Protecting recognized Geneva Convention refugees outside their states of asylum

This article highlights the predicament of persons recognized as refugees according to the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (CSR1951 refugees) when they travel outside their state of asylum. Their status entails ipso facto that, if they are ill-treated abroad, they cannot turn to representatives of their state of nationality and request its diplomatic protection, nor can they expect to receive its consular assistance. It is submitted that a state of asylum ought to extend the scope of protection that it offers CSR1951 refugees residing in its territory, and provide them diplomatic protection and consular assistance when they travel abroad as if they were its nationals. Four claims are advanced in support of this contention: First: the advent of human rights treaties has not rendered obsolete the protection of nationals abroad nor has the practice fallen into disuse. On the contrary, protection abroad retains its pedigree and significance, as is illustrated by the recently adopted International Law Commission's Draft Articles on Diplomatic Protection and by frequent resort to consular assistance. Second: while states previously enjoyed unfettered discretion concerning whether and when to protect their nationals abroad, recent developments in domestic jurisdictions as well as in European Union (EU) treaties point to the potential emergence of a qualified duty to exercise state protection or to be willing to provide justifications for its refusal. These developments call particular attention to the vulnerability of CSR1951 refugees: the professed aim of the EU treaty regime is that EU citizens should enjoy effective state protection wherever they travel; by contrast, CSR1951 refugees are in need of state protection wherever they travel. Third: according to CSR1951, states of asylum are required to issue Convention Travel Documents (CTDs) to recognized refugees lawfully staying in their territory. While CTDs do not in of themselves authorize states of asylum to provide protection abroad to their CSR1951 refugees, they reflect partial recognition of the instrumental role of these states in facilitating safe refugee travel. Fourth: while the 'nationality of claims' requirement remains pivotal to the institution of diplomatic protection, and efforts to effectuate its general relaxation have thus far failed, the International Law Commission (ILC) has 'carved out' an exception authorizing states of asylum to provide protection abroad to their recognized refugees. The ILC's protection-enhancing agenda, reflecting progressive development of the law, is laudable, even though it has opted for a rather cautious approach.

The knowledge of healthcare professionals regarding elderly persons' oral care

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the knowledge and views of nursing staff on both acute elderly care and rehabilitation wards regarding elderly persons' oral care with that of carers in nursing homes. SUBJECTS: One hundred nurses working on acute, sub-acute and rehabilitation wards for elderly people (Group 1) and 75 carers in nursing homes (Group 2) were surveyed. DESIGN: A semi-structured questionnaire. RESULTS: Similar percentages of each group of nurses were registered with a dentist (86% and 88% respectively), although more hospital-based nurses were anxious about dental treatment compared with the nursing home group (40% and 28% respectively). More carers in nursing homes gave regular advice about oral care than the hospital-based nurses (54% and 43% respectively). Eighteen per cent of each group thought that edentulous individuals did not require regular oral care. Eighty-five per cent of hospital-based nurses and 95% of nursing home carers incorrectly thought that dentures were 'free' on the NHS. Although trends were observed between the two groups, no comparisons were statistically significant (Chi-square; level p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Deficiencies exist in the knowledge of health care workers both in hospital and in the community setting, although the latter were less knowledgeable but more likely to give advice to older people.

Hypothetical choice, egalitarianism, and the separateness of persons

Luck egalitarians claim that disadvantage is worse when it emerges from an unchosen risk than when it emerges from a chosen risk. I argue that disadvantage is also worse when it emerges from an unchosen risk that the disadvantaged agent would have declined to take, had he or she been able to do so, than when it emerges from an unchosen risk that the disadvantaged agent would not have declined to take. Such a view is significant because it allows both luck egalitarians and prioritarians to respond to Voorhoeve and Fleurbaey's charge that they fail to accommodate intuitions about the moral relevance of interpersonal boundaries – the so-called separateness of persons objection. I argue that the view is plausible independently of its ability to answer the separateness of persons objection, and is a natural extension of the luck egalitarian concern with the impact of unchosen circumstance.

