Indlag i jødesagen : til understøttelse for forslaget om ophaevelse af Norges grundlovs 2, sidste passus.

Mode of access: Internet.

The Right to Bodily Integrity and the Rehabilitation of Offenders Through Medical Interventions : A Reply to Thomas Douglas

Peer reviewed

Eigentumsrechte an menschlichen Körperteilen

Arbeit an der Bibliothek noch nicht eingelangt - Daten nicht geprüft

El reacionismo del Estado Colombiano y su influencia en la garantía efectiva de derechos fundamentales

28 p.

Anotação sintética, numa perspectiva de Direito Público-penal e Direito Privado-civil, ao Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça Português, de 19 de Abril de 2012 - A poluição sonora e o direito humano ao descanso e à saúde, sem descurar a necessidade duma adequada política tributária.

Resumo: 1 – Sumário do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 19 de Abril de 2012; 2 – Texto completo do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 19 de Abril de 2012: cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/fc664c231f3e73cf802579ea003d91d2?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,polui%C3%A7%C3%A3o , 2 de Junho de 2012; 3 – Anotação sintética; 3.1 – Introdução à anotação sintética e suas características neste caso concreto; 4 – Algumas referências constitucionais centrais em relação a Direitos humanos e, nomeadamente, a um Direito humano a um meio-ambiente sadio, saudável em todas as suas vertentes e sentidos – o exemplo central do artigo 9.º da CRP; 4.1 – Algumas referências constitucionais centrais em relação a Direitos humanos e, nomeadamente, a um Direito humano a um meio-ambiente sadio, saudável em todas as suas vertentes e sentidos – o exemplo central do artigo 66.º da CRP e o Regime Geral do Ruído; 5 – O direito humano ao descanso e à saúde, rectius o direito ao ambiente sadio vs o direito ao lazer e/ou exploração económica de indústrias de diversão, rectius o direito à liberdade de iniciativa económica privada; 6 – A violação do direito humano, de personalidade, ao descanso e à saúde, rectius o direito a um ambiente sadio, numa perspectiva de Direito privado e Direito civil; 7 – A criminalização da poluição, designadamente a criminalização da poluição sonora – uma perspectiva de Direito público e Direito penal; 8 - A necessidade duma adequada política tributária que compatibilize desenvolvimento sustentado com a protecção dum meio ambiente sadio e com qualidade de vida; 9 – Conclusões. Palavras-chave: Direitos Humanos; Direito constitucional; Direito público; Direito penal; Direito privado; Direito civil; Direito ambiental; meio ambiente sadio; Direito ao descanso; Direito à saúde; Direito ao lazer e/ou exploração económica de indústrias de diversão; direito à liberdade de iniciativa económica privada; Direito tributário; Direito fiscal; Direito aduaneiro. Abstract: 1 - Summary of the Judgment of the Supreme Court of April 19, 2012, 2 - Complete text of the Judgment of the Supreme Court of April 19, 2012: cf. http://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/fc664c231f3e73cf802579ea003d91d2?OpenDocument&Highlight=0,polui%C3%A7%C3%A3o , June 2, 2012, 3 - Synthetic Note: 3.1 - Introduction to synthetic annotation and its characteristics in this case 4 - Some references constitutional power over human rights and in particular to a human right to a healthy environment, healthy in all its forms and meanings - the central example of Article 9. of CRP; 4.1 - Some references constitutional power over human rights and in particular to a human right to a healthy environment, healthy in all its forms and meanings - the central example of Article 66. No of CRP and the General Noise; 5 - the human right to rest and health, rectius the right to healthy environment vs. the right to leisure and / or economic exploitation of industries fun, rectius the right to freedom of private economic initiative; 6 - the violation of human personality, to rest and health, rectius the right to a healthy environment, a perspective of private law and civil law; 7 - criminalization of pollution, including the criminalization of noise - a perspective of public law and criminal law; 8 - the need for appropriate tax policy that reconciles sustainable development with the protection of a healthy environment and quality of life; 9 - Conclusions.

