Preventing human trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation: the need for a bottom-up approach : the case-study of Brazilians trafficked to Portugal

Masters Thesis – Academic Year 2007/2008 - European Master’s Degree in Human Rights and Democratization (E.MA) - European Inter-university Centre for Human Rights and Democratization (EIUC) -Faculdade de Direito, Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL)

Law and the practise of principle in diverse societies

Projecte de recerca elaborat a partir d’una estada a la London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom, entre 2007 i 2009. L’objecte principal del projecte ha estat analitzar les implicacions jurídico-polítiques i institucionals d’una teoria de la justícia i la igualtat liberals aplicada a societats multiculturals amb un marcat predomini de la diversitat cultural. L’anàlisi desenvolupa una línia d'investigació interdisciplinar - entre el dret i la teoria política - iniciada en una tesis doctoral sobre multiculturalisme i drets de les minories culturals (UPF, 2000) que va culminar en la publicació de Group Rights as Human Rights (Springer, 2006). La recerca adopta com a punt de partida les conclusions de l'esmentada obra, en especial, la rellevància del reconeixement de drets col•lectius; tanmateix, el tipus de qüestions plantejades, l’enfoc i la metodologia emprades són substancialment diferents. En concret, s'adrecen preguntes específiques sobre el model i aspiracions del constitucionalisme democràtic i el paper del dret en contextos multiculturals. També s’atorga un pes central a la dimensió institucional dels models de gestió de la diversitat que s’analitzen, prioritzant un enfocament comparatiu a partir de l’estudi de controvèrsies concretes. L’objectiu és superar algunes limitacions importants de la literatura actual, com ara la tendència a examinar en abstracte la compatibilitat de determinades demandes amb el constitucionalisme democràtic, sense abordar el funcionament d'estratègies de gestió de la diversitat cultural emprades en contextos concrets. Els treballs producte d'aquest projecte articulen les línies bàsiques d’un model pluralista, basat en principis més que en regles, que desafia els plantejaments dominants actualment. Aquest model es caracteritza pel compromís amb la legitimitat i igualtat comparatives, rebutjant el paternalisme i les visions liberals típiques sobre el paper de la regulació. La presumpció de l’“standing” moral dels grups identitaris és fonamental per tal de considerar-los interlocutors vàlids amb interessos genuïns. També s’argumenta que la integració social en contextos multiculturals no depèn tant de l’eliminació del conflicte sinó, sobre tot, d’una gestió eficient que eviti abusos de poder sistemàtics. El model defensa el rol del dret en la institucionalització del diàleg intercultural, però admet que el diàleg no necessàriament condueix a l’acord o a una estructura reguladora coherent i uniforme. Les aspiracions del ordre jurídic pluralista són més modestes: afavorir la negociació i resolució en cada conflicte, malgrat la persistència de la fragmentació i la provisionalitat dels acords. La manca d'un marc regulador comú esdevé una virtut en la mesura que permet la interacció de diferents subordres; una interacció governada per una multiplicitat de regles no necessàriament harmòniques. Els avantatges i problemes d’aquest model s'analitzen a partir de l'anàlisi de l’estructura fragmentària de l'ordre jurídic internacional i del règim Europeu de drets humans.

The League of Iowa Human Rights Agencies, February 2008, Vol. 1, no. 1

The League of Iowa Human Rights Agencies is a voluntary, non-profit organization dedicated to the protection and advancement of human and civil rights. Founded in the late 1970’s, the League comprises of the local human and civil rights commissions in Iowa, the Iowa Civil Rights Commission and the Iowa Department of Human Rights. While its members are public agencies, the League is a private, non-governmental organization.

