Human rights in Romania : hearing before the Subcommittees on Europe and the Middle East and on Human Rights and International Organizations of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-ninth Congress, first session, May 14, 1985.

Mode of access: Internet.

Review of the 35th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights : hearing before the Subcommittee on International Organizations of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-sixth Congress, first session, April 9, 1979.

Mode of access: Internet.

Review of the 36th session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights : hearing before the Subcommittee on International Organizations of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-sixth Congress, second session, April 29, 1980.

Mode of access: Internet.

Essays on human rights and their political guaranties /

The origin of human rights -- The true function of government --The constitution of government -- Constitutional limitations and prohibitions -- The elective franchise -- Rights emanating from the sentiments and affections -- The rights of woman -- The right of property and its moral relations --Intellectual property.

The situation in El Salvador : hearings before the Subcommittees on Human Rights and International Organizations and on Western Hemisphere Affairs of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House of Representatives, Ninety-eighth Congress, second session, January 26; February 6, 1984.

Item 1017-A, 1017-B (microfiche)

The U.N. convention on the rights of the child: Relevance and application to pediatric clinical bioethics

This article provides an overview of the relevance and import of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) to child health practice and pediatric bioethics. We discuss the four general principles of the CRC that apply to the implementation of all rights contained in the document, the right to health articulated in Article 24, and the important position ascribed to parents in fulfilling the rights of their children. We then examine how the CRC is implemented and monitored in law and practice. The CRC and associated principles of child rights provide strategies for rights-based approaches to clinical practice and health systems, as well as to policy design, professional training, and health services research. In light of the relevance of the CRC and principles of child rights to children’s health and child health practice, it follows that there is an intersection between child rights and pediatric bioethics. Pediatric bioethicists and child rights advocates should work together to define this intersection in all domains of pediatric practice.

El aborto en la ley europea : derechos humanos, derechos sociales y la nueva tendencia cultural

Resumen: Este artículo se propone analizar: 1) si existe un verdadero “derecho al aborto” en la Convención Europea de Derechos Humanos, 2) si el aborto es una violación a los Derechos Sociales, 3) si la reciente tendencia en Europa frente a la restricción del aborto muestra que éste es un problema social y no un derecho o una libertad individual. Legisladores y organizaciones esperando proteger mejor a los niños y a las mujeres, del aborto, encontrarán críticas a la idea de la existencia de un derecho humano al aborto, así como el marco legal en el cual elaborar leyes protectorias.

Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark: possession - mortgagee's right or discretionary remedy?

Comments on the Chancery Division decision in Horsham Properties Group Ltd v Clark on whether a mortgagee's exercise of its contractual right, on the mortgagor falling into arrears, to appoint receivers such that the property could be sold and possession obtained without triggering the court's discretionary powers pursuant to the Administration of Justice Act 1970 s.36 infringed the mortgagor's rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 Protocol 1 art.1. Considers the implications of proposed reforms recasting the mortgagee's right to possession as a discretionary remedy. [From Legal Journals Index]

Freedom of Expression and Hate Speech

This is a study of free speech and hate speech with reference to the international standards and to the United States jurisprudence. The study, in a comparative and critical fashion, depicts the historical evolution and the application of the concept of ‘free speech,’ within the context of ‘hate speech.’ The main question of this article is how free speech can be discerned from hate speech, and whether the latter should be restricted. To this end, it examines the regulation of free speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, and in light of the international standards, particularly under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The study not only illustrates how elusive the endeavour of striking a balance between free speech and other vital interests could be, but also discusses whether and how hate speech should be eliminated within the ‘marketplace of ideas.’

Multiculturalism, freedom of religion, equality, and the British constitution: The JFS case considered

In the JFS case, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom held that the admissions policy of a Jewish faith school constituted unlawful racial discrimination because it used the Orthodox Jewish interpretation of who is Jewish as a criterion for determining admission to the school. A detailed discussion of the case is located in the context of two broader debates in Britain, which are characterized as constitutional in character or, at least, as possessing constitutional properties. The first is the debate concerning the treatment of minority groups, multiculturalism, and the changing perceptions in public policy of the role of race and religion in national life. It is suggested that this debate has become imbued with strong elements of what has been termed “post-multiculturalism”. The second debate is broader still, and pertains to shifting approaches to “constitutionalism” in Britain. It is suggested that, with the arrival of the European Convention on Human Rights and EU law, the U.K. has seen a shift from a pragmatic approach to constitutional thinking, in which legislative compromise played a key part, to the recognition of certain quasi-constitutional principles, allowing the judiciary greatly to expand its role in protecting individual rights while requiring the judges, at the same time, to articulate a principled basis for doing so. In both these debates, the principle of equality plays an important role. The JFS case is an important illustration of some of the implications of these developments.

The Right to Work in the ECHR

The European Convention on Human Rights does not explicitly protect the right to work; nevertheless the ECHR case law protects aspects of this right. The paper summarises the content of the right to work and then demonstrates how the case law protects aspects of it. Article 8 can be used to protect the right to seek employment, while Articles 6 and 8 can be used to combat unfair dismissal. Other ECHR Articles prohibit discrimination. The paper concludes with some suggestions as to how to develop this trend in the case law. First, Article 8 should be recognised as protecting the negative aspects of the right to work. Second, the relationship between Article 8 and Article 14 needs clarification. Third, there is scope to develop positive obligations in relation to the right to work.

Dignity and religion

This chapter, included in a book examining the relationship between Islam and English Law, considers the role that the idea of 'human dignity' plays in discussions of the relationship between the European Convention on Human Rights and freedom of religion, and the implications this has for future consideration of the place of Shari'a.

Inhuman and Degrading Punishment, Dignity, and the Limits of Retribution

The recent judgment of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Vinter and others v United Kingdom provides a much needed clarification of the parameters of the prohibition on inhuman and degrading punishment under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as it applies to whole life orders of imprisonment under mandatory life sentences – essentially, life imprisonment without parole. The Grand Chamber’s judgment refines Strasbourg doctrine on life imprisonment and the prospect of release and illuminates key principles concerning inhuman and degrading punishment under Article 3 of the ECHR. This article considers the judgment’s profound significance in relation to both human rights and penology.

Crime, Punishment and Article 3 ECHR: Puzzles and Prospects of Applying an Absolute Right in a Penal Context

Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which provides that ‘No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’, is considered to enshrine an absolute right. Yet it contains an under-explored element: inhuman and degrading punishment. While torture has been the subject of extensive academic commentary, and inhuman and degrading treatment has been examined to some extent, the prohibition of inhuman and degrading punishment has not been explored in significant depth, in spite of its considerable potential to alter the penal landscape.

This paper elucidates the key doctrinal elements of inhuman and degrading punishment ‘and treatment associated with it’, in the words of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). It addresses a number of ‘puzzles’ or problems which arise in applying the absolute right enshrined in Article 3 of the ECHR to sentencing and imprisonment, clarifies ECtHR doctrine and highlights some of its key implications. Bringing a theoretically informed understanding to bear on the application of Article 3 of the ECHR in a penal context, the paper provides clarity and coherence to a complex and crucial intersection between human rights and penology.