Triangulation of rights, balancing of interests : exploring the tensions between freedom of conscience and freedom of religion in comparative constitutional law

La liberté de religion, souvent reconnue comme étant la « première liberté » dans de nombreuses traditions juridiques, reflète également les différentes conceptions de la place de l’individu et de la communauté dans la société. Notre étude analysera les modèles constitutionnels canadien, américain et européen de liberté de religion et conscience. Dans un premier chapitre, nous examinerons les conceptions théoriques de la religion dans les sciences sociales ainsi les approches juridiques afin de mieux cerner comment la religion est conçue et de plus, comprendre les diverses influences sur sa conceptualisation. Dans un second et troisième chapitre, nous tenterons d’une part, de qualifier la relation entre la liberté de conscience et la liberté de religion au Canada en nous livrant à une analyse approfondie des deux libertés et d’autre part, d’identifier les questions qui demeurent irrésolues. Dans le chapitre final, nous observerons comment la liberté de conscience a été interprétée dans les contextes américain et dans l’Union Européenne, par le biais de la Cour Européenne des droits de l’Homme. Notre hypothèse est que l’on peut arriver à une meilleure compréhension de la relation entre les libertés de conscience et religion en clarifiant les conceptions théoriques de la religion et de la conscience en droit constitutionnel comparé.

Trafficking in human beings for for forced labour in domestic and international law: a comparative legal study of the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Kingdom

This thesis examines the effect of combating of human trafficking as a crime. Special emphasis has been placed on forced labour and the rights of trafficked victims and their protection. The study explores various legislations undertaken at regional, national and international levels and considers rights of trafficked victims under international human rights and Islamic rights. The aim of the thesis is to provide a critical and comparative analysis of the legal systems of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and the United Kingdom (UK) in terms of human trafficking. The thesis consists of eight chapter; each covering a different aspect of the study. It begins by providing background information regarding the issue of human trafficking and proceeds to examine developments of legal frameworks across the two jurisdictions to combat this crime and penalize the criminals. It seeks to examine the legal system pertaining to human trafficking for forced labour and analyse the three distinct platforms, that is, prevention, protection, and punishment, by comparing the legal systems of the KSA and the UK. The examination of both countries aims to identify the strength and weaknesses of the KSA system as compared to the UK system. Thus, it concludes that the KSA can improve its ranking from Tier 2 watch list to Tier 1 if reforms are introduced in the legislation and enforcement domains. The study also demonstrates how the UK and the KSA portray ‘human trafficking’ in their regional laws. A problem often faced during the information-gathering and investigation stages is the lack of available evidence against traffickers, a particular issue in the KSA. The thesis concludes that the transnational aspect of this phenomenon makes it necessary to establish a thorough and comprehensive legal framework to cover all matters pertaining to this crime, including the protection of victims and punishment of criminals in the KSA and the UK, including immigration and ‘kafala’ strategies that may be of value in future researches.

Statewide Process and Comparative Outcomes Study of 2003 Iowa Adult and Juvenile Drug Courts, August 2009

A statewide evaluation of the six adult and three juvenile drug courts in operation during calendar year 2003 was conducted. Completion rates, recidivism, substance abuse treatment, and supervision and placement (juveniles only) costs were examined by model (Judge and Community Panel) and by Judicial District. In addition, adult drug court participants were compared with a group of offenders who were screened and declined or were rejected by drug court in 2003 (referred) and a sample of offenders starting probation in 2003 (probationer). The adult participant and comparison groups were tracked from their entry into drug court, or the study, through December 31, 2007. This yielded an average post-program follow-up time of almost 3 years (2.9) for drug court participants. For the juvenile portion, drug court participants were compared with a group matched on several demographic and offense variables (Matched Comparison group) and juveniles referred to drug court who did not enter the program (Referred Comparison group). The juvenile participant and comparison groups were tracked from their entry into drug court, or the study, through approximately 16 quarters after program discharge with an end date of December 31, 2007.

