North Korean human rights and the international community: responding to the UN Commission of Inquiry

Of all the difficult conversations to have with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) regime, the one over human rights has proven the most troubling for the international community. Once human rights issues are placed on the table, diplomatic efforts become quickly de-railed. Because of this, and because issues such as non-proliferation are seen as more pressing than human rights, there has been a conspicuous absence of any official, systematic response to the question of human rights violations in North Korea. Of course, most human rights campaigns experience some amount of politicisation. This is unsurprising, given the deeply political nature of the very concept of human rights. The North Korean human rights issue, however, suffers from this phenomenon more than most, tied up as it is with wider ideological battles that hark back to the circumstances of the division of the Korean peninsula. In this context, the 2014 report delivered by the United Nations (UN) Commission of Inquiry (COI) into North Korean human rights represents an effort to move above and beyond the politicisation of the issue and was largely successful in this regard.

Secrecy and human rights abuse in Australia’s offshore immigration detention centres

All asylum seekers who arrive in Australia’s territorial waters by boat are subject to mandatory, indefinite and unreviewable detention on Nauru and Papua New Guinea. This offshore detention regime is characterised by a high degree of secrecy, low levels of transparency and accountability, and few opportunities for external oversight. This has created a closed, controlled environment, in which people are routinely neglected and harmed. To better understand the human impact of Australia’s offshore detention regime, this article draws on research from social psychology regarding human behaviour in closed institutions. This research – which has substantially informed prison policies throughout the Western world – demonstrates the critical importance of external oversight, openness and transparency for the protection of human rights of people in closed institutions. This knowledge has not been applied to Australia’s offshore immigration detention regime. To the contrary: creating a closed, opaque system of detention has been an explicit policy goal of the Australian government. By actively restricting transparency, this research demonstrates that not only are the abuses of detainees’ human rights hidden from the public eye, they are inevitable.

An Examination of the merits of a human rights-based approach to higher education teaching and learning, compared with welfare and market-based approaches.

The thesis concludes that a human rights-based approach to higher education will produce better teaching and learning outcomes than welfare state or market-based approaches. It is intended that this research might influence an improvement in policy-making, identify a ‘feasible utopia’ for higher education, and contribute to discussion about the public interest role of higher education.

Development of organizational internet security policy: a holistic approach

This chapter describes a general framework for developing organizational internet security policy. A model of internet security risks for an internet user organization is proposed. The framework utilizes this model, as well as a holistic approach, to develop the organization's internet security policy. A hierarchy of sub-policies for the internet security policy is also suggested. This chapter presents findings from part of a wider investigation into internet security policy.

Emergence of the individual as an international juristic entity: enforcement of International Human Rights

In this article it is contended that state practice, as evidenced in the  declarations of the judiciary and the many treaties and conventions  guaranteeing human rights, reveals a consensus of opinion acknowledging the individual to be an international juristic entity. So extensive is this practice that it could be seen as marking the emergence of a new customary international norm; or at least a general principle of international law, yet to crystallise into a custom; acknowledging the individual as the beneficiary of international rights. This is important for individuals and minority groups because if they possess international rights independently of the State, enforcement of their rights will no longer depend on the interests of the State. Where the State is often the offender of human rights, international law will not effectively confer any real rights unless the individual is so recognised as an international juristic entity.

Holding the purse strings : the continuing evolution of human rights law and the potential liability of the finance industry for human rights abuses

While the responsibility of States and, in more recent times, corporations, has been thoroughly discussed in relation to human right~, a new stage of evolution may be emerging in relation to the liability of the financial backers of an enterprise that is accused of human rights abuses. This article considers the basis in international law for such emerging liability and examines some of the legal avenues used in recent domestic litigation against financial institutions. The article concludes by examining some of the relevant instruments of 'soft' international law and notes that although there is little in the way of concrete legislation or judicial precedent that would hold financial institutions responsible for the actions of those they invest in, the potential for the law to evolve in that direction is clear.

International human rights law: all show, no go

This article examines the following issues: (i) If international human rights  instruments are so worthwhile, why are much of the world’s people still living in conditions of destitution? and (ii) what can be done to make international law the best it can be at improving the living standards of the human species?

