interpreting; removing barriers to access; using training, supervision and support to enable staff to provide good care; working with community groups and other agencies; working to guidelines, standards or checklists; creating alternative services; prevention; making a difference quickly.