Les valeurs afférentes à la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés dans le discours judiciaire : utilisations et sources

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal

New Standards of Justice: Uncovering Motivations for Mexico’s Recent Judicial Reforms amid a Security Crisis

From the introduction: Mexico is in a state of siege. In recent years, organized crime and drug-related violence have escalated dramatically, taking innocent lives and leaving the country mired in bloodshed. The Mexican government, under the leadership of President Felipe Calderón, has responded in part by significantly extending the reach of its security operations, deploying thousands of federal police officers and military troops to combat the activities of drug cartels, and collaborating with the United States on an extensive regional security plan known as the Mérida Initiative. In the midst of the security crisis, however, the government has somewhat paradoxically adopted judicial reforms that protect human rights and civil liberties rather than erode them, specifically the presumption of innocence standard in criminal proceedings and the implementation of oral trials. Assuming that the new laws on the books will be applied in practice, these reforms represent an important commitment on the part of the government to uphold human rights and civil liberties. This is in stark contrast to the infamous judicial reforms in Colombia—the institutionalization of anonymous or “faceless” prosecutions in special courts—implemented after a surge in leftist and cartel brutality, and the murders of several prominent public and judicial officials in the 1980s.

EU Law, International Law and Economic Sanctions against Terrorism: The Judiciary in Distress? Research Papers in Law, 3/2008

From the Introduction. This article seeks to examine the relationship between European Union law, international law, and the protection of fundamental rights in the light of recent case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Court of First Instance (CFI) relating to economic sanctions against individuals. On 3 September 2008, the ECJ delivered its long-awaited judgment in Kadi and Al Barakaat on appeal from the CFI.3 In its judgment under appeal,4 the CFI had held that the European Community (EC) is competent to adopt regulations imposing economic sanctions against private organisations in pursuance of UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions seeking to combat terrorism; that although the EC is not bound directly by the UN Charter, it is bound pursuant to the EC Treaty to respect international law and give effect to UNSC; and that the CFI has jurisdiction to examine the compatibility of EC regulations implementing UNSC resolutions with fundamental rights not as protected by the EC but as protected by jus cogens. On appeal, following the Opinion of Maduro AG, the ECJ rejected the CFI’s approach. It held that UNSC resolutions are binding only in international law. It subjected the contested regulations to full review under EC human rights standards and found them in breach of the right to a hearing, the right to judicial protection and the right to property. Kadi and Al Barakaat is the most important judgment ever delivered by the ECJ on the relationship between EC and international law and one of its most important judgments on fundamental rights. It is imbued by constitutional confidence, commitment to the rule of law but also some scepticism towards international law. In the meantime, the CFI has delivered a number of other judgments on anti-terrorist sanctions assessing the limits of the “emergency constitution” at European level. The purpose of this paper is to examine the above case law and explore the dilemmas and tensions facing the EU judiciary in seeking to define and protect the EU’s distinct constitutional space. It is divided as follows. It first looks at the judgment in Kadi. After a short presentation of the factual and legal background, it explores the question whether the EU has competence to adopt smart sanctions. It then examines whether the EU is bound by resolutions of the Security Council, whether the ECJ has jurisdiction to review Community measures implementing such resolutions and the applicable standard of judicial scrutiny. It analyses the contrasting views of the CFI, the Advocate General, and the ECJ taking account also of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Further, it explores the consequences of annulling the contested regulation. It then turns to discussing CFI case law in relation to sanctions lists drawn up not by the UN Security Council but by the EC. The paper concludes by welcoming the judgment of the ECJ. Whilst its reasoning on the issue of Community competence is questionable, once such competence is established, it is difficult to support the abrogation of Community standards for the protection of fundamental rights. Such standards should ensure procedural due process whilst recognising the importance of public security.