The advantages of a proactive business response to human rights reporting

In a globalizing world, with shifting production, labor and consumer markets and increased competitiveness, human rights are gaining new practical relevance. The UN Global Compact presented by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to the World Economic Forum at Davos in 1999, sought to create a voluntary international corporate citizenship network to bring together private-sector and other social actors. Its central aim is to advance responsible corporate citizenship and universal social and environmental principles to meet the challenges of globalization. The business (and ethical) case for corporate engagement in human rights reporting is strengthening, although much still needs to be done. The Danish Human Rights and Business Project launched its 2006 educational project on company codes of conduct aimed at developing models for business in the pharmaceutical, steel, agricultural, logging, lumber, paper and cardboard, and apparel and textile industries, assessing company codes against international human rights standards.

Saving human rights from its friends : a critique of the imaginary justice of Costas Douzinas

Costas Douzinas has argued that human rights arise from a universal but unconscious need for recognition of oneself by others as unique and whole. According to Douzinas, humans' activities and interrelationships are determined by their desires and human rights are a manifestation of those same deep characteristics. Because the basic desires are by their nature incapable of being satisfied, the aspiration for human rights is likewise doomed to frustration. Douzinas' analysis of human nature is derived from a reading of Jacques Lacan's theory of psychoanalysis in which an imaginary and a symbolic realm of experience are defined. Douzinas attempts a synthesis between the Lacanian imaginary and the ethical arguments of Emmanuel Levinas. It will be argued here that the synthesis proposed by Douzinas is itself doomed to failure and that Douzinas' negative approach to human rights and to justice should be rejected in favour of a positive approach.

Are we speaking the same language? Corporate perceptions of human rights responsibilities

Over the last several years, notions of corporate social responsibility and corporate responsibility for human rights have developed on several fronts, including under international human rights law, through voluntary initiatives and in the discourse and the reporting of the corporations themselves. But are all protagonists on all these fronts speaking the same language? Are these developments truly improving the realisation of human rights?
As one aspect of its three year Australian Research Council project examining the legal human rights responsibilities of multinational corporations, the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law set out to discover the perceptions that multinational corporations have of their own human rights responsibilities, the types of activities undertaken by corporations to fulfill those responsibilities and the appropriate extent, if any, of the imposition of legally binding human rights obligations on corporations.
While not setting out the formal findings of that empirical study, this paper reports on some interesting discoveries as to how corporations see their place in the human rights debate. It notes a divergence among corporations' views of the nature of human rights responsibility - whether an obligation or a benevolence - as well as its content. In considering whether corporations ought to have legally binding human rights obligations, a surprising number of corporations replied in the affirmative, citing reasons such as certainty in dealing with suppliers and instituting a level playing field against rogue operators.
However,  perhaps the most important finding is the different understandings of human rights as they relate to a corporation's operations. Agreement on potential reforms would be meaningless if they were not employed towards a commonly understood end. After examining the various responses of the corporations and the evidence they cited to support their contentions, the paper concludes that the various protagonists of human rights responsibility for corporations may be using the same words, but they are not yet speaking the same language.

Limiting the list : human rights and intangible cultural heritage

UNESCO's Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Heritage came into force in April 2006, signalling a major expansion of the global system of heritage protection from the tangible to the intangible. It is an expansion that some heritage professionals see as opening up a Pandora's box of confusions and complexities. The conservation of inanimate objects tangible sites and monuments and artefacts - is difficult enough; but the protection of heritage embodied in people raises new sets of ethical and practical issues. The paper canvasses these concerns and focuses on how the notion of human rights must be used as a way of limiting and shaping the Intangible List. In particular it outlines the ways in which the protection and preservation of cultural heritage is linked to 'cultural rights' as a form of human rights. This linkage is not clearly recognised by cultural heritage practitioners in many countries, who view their work merely as technical, or even by human rights workers, despite the abundance of opportunities around the world to witness people struggling to assert their cultural rights in order to protect their heritage and identity.