Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T22:23:23.230Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Africa as a Generator of Human Rights Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Chelsea Purvis
Chelsea Purvis*
Affiliation:
Minority Rights Group International
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
New Voices: Human Rights
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 107 , 2013 , pp. 480 - 483
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, adopted July 11, 2003, http://www.africa-union.org/root/au/Documents/Treaties/Text/Protocol%20on%20the%20Rights%2-Oof%20Women.pdf [hereinafter Maputo Protocol].

2 Id. arts. 1(j), 3(4).

3 Id. art. 14(2)(c).

4 See Bond, Johanna, Gender, Discourse, and Customary Law in Africa, 83 S. Cal. L. Rev. 425, 427 (2010)Google Scholar (noting that the human rights community has historically depicted African cultures as a source of African women’s oppression).

5 See Viljoen, Frans, An Introduction to the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, 16 Wash. & Lee J. C R. & Soc. Just. 11, 19–20 (2010)Google Scholar (describing criticisms of the African Charter).

6 Maputo Protocol, supra note 1, arts. 7, 17.

7 Ctr. for Minority Rights Dev. (Kenya) & Minority Rights Grp. Int’l ex rel. Endorois Welfare Council v. Kenya, Comm’n No. 276/2003 (Afr. Comm’n Hum. & Peoples’ Rights 2010), http://www.escr-net.org/sites/default/files/Endorois_Decision.pdf [hereinafter Endorois Case].

8 The traditional “first nations” approach to indigenousness does not easily apply in Africa. The Commission instead adopts the emerging consensus that factors such as self-identification and relationship to ancestral land more accurately determine indigenousness. Endorois Case, supra note 7, paras. 151–62.

9 Id. paras. 185–237.

10 Id. para. 251.

11 Id. para. 227.

12 Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Case of the Saramaka People v. Suriname (Judgment of Nov. 28, 2007), paras. 134–36.

13 Endorois Case, supra note 7, para. 291.

14 Hadijatou Mani Koraou v. La Republic de Niger, Arret No. ECW/CCJ/JUD/06/08 (ECOWAS Cour de Justice Oct. 27, 2008), http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/491168d42.html [hereinafter Mani Case], paras. 8–27.

15 Id. para. 85.

16 Duffy, Helen, Hadijatou Mani Koroua v. Niger: Slavery Unveiled by the ECOWAS Court, 9 Hum. Rts. L. Rev. 151, 151 (2009)Google Scholar.

17 Mani Case, supra note 12, paras. 77–79.

18 See Press Release, Minority Rights Group International, African Court Issues Historic Ruling Protecting Rights of Kenya’s Ogiek Community (Mar. 20, 2013), http://www.minorityrights.org/?lid=11822.

19 Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence art. 3(a), CETS No. 210 (2011); U.N. Comm. on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 13: The Right of the Child to Freedom from All Forms of Violence, para. 21, U.N. Doc. CRC/C/GC/13 (2011).

20 Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku and Its Members v. Ecuador, (Judgment of June 27, 2012), para. 217.

21 Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, App. No. 25965/04 (Eur. Ct. H.R. 2010), para. 280.

22 See generally Sarkin, Jeremy, The African Commission on Human and People’s Rights and the Future African Court of Justice and Human Rights: Comparative Lessons from the European Court of Human Rights, 18 S. Afr. J. Int’l Aff. 281, 284–85 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 The Council of Europe and the Committee on the Rights of the Child fail to credit the Maputo Protocol for inspiring their definitions of verbal abuse. See supra note 20 and accompanying text.

24 See, e.g., Opuz v. Turkey, paras. 83–86, App. No. 33401/02 (Eur. Ct. H.R. 2009).

25 See, e.g., Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Rep. of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Human Rights Council, U.N. Doc. A/HRC/21/47 (July 6, 2012) (by James Anaya).