Reasons withheld and insufficient reasoning as due process violations: two cases before the ECHR

Two very different cases decided by the European Court of Human Rights illustrate how the non-availability of sufficient reasons, for pre-trial judicial decisions in one case, and for a decision in a civil and administrative matter in the other, can lead to due process violations in terms of Articles 5 or 6 of the Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

The gendered effects of family migration law: contextual interpretation as a possible judicial remedy

At all normative levels, family migration law can disproportionally and negatively affect immigrant women’s rights in this field, producing gendered effects. In some cases, such effects are related to the normative and judicial imposition of unviable family-related models (e.g., the ʻgood mother ̕ the one-breadwinner family, or a rigid distinction between productive and reproductive work). In other cases, they are due to family migration law’s overlooking of the specific needs and difficulties of immigrant women, within their families and in the broader context of their host countries’ social and normative framework.To effectively expose and correct this gender bias, in this article I propose an alternative view of immigrant women’s right to family life, as a cluster of rights and entitlements rather than as a mono-dimensional right. As a theoretical approach, this construction is better equipped to capture the complex experiences of immigrant women in the European legal space, and to shed light on the gendered effects generated not by individual norms but by the interaction of norms that are traditionally assigned to separated legal domains (e.g., immigration law and criminal law). As a judicial strategy, this understanding is capable of prompting a consideration by domestic and supranational courts of immigrant women not as isolated individuals, but as ‘individuals in context’. I shall define this type of approach as ‘contextual interpretation’, understood as the consideration of immigrant women in the broader contexts of their families, their host societies and the normative frameworks applicable to them. Performed in a gendersensitive manner, a contextual judicial interpretation has the potential to neutralize the gendered effects of certain family migration norms. To illustrate these points, I will discuss selected judicial examples offered by the European Court on Human Rights, as well as from domestic jurisdictions of countries with a particularly high incidence of immigrant women (Italy and Spain).

What ‘Security’, whose ‘Rights’ and which ‘Law’? : the Israeli High Court of Justice and the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank

Cette thèse examine l’interprétation et l’application, par l’Haute Cour d'Israël (HCJ), de principes du droit international de l’occupation et du droit international des droits de la personne dans le traitement de requêtes judiciaires formulées par des justiciables palestiniens. Elle s’intéresse plus particulièrement aux jugements rendus depuis le déclenchement de la deuxième Intifada (2000) suite à des requêtes mettant en cause la légalité des mesures adoptées par les autorités israéliennes au nom d’un besoin prétendu d’accroitre la sécurité des colonies et des colons israéliens dans le territoire occupé de la Cisjordanie. La première question sous étude concerne la mesure dans laquelle la Cour offre un recours effectif aux demandeurs palestiniens face aux violations alléguées de leurs droits internationaux par l’occupant. La recherche fait sienne la position de la HJC selon laquelle le droit de l’occupation est guidé par une logique interne tenant compte de la balance des intérêts en cause, en l’occurrence le besoin de sécurité de l’occupant, d’une part, et les droits fondamentaux de l’occupé, d’autre part. Elle considère, en outre, que cette logique se voit reflétée dans les principes normatifs constituant la base de ce corpus juridique, soit que l’occupation est par sa nature temporaire, que de l’occupation découle un rapport de fiduciaire et, finalement, que l’occupant n’acquiert point de souveraineté sur le territoire. Ainsi, la deuxième question qui est posée est de savoir si l’interprétation du droit par la Cour (HCJ) a eu pour effet de promouvoir ces principes normatifs ou, au contraire, de leur porter préjudice. La réunion de plusieurs facteurs, à savoir la durée prolongée de l’occupation de la Cisjordanie par Israël, la menace accrue à la sécurité depuis 2000 ainsi qu’une politique de colonisation israélienne active, soutenue par l’État, présentent un cas de figure unique pour vérifier l’hypothèse selon laquelle les tribunaux nationaux des États démocratiques, généralement, et ceux jouant le rôle de la plus haute instance judiciaire d’une puissance occupante, spécifiquement, parviennent à assurer la protection des droits et libertés fondamentaux et de la primauté du droit au niveau international. Le premier chapitre présente une étude, à la lumière du premier principe normatif énoncé ci-haut, des jugements rendus par la HCJ dans les dossiers contestant la légalité de la construction du mur à l’intérieur de la Cisjordanie et de la zone dite fermée (Seam Zone), ainsi que des zones de sécurité spéciales entourant les colonies. Le deuxième chapitre analyse, cette fois à la lumière du deuxième principe normatif, des jugements dans les dossiers mettant en cause des restrictions sur les déplacements imposées aux Palestiniens dans le but allégué de protéger la sécurité des colonies et/ou des colons. Le troisième chapitre jette un regard sur les jugements rendus dans les dossiers mettant en cause la légalité du tracé du mur à l’intérieur et sur le pourtour du territoire annexé de Jérusalem-Est. Les conclusions découlant de cette recherche se fondent sur des données tirées d’entrevues menées auprès d’avocats israéliens qui s’adressent régulièrement à la HCJ pour le compte de justiciables palestiniens.

