The Extra-territorial Obligations of European States regarding Human Rights in the Context of Terrorism

This chapter focuses on the growing tendency of international human rights law to require states to protect the rights of non-nationals who are in the state unlawfully and of nationals and non-nationals who are outside the state, especially when any of these people are involved in terrorist or counter-terrorist activity. It reviews these additional obligations within a European context, focusing on EU law and the law of the European Convention on Human Rights and drawing on the case law of UK courts. Part 1 considers when a European state must grant asylum to alleged terrorists on the basis that otherwise they would suffer human rights abuses in the state from which they are fleeing. Part 2 examines whether, outside of asylum claims, a European state must not deport or extradite an alleged terrorist because he or she might suffer an abuse of human rights in the receiving state. Part 3 looks at whether a European state whose security forces are engaged in counter-terrorism activities abroad is obliged to protect the human rights of the individuals serving in those forces and/or the human rights of the alleged terrorists they are confronting. While welcoming the extension of state responsibility, the chapter notes that it is occurring in a way which introduces three aspects of relativity into the protection of human rights. First, European law protects only some human rights extra-territorially. Second, it protects those rights only when there is ‘a real risk’ of their being violated. Third, sometimes it protects those rights only when there is a real risk of their being violated ‘flagrantly’.

Human Rights, Local Plights: The Implications of Rights Discourses in the Struggle over Arab-Palestinian Bedouin Land in Israel

A widely diffused, engaged approach understands human rights as an opportunity to enhance moral progress. Less visible has a critical realm of research that reveals the often ambiguous social life of human rights discourses. This article draws on a specific case study from the intricate issue of how activism for Arab-Palestinian Bedouin citizens in Southern Israel engages with the global human rights discourse. It follows the implications of mobilization, focusing on events related to a campaign against house demolitions in informal,unrecognised settlements. The case shows how human rights discourses tend to silence the agency of political subjects, victimizing and patronizing those who seek emancipation. The ethnographic insights emphasize the role of a range of carnivalesque and spontaneous acts ofresistance, which subvert the patronizing implications of the human rights language.

The four general principles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: the potential value of the approach in other areas of human rights law

At the outset of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Committee on the Rights of the Child identified four of its provisions (non-discrimination; best interests of the child as a primary consideration; life, survival and development; and participation) as ‘general principles’. This approach has shaped implementation of, advocacy for and the scholarship on the Convention. The use of general principles has the potential to make a significant contribution in other areas of human rights law provided that the principles are selected carefully and address the distinct issues at the root of potential rights violations for particular rights-holders.

Devolution, Social Policy and Education: Some Observations from Northern Ireland

Many commentaries on social policy in the UK assume that policy as developed in England applies to the constituent countries of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. However, the advent of political devolution in the last five years is slowly being reflected in the literature. This paper takes education policy in Northern Ireland and discusses recent policy developments in the light of the 1998 Belfast Agreement. The Agreement, it is suggested, is providing a framework which promotes equality, human rights and inclusion in policy making. Some early indications of this are discussed and some of the resultant policy dilemmas are assessed. The paper concludes that accounts of policy development
in the UK, which ignore the multi-level policy-making contexts created by devolution, do
a disservice to the subject.