Right to Food, Food Security and Food Aid Under International Law, or the Limits of a right-based approach

The right to food has become a pillar of international humanitarian and human rights law. The increasing number of food-related emergencies and the evolution of the international order brought the more precise notion of food security and made a potential right to receive food aid emerge. Despite this apparent centrality, recent statistics show that a life free from hunger is for many people all over the world still a utopian idea. The paper will explore nature and content of the right to food, food security and food aid under international law in order to understand the reasons behind the substantial failure of this right-centred approach, emphasising the lack of legal effects of many food-related provisions because of excessive moral connotations of the right to be free from hunger. Bearing in mind the three-dimensional nature of food security, the paper will also suggest that all attention has been focused on the availability of food, while real difficulties arise in terms of accessibility and adequacy. Emergency situations provide an excellent example of this unbalance, as the emerging right to receive food aid focus itself on the availability of food, without improving local production and adequacy. Looking at other evolving sectors of international law, such as the protection of the environment, and particularly the safeguard of biological diversity, alternative solutions will be envisaged in order to “feed” the right to food.

The communication by States of International Law to their direct stakeholders

El derecho internacional fue concebido como un derecho interestatal. Sin embargo, como consecuencia del desarrollo progresivo del derecho, nuevos actores y nuevos sujetos han ido surgiendo. El individuo es uno de ellos bajo diferentes perspectivas, bajo la perspectiva penal al asumir la responsabilidad de sus actos frente a los diferentes tribunales ad hoc y, ahora ante la Corte Penal Internacional. También se ha desarrollado la figura bajo la perspectiva de los derechos humanos. Este artículo analiza las formas como las políticas estatales relativas al derecho internacional se presentan a los individuos, a las personas jurídicas y a los demás actores.

Legal outlier, again? U.S. felon suffrage: comparative and international human rights perspectives

The judiciousness of American felon suffrage policies has long been the subject of scholarly debate, not least due to the large number of affected Americans: an estimated 5.3 million citizens are ineligible to vote as a result of a criminal conviction. This article offers comparative law and international human rights perspectives and aims to make two main contributions to the American and global discourse. After an introduction in Part I, Part II offers comparative law perspectives on challenges to disenfranchisement legislation, juxtaposing U.S. case law against recent judgments rendered by courts in Canada, South Africa, Australia, and by the European Court of Human Rights. The article submits that owing to its unique constitutional stipulations, as well as to a general reluctance to engage foreign legal sources, U.S. jurisprudence lags behind an emerging global jurisprudential trend that increasingly views convicts’ disenfranchisement as a suspect practice and subjects it to judicial review. This transnational judicial discourse follows a democratic paradigm and adopts a “residual liberty” approach to criminal justice that considers convicts to be rights-holders. The discourse rejects regulatory justifications for convicts’ disenfranchisement, and instead sees disenfranchisement as a penal measure. In order to determine its suitability as a punishment, the adverse effects of disenfranchisement are weighed against its purported social benefits, using balancing or proportionality review. Part III analyzes the international human rights treaty regime. It assesses, in particular, Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”), which proclaims that “every citizen” has a right to vote without “unreasonable restrictions.” The analysis concludes that the phrase “unreasonable restrictions” is generally interpreted in a manner which tolerates certain forms of disenfranchisement, whereas other forms (such as life disenfranchisement) may be incompatible with treaty obligations. This article submits that disenfranchisement is a normatively flawed punishment. It fails to treat convicts as politically-equal community members, degrades them, and causes them grave harms both as individuals and as members of social groups. These adverse effects outweigh the purported social benefits of disenfranchisement. Furthermore, as a core component of the right to vote, voter eligibility should cease to be subjected to balancing or proportionality review. The presumed facilitative nature of the right to vote makes suffrage less susceptible to deference-based objections regarding the judicial review of legislation, as well as to cultural relativity objections to further the international standardization of human rights obligations. In view of this, this article proposes the adoption of a new optional protocol to the ICCPR proscribing convicts’ disenfranchisement. The article draws analogies between the proposed protocol and the ICCPR’s “Optional Protocol Aiming at the Abolition of the Death Penalty.” If adopted, the proposed protocol would strengthen the current trajectory towards expanding convicts’ suffrage that emanates from the invigorated transnational judicial discourse.