Transitional justice in Nepal: the Commission on Investigation of Disappeared Persons, Truth and Reconciliation Act 2014

The Commission on Investigation of Disappeared Persons, Truth and Reconciliation Act 2014 is Nepal’s latest attempt to establish a transitional programme to respond to conflict era abuses. In part, the Act remedies the inadequacies of the 2013 Ordinance. It creates two commissions, on truth and reconciliation and enforced disappearances, makes provision for the establishment of a Special Court to try past abuses and incorporates systems to enable vulnerable witnesses to participate in truth seeking. Yet in a number of respects it continues to fall short of international legal standards, not least in the possibility of amnesty for international crimes and gross violations of human rights. In addition, the relationship between the three mechanisms – truth seeking, amnesty and prosecution – remains unclear and safeguards for individual rights are lacking. This paper explores these recent developments, highlighting issues that must be remedied if transitional justice objectives are to be achieved in Nepal.

The notions of 'restriction' and 'discrimination' in the context of the free movement of persons provisions: from a relationship of interdependence to one of (almost complete) independence

This article aims to analyse how the meaning of the notions of ‘restrictions’ and ‘discrimination’ in EU free movement law has developed through the years, and to explore how the relationship between them has evolved. It is explained that the two concepts under examination had originally been closely intertwined, in the sense that one defined the other, the element holding them together being the aim of the relevant provisions to liberalise the inter-State movement of persons in the EU, as part of the process of establishing an internal market. Yet, more recently, the way that the Court has chosen to delimit their scope, illustrates that each of these notions can now have a life of its own, meaning that ‘discrimination’ can include discriminatory measures which do not lead to restrictions that are contrary to the free movement provisions, and ‘restriction’ can cover national measures that are not discriminatory.

Influence of galacto-oligosaccharide mixture (B-GOS) on gut microbiota, immune parameters and metabonomics in elderly persons

It is recognised that ageing induces various changes to the human colonic microbiota. Most relevant is a reduction in bifidobacteria, which is a health-positive genus. Prebiotics, such as galacto-oligosaccharides (GOS), are dietary ingredients that selectively fortify beneficial gut microbial groups. Therefore, they have the potential to reverse the age-related decline in bifidobacteria and modulate associated health parameters. We assessed the effect of GOS mixture (Bimuno (B-GOS)) on gut microbiota, markers of immune function and metabolites in forty elderly (age 65-80 years) volunteers in a randomised, double-blind, placebo (maltodextrin)-controlled, cross-over study. The intervention periods consisted of 10 weeks with daily doses of 5·5 g/d with a 4-week washout period in between. Blood and faecal samples were collected for the analyses of faecal bacterial populations and immune and metabolic biomarkers. B-GOS consumption led to significant increases in bacteroides and bifidobacteria, the latter correlating with increased lactic acid in faecal waters. Higher IL-10, IL-8, natural killer cell activity and C-reactive protein and lower IL-1β were also observed. Administration of B-GOS to elderly volunteers may be useful in positively affecting the microbiota and some markers of immune function associated with ageing.

Protections for persons deprived of their liberty in international armed conflict

This contribution is about the protection of detained persons in international armed conflict. In particular, it compares how the relationship between IHL and IHRL is understood depending on whether one is speaking of the substantive or the procedural rules of protection for detainees. It will be suggested that, whereas the relationship between IHL and IHRL raises fewer problems when speaking of substantive rules, the situation is very different when speaking of procedural rules.

The Léger ruling as another example of the ECJ’s disappointingly reticent approach to the protection of the rights of LGB persons under EU law

In the 1980s, in the midst of the AIDS epidemic, many countries introduced lifetime bans on blood donations by men who had sexual relations with men (MSM). These blanket bans have, recently, begun to be challenged and, as a result, many countries have either relaxed them or completely abolished them. The case under examination (Léger ) is another instance of questioning the legality of such a ban. In particular, in this case, the European Court of Justice was called on to rule on whether a measure such as the French lifetime exclusion from blood donation of the MSM population that was at issue before the referring court is contrary to EU law. The Court ruled that although discriminatory on the ground of sexual orientation, such a ban may be justified in certain circumstances, and left it to the national court to make the final decision. This article seeks to analyse the case and to explain why, in the author’s view, the Court can be accused of—once more—not going far enough in the protection of lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) rights.