The case of Quebec within Canada, and the Supreme Court of Canada's case on the legality of secessionist attempts by Quebec, is one example of the tension associated with the relationship between self-determination and a right of secession. The object of the book is to render available to the international community the expert opinions and legal arguments associated with the Supreme Court of Canada's decision on the Quebec Secession Reference. The questions put to the Court in large part concerned international law, leading the parties to the Reference to seek opinions from international law experts around the world as they prepared their arguments which are presented in this book. Self-determination is an idea rooted in human dignity and its meaning and force parallel the emergence of new understandings of the nature of sovereignty and the role of international law in the protection of human rights. The UN Human Rights Committee has identified self-determination as one of the most awkward principles to define because abuse of this right could jeopardize international peace and security. Self-determination, as formulated by the International Court of Justice, requires a free and genuine expression of the will of the peoples concerned. But serious questions remain about the extent of the relationship between self-determination and a right of secession. Does self-determination legitimate internal self-government, association of some kind with another state, or statehood, and in what contexts?
With this volume Professor Bayefsky makes the international complaints procedure arising from the UN human rights treaty system available to individuals, lawyers, non-governmental organizations, and human right advocates in many parts of the world. She begins by indentifying the common features of the four complaints procedures under each of the four treaties. Each treaty is then examined in greater detail. Consideration is finally given to questions of overlap and the choise of a forum. The annexes provide the practical tools for filling a complaint.
This work outlines available resources and proposed standards for international NGO fact-finding missions. Chapter One presents an introduction to the issue of NGO fact-finding. Chapter Two discusses the problems caused by the lack of any generally-accepted guidelines for NGO fact-finding, in contrast with contexts where NGOs have achieved consensus. Chapter Three surveys proposed guidelines for human rights and humanitarian NGOs. In addition, this section examines United Nations fact-finding standards, as well as examples of internal fact-finding standards for major NGOs. Chapter Four analyzes the fact-finding standards used in five specific cases: the International Crisis Group (Kosovo, 1999), the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Conflict in Georgia (Georgia, 2008), United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights Mapping Exercise on the Democratic Republic of Congo (1993-2003), Conflict Analysis Resource Center/University London study on Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch (Colombia, 1988-2004), and Human Rights Watch (Lebanon, 2006). The final chapter offers conclusions and recommendations.
Human rights treaties are at the core of the international system for the promotion and protection of human rights. Every UN member state has ratified at least one of these treaties, making them applicable to virtually every child, woman or man in the world - over six billion people. At the same time, human rights violations are rampant. The problem is that the implementation scheme accompanying the core human rights standards was drafted during a period of history when effective international monitoring was neither intended nor achievable. Today there is a gap between universal right and remedy that is inescapable and inexcusable, threatening the integrity of the international human rights legal regime. There are overwhelming numbers of overdue reports, untenable backlogs, minimal individual complaints from vast numbers of potential victims, and widespread refusal of states to provide remedies when violations of individual rights are found. This landmark Report prepared by Professor Bayefsky envisions a wide-ranging number of reforms, most of which can be accomplished without formal amendment. The recommendations generally assume a six treaty body regime, and focus primarily on offering concrete suggestions for improvements in working methods of the treaty bodies and procedures at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Professor Bayefsky details numerous proposals for bolstering national level partnerships, and for following-up the output of the treaty monitoring system as a key missing component of the implementation regime. One major reform requiring amendment is ultimately recommended, namely, consolidation of the human rights treaty bodies and the creation of two permanent committees, one for the consideration of state reports and one for complaints. All individuals, agencies, and organizations involved in the promotion, implementation, review, analysis, and study of human rights protection for all peoples will find this Report an indispensable resource for their work. It contains a unique overview of all the working methods of the six human rights treaty bodies, a detailed and thorough statistical analysis of the operation of the human rights treaty system, and a number of additional annexes which together provide a thorough and comprehensive understanding of the treaty system. The international human rights legal system is at a crossroads, with the ideal of universality threatened by the fundamental shortfalls in effective implementation. This Report offers a clear and substantive path to moving universality beyond rhetoric and towards a treaty regime meaningful and effective in the lives of everyday people.
This book is an essential tool for those interested in the vital relationship between international human rights law and domestic policy. It explores this subject in the context of public funding for religious education in Canada, an area of controversy for well over a hundred years. This work provides in one volume a unique set of source documents concerning the legal and political history of religious education in a multicultural environment and especially in Ontario, Canada’s largest province. It makes available for the first time a complete set of documents concerning the international litigation which has occurred between the Canadian government and its citizens, who have been seriously affected by entrenched religious discrimination. An introductory essay provides an overview of how religious discrimination forms the backbone of Ontario’s education system. Having failed to remedy such discrimination in Canadian courts, the UN Human Rights Committee provided a mechanism to address this breach of Canada’s international legal obligations. The volume is an expose of the process and the consequences of international human rights litigation before the UN Committee, and will be of special interest to others seeking to take cases of human rights violations forward to the international level. Canadian policy makers and analysts will consider this collection an invaluable resource for future consideration of the public funding of religious education in Canada, still unresolved after 135 years.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.