What ‘Security’, whose ‘Rights’ and which ‘Law’? : the Israeli High Court of Justice and the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank

Cette thèse examine l’interprétation et l’application, par l’Haute Cour d'Israël (HCJ), de principes du droit international de l’occupation et du droit international des droits de la personne dans le traitement de requêtes judiciaires formulées par des justiciables palestiniens. Elle s’intéresse plus particulièrement aux jugements rendus depuis le déclenchement de la deuxième Intifada (2000) suite à des requêtes mettant en cause la légalité des mesures adoptées par les autorités israéliennes au nom d’un besoin prétendu d’accroitre la sécurité des colonies et des colons israéliens dans le territoire occupé de la Cisjordanie. La première question sous étude concerne la mesure dans laquelle la Cour offre un recours effectif aux demandeurs palestiniens face aux violations alléguées de leurs droits internationaux par l’occupant. La recherche fait sienne la position de la HJC selon laquelle le droit de l’occupation est guidé par une logique interne tenant compte de la balance des intérêts en cause, en l’occurrence le besoin de sécurité de l’occupant, d’une part, et les droits fondamentaux de l’occupé, d’autre part. Elle considère, en outre, que cette logique se voit reflétée dans les principes normatifs constituant la base de ce corpus juridique, soit que l’occupation est par sa nature temporaire, que de l’occupation découle un rapport de fiduciaire et, finalement, que l’occupant n’acquiert point de souveraineté sur le territoire. Ainsi, la deuxième question qui est posée est de savoir si l’interprétation du droit par la Cour (HCJ) a eu pour effet de promouvoir ces principes normatifs ou, au contraire, de leur porter préjudice. La réunion de plusieurs facteurs, à savoir la durée prolongée de l’occupation de la Cisjordanie par Israël, la menace accrue à la sécurité depuis 2000 ainsi qu’une politique de colonisation israélienne active, soutenue par l’État, présentent un cas de figure unique pour vérifier l’hypothèse selon laquelle les tribunaux nationaux des États démocratiques, généralement, et ceux jouant le rôle de la plus haute instance judiciaire d’une puissance occupante, spécifiquement, parviennent à assurer la protection des droits et libertés fondamentaux et de la primauté du droit au niveau international. Le premier chapitre présente une étude, à la lumière du premier principe normatif énoncé ci-haut, des jugements rendus par la HCJ dans les dossiers contestant la légalité de la construction du mur à l’intérieur de la Cisjordanie et de la zone dite fermée (Seam Zone), ainsi que des zones de sécurité spéciales entourant les colonies. Le deuxième chapitre analyse, cette fois à la lumière du deuxième principe normatif, des jugements dans les dossiers mettant en cause des restrictions sur les déplacements imposées aux Palestiniens dans le but allégué de protéger la sécurité des colonies et/ou des colons. Le troisième chapitre jette un regard sur les jugements rendus dans les dossiers mettant en cause la légalité du tracé du mur à l’intérieur et sur le pourtour du territoire annexé de Jérusalem-Est. Les conclusions découlant de cette recherche se fondent sur des données tirées d’entrevues menées auprès d’avocats israéliens qui s’adressent régulièrement à la HCJ pour le compte de justiciables palestiniens.