Universal declaration of human rights; its origins, significance, and interpretation

Cover title

Affirmative action plan for Illinois Department of Human Rights /

Description based on: 1987; title from cover.

Affirmative action plan for Illinois Department of Human Rights /

Description based on: 2003/2004.

Affirmative action plan for the handicapped for Illinois Department of Human Rights /

"July 1, 1987."

Affirmative action plan for Illinois Department of Human Rights /

Description based on: 1981.

Illinois Department of Transportation affirmative action plan for the handicapped for Illinois Department of Human Rights : September 1, 1981.

Cover title: Affirmative action plan for the handicapped : accessibility, the key to employment.

The four general principles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: the potential value of the approach in other areas of human rights law

At the outset of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Committee on the Rights of the Child identified four of its provisions (non-discrimination; best interests of the child as a primary consideration; life, survival and development; and participation) as ‘general principles’. This approach has shaped implementation of, advocacy for and the scholarship on the Convention. The use of general principles has the potential to make a significant contribution in other areas of human rights law provided that the principles are selected carefully and address the distinct issues at the root of potential rights violations for particular rights-holders.

Critics of Human Rights from a Historical Perspective

Implementation of human rights is often criticized because it is perceived as being imposed on the rest of the world. In this case, human rights start to be seen as a sole abstraction, an empty word. What are the theoretical arguments of these critics and can we determine any historical grounds for them? In this paper, I will try to point at similar critics after the French Revolution – like that of the Historical School and Hegel – and try to show if some of these critics are still relevant. And I will compare these critics with contemporary arguments of cultural relativists. There are different streams and categorizations of human rights theories in today’s world. What differentiates them is basically the source of the human rights. After the French Revolution, the historical school had criticized the individuation and Hegel had criticized the formal freedom which was, according to him, a consequence of the Revolution. In this context Hegel drew a distinction between real freedom and formal freedom. Besides the theory of sources, the theories of implementation such as human rights as a model of learning, human rights as a result of an historical process are worth attention. The crucial point is about integrating human rights as an inner process and not to use them as a tool for intervention in other countries, which we observe in today’s world. And this is the exact point why I find the discussion of the sources more important. This discussion can help us to show how the inner evaluation of a society makes the realization of human rights possible and how we can avoid the above mentioned abstraction and misuse.

Mental health and human rights in forensic psychiatry in the European Union

One of the most important events which characterizes the process of transitioning to the European Union is the ratification of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by the European Council in 1950. Since then, the topic of human rights has become the inspiring principle in the construction of the European Community and afterwards the institutional apparatus which constitutes the Union. The primary objective of the European Union States currently is to promote a harmonization of the national legislations on mental health, favoring a central health policy which reduces inequalities amongst the member States. For this reason Europe is a region of the world in which is more abundant the normative one about mental health, especially in form of Recommendations directed to the States by the Council of Europe, although norms of direct application also exist. Special interest has the sentences dictated by the European Court of Human Rights and the conclusions of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. It should be mentioned the work of European Union equally and of the Office for Europe of the World Organization of the Health. This group of juridical instruments configures the most complete regulation on the mental patient's rights.

Derecho penal y la obligación de investigar y sancionar graves violaciones de derechos humanos y el derecho internacional humanitario -especial referencia a la sentencia de la corte constitucional colombiana c-579/13-

En el presente trabajo se analiza la obligación de investigar graves violaciones de Derechos Humanos y Derecho Internacional Humanitario, a la luz de la sentencia de la Corte Constitucional Colombiana referente a la constitucionalidad del Marco Jurídico para la paz. De la aparente remisión que hace la Corte Constitucional a la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos sobre el deber de investigar graves violaciones de Derechos Humanos y de Derecho Internacional Humanitario se concluye que la Corte Constitucional propone como premisa mayor una obligación que surge de una interpretación extensiva de la Convención Interamericana. De la misma forma, se estudia el tratamiento indebido del derecho aplicable a las amnistías e indultos, que se relaciona con la necesidad de evitar cualquier tipo de impunidad, cuyo concepto sirve para esclarecer cuáles son los estándares que se quiere proteger. Por último, se analiza el contexto al que se pretende aplicar dicha obligación, es decir, la justicia transicional, proponiendo un modelo interpretativo de los fines de la pena, y su aplicación por medio de la favorabilidad penal, para la justicia transicional, que sea acorde a la interpretación de la Convención Interamericana.

Efectos de la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos en los países miembros de la OEA

Uno de los eventos jurídicos más importantes del siglo XX, sin duda, ha sido la consolidación del derecho internacional de los derechos humanos. Instrumentos internacionales y mecanismos de protección se han puesto en funcionamiento y afianzado, tanto a nivel global como regional. No obstante, en muchos casos, este desarrollo de principios, normas y órganos de protección a nivel internacional no se ha reflejado en iguales progresos en ámbito nacional. Lo cual permite todavía afirmar que si bien la universalización de los derechos ha sido una etapa sustancial para la consolidación de la protección de los derechos humanos el desafío sigue siendo el hacerlos efectivos. El artículo lleva a cabo un examen de la jurisprudencia de los países de la región que permite llegar a la consideración que se están produciendo importantes avances en este terreno y cada vez más los altos tribunales de varios países de la región utilizan como parámetro de interpretación la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana para resolver cuestiones internas y concluir que en Latinoamérica, gracias a la influencia integradora de la Convención Americana y de la jurisprudencia de la Corte Interamericana con la jurisprudencia nacional, se está lentamente consolidado lo que podría ser definido como un estándar mínimo común en materia de protección de los derechos humanos. Un núcleo fundamental o esencial de derechos que poco a poco se va imponiendo en los países miembros dando origen a un nuevo ius commune para Latinoamérica.

A Racionalidade jurídica da Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos no caso Gomes Lund e outros VS Brasil

Mesmo após trinta anos de consolidação democrática no Brasil o tema da justiça de transição ainda faz parte do nosso debate jurídico. Atualmente vive-se uma insegurança jurídica quanto à validade da lei de anistia brasileira, uma vez que o Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) e a Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos (CorteIDH) julgaram a questão em sentidos opostos. Almejando contribuir para esse debate, tendo como objeto a decisão da CorteIDH, o presente artigo busca responder aos seguintes questionamentos: Ao julgar caso Gomes Lund e outros vs Brasil, quais foram os principais temas abordados pela CorteIDH que fez com que ela chegasse à conclusão de que a lei de anistia brasileira é inválida? Como se deu sua construção argumentativa, e quais foram suas principais fontes de embasamento normativo e jurisprudencial? Em suma, qual foi a racionalidade jurídica da Corte no julgamento desse caso? Para responder a essas perguntas de pesquisa buscou-se levantar indutivamente as principais questões abordadas na sentença e problematizar a responsabilidade do Brasil em relação ao Sistema Interamericano de Direitos Humanos.