764 resultados para sex trafficking human rights children
Resumo:
The concept of non-discrimination has been central in the feminist challenge to gendered violence within international human rights law. This article critically explores non-discrimination and the challenge it seeks to pose to gendered violence through the work of Judith Butler. Drawing upon Butler’s critique of heteronormative sex/gender, the article utilises an understanding of gendered violence as effected by the restrictive scripts of sex/gender within heteronormativity to illustrate how the development of non-discrimination within international human rights law renders it ineffective to challenge gendered violence due to its own commitments to binarised and asymmetrical sex/gender. However, the article also seeks to encourage a reworking of non-discrimination beyond the heteronormative sex binary through employing Butler’s concept of cultural translation. Analysis via the lens of cultural translation reveals the fluidity of non-discrimination as a universal concept and offers new possibilities for feminist engagement with universal human rights.
Resumo:
Includes bibliography
Resumo:
Includes bibliography
Resumo:
Includes bibliography
Resumo:
Includes bibliography
Resumo:
In order to prevent, suppress and punish human trafficking, bilateral agreements between origin of victim countries and destination countries are crucial, because their cooperation involves cross-border activities such as repatriation of victims, extradition of criminals and information-sharing. This article analyzes three bilateral legal instruments between The Government of The Kingdom of Thailand and her three neighboring countries, namely The Royal Government of Cambodia, The Government of Lao People's Democratic Republic and The Government of The Union of Myanmar. The analysis will examine the legal status of the victim, the victim as witness in criminal proceedings, the victim protection programs, the recovery and restitution of damages, the process of repatriating the victim, and the prosecution of the criminal.
Resumo:
This paper explores notions of harm in sex work discourse, highlighting the extent to which essentialist ideas of ‘good’ versus ‘bad’ sex have pervaded trafficking policy. In a comparative examination of Australian Parliamentary Inquiries and United States Congressional Hearings leading to the establishment of anti-trafficking policy, we identify the stories that have influenced legislators, and established a narrative of trafficking heavily dependent upon assumptions of the inherent harm of sex work. This narrative constructs a hierarchy of victimisation, which denies alternative discourses of why women migrate for sex work. We argue that it is not sexual commerce that is harmful, but pathological, systemic inequalities and entrenched disadvantage that are harmful. A narrow narrative of trafficking fails to adequately depict this complexity of the trafficked experience.
Resumo:
The purpose of this article is to analyse the illicit cycle of narcotics within a human rights framework. It begins by illustrating the benefits of adopting a human rights framework, such as its ability to promote victim-centred and holistic approaches. The article then identifies key human rights issues such as poverty, forced labour, law enforcement practices and addiction to narcotics. It continues with an analysis of the nature and the extent of obligations imposed upon States. This article focuses on three categories of human rights obligations to address: 1) the supply of narcotics; 2) narcotics trafficking; and 3) the demand for narcotics. The main conclusion reached is that a human rights framework can strengthen the global action against the illicit cycle of narcotics.
Resumo:
This paper addresses the problems often faced by social workers and their supervisors in decision making where human rights considerations and child protection concerns collide. High profile court cases in the United Kingdom and Europe have consistently called for social workers to convey more clarity when justifying their reasons for interfering with human rights in child protection cases. The themes emerging from these case law decisions imply that social workers need to be better at giving reasons and evidence in more explicit ways to support any actions they propose which cause interference with Convention Rights. Toulmin (1958, 1985) offers a structured approach to argumentation which may have relevance to the supervision of child protection cases when social workers and managers are required to balance these human rights considerations. One of the key challenges in this balancing act is the need for decision makers to feel confident that any interventions resulting in the interference of human rights are both justified and proportionate. Toulmin’s work has already been shown to have relevance for assisting social workers navigate pathways through cases involving competing ethical and moral demands (Osmo and Landau, 2001) and more recently to human rights and decision making in child protection (Duffy et al, 2006). Toulmin’s model takes the practitioner through a series of stages where any argument or proposed recommendation (claim) is subjected to intense critical analysis involving exposition of its strengths and weaknesses. The author therefore proposes that explicit argumentation (Osmo and Landau, 2001) may help supervisors and practitioners towards safer and more confident decision making in child protection cases involving the interference of the human rights of children and parents. In addition to highlighting the broader context of human rights currently permeating child protection decision making, the paper will include case material to practically demonstrate the application of Toulmin’s model of argumentation to the supervision context. In this way the paper adopts a strong practice approach in helping to assist practitioners with the problems and dilemmas they may come up against in decision making in complex cases.
Resumo:
Book Review
Resumo:
On 21 July 2011 the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights issued its much awaited decision in the case of Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) v United States. In a landmark decision the Commission found the United States of America to be in violation of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man 1948 due to the failure of the state to protect a victim of domestic violence and her children. This paper analyses the Lenahan decision and its significance for the United States. In particular, the substantial influence of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the Commission’s reasoning is examined.