Human rights and trafficking in persons in the Americas: summary and highlights of the Hemispheric Conference on International Migration

Includes bibliography

Is the anti-trafficking framework really for the 'victims'? : reflections on Burmese victims of human trafficking and non-trafficked migrants in Thailand

Since the year 2000 when the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, human trafficking has been regarded as one of the egregious violations of human rights, and global efforts have been made to eradicate it. The anti-trafficking framework has multiple dimensions, and the way the anti-trafficking framework is constructed influences its impact on the victims and non-trafficked migrants. This paper will analyze the impact of the anti-trafficking framework on the experiences of Burmese victims and non-trafficked migrants in Thailand. I will question the conventional framework of anti-trafficking, and seek to construct a framework more appropriate for addressing victims' actual needs. In conclusion, the anti-trafficking framework should serve the best interest of the victim; still, it should not be one which might adversely affect the interest of the would-be victim who is not identified as a victim according to the law.

The EU, China and Southeast Asia: Divergent Views of Dealing with Human Security. Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series Vol. 14 No. 8, May 2014

Introduction. This chapter takes a closer look at the European Union (EU), China, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)’s respective approaches to dealing with non-traditional security (NTS) challenges by investigating their policies toward Burma/Myanmar—a source country of numerous such challenges. It argues that, although all, as members of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), see the need for multilateral solutions to fight organized crime, provide disaster relief, combat terrorism, prevent drug trafficking, etc., they differ with respect to the steps to be taken to protect human security in Asia-Pacific. China, initially hesitant to join the ARF for fear that other members might try to contain it, has come to value the principal forum for NTS challenges in the Asia-Pacific region since, like many ASEAN countries, it is a big proponent of non-interventionism, non-use of force, consensus decision-making, that is, the confidence-building mechanisms commonly referred to as the ‘ASEAN way’.2 The EU, as a strong proponent of human rights and the rule of law, repeatedly, has criticized ARF members for allowing sovereignty-related norms to get in the way of the protection of human rights, but it has refrained from assuming the role of norm exporter. As will be seen in the case of Burma/Myanmar, the EU does make its opinions heard and, when necessary, will take unilateral steps not supported by the ASEAN members of the ARF but, cognizant of the history of the region, for the most part, settles for supporting economic development and aiding in capacity-building, understanding that it would be counter-productive to exert pressure on reluctant ARF members to modify the non-interference norm. The chapter then speculates about the ‘ASEAN way’s’ longevity, arguing that, increasingly, there are internal and external dynamics that seem to indicate that the ‘ASEAN way,’ at least in its current form, may not be here to stay. The conclusion looks at what might be in store for Burma/Myanmar in the years to come.

Filing a charge of discrimination under the Illinois Human Rights Act.

Cover title.

Filing a charge of discrimination under the Illinois Human Rights Act /

Cover title.

Contesting human rights through institutional reform:a case study of the reform of the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission

This article presents a case study of the recent reform of the United Kingdom Equalities and Human Rights Commission, to address a critical gap in the literature on national human rights institutions (NHRIs) concerning the power of governments to exert control over these institutions through reform processes. Through this analysis, the article demonstrates, first, that NHRIs are affected by contextual factors not only related to the popularity of the human rights agenda but also to wider policy agendas which impact on their status and functions; and second, that attempts by government to exert more administrative control can be significantly problematic for the operational independence of NHRIs.

The principle of non-refoulement under international law: Its inception and evolution in a nutshell

The article first gives an overview of the formation and the evolution of the principle of non-refoulement under international law. The different meanings of the concept in the asylum and human rights contexts are then discussed and compared, with due regard to the convergences that arose in the course of legal developments. In doing so, this short piece also draws attention to certain controversial issues and blurred lines, which have surfaced through the practical application of the prohibition of refoulement. Identifying the contours of the concept and clarifying its content and its effects may help in appreciating the implications that stem, in the current extraordinary times of migratory movements, from the fundamental humanitarian legal principles of which the imperative of non-refoulement forms part.