Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (185) (remove)
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (100)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (61)
- Part of a Book (9)
- Doctoral Thesis (6)
- Other (5)
- Review (3)
- Journal/Publication series (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (185) (remove)
Keywords
Institute
- MenschenRechtsZentrum (185) (remove)
Einführung in die Tagung
(2015)
Grußwort des Dekans
(2015)
The question of whether the monitoring bodies have competence concerning reservations is at the centre of the discussion of reservations to human rights treaties that has occupied many international legal scholars over the last few decades. The Istanbul Convention’s treaty monitoring body, GREVIO, is the only human rights treaty monitoring body with a direct competence concerning reservations. However, as practice to date shows, it does not make much use of this power. This is a big disappointment considering all the efforts of other bodies in the past and the doctrinal positions of various scholars. The main aims of this article are threefold to: present GREVIO’s practice to date concerning reservations, provide a brief historical overview of how other human rights treaty bodies have approached their role concerning reservations, and finally, attempt to explain why GREVIO has abandoned a more proactive position on reservations.
Thus far, research into reservations to treaties has often overlooked reservations formulated to both European Social Charters (and its Protocols) and the relevant European Committee of Social Rights practices. There are several pressing reasons to further explore this gap in existing literature. First, an analysis of practices within the European Social Charters (and Protocols) will provide a fuller picture of the reservations and responses of treaty bodies. Second, in the context of previous landmark events it is worth noting the practices of another human rights treaty monitoring body that is often omitted from analyses. Third, the very fact that the formulation of reservations to treaties gives parties such far-reaching flexibility to shape their contractual obligations (à la carte) is surprising. An important outcome of the research is the finding that, despite the far-reaching flexibility present in the treaties analysed, both the States Parties and the European Committee of Social Rights generally treat them as conventional treaties to which the general rules on reservations apply. Consequently, there is no basis for assuming that the mere fact of adopting the à la carte system in a treaty with no reservation clause implies a formal prohibition of reservations or otherwise discourages their formulation.
Dispersing the fog
(2020)
Countries in the Middle East generally fare poorly in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index. One of the biggest challenges for the anti-corruption-regime in the Middle East are the many forms of corruption that are not being recognised as such on the local level, if assessed against a culturally relativistic benchmark. Our paper seeks to establish a unifying ground by providing a functional analysis of corruption which is both, normatively guiding and culturally sensitive. We demarcate our work as follows: (1) our reference point will be the phenomenon of institutional corruption, whereas (2) our working definition of corruption will conceive of corruption as a violation of role-specific norms that is motivated by the role-occupier’s private motives. In an attempt to offer a comprehensive approach, corruption will be viewed on two differing levels. On the external level, we will begin with an investigation of features within a norm-order that typically instantiate corruption. We will argue that corruption is externally conditioned by an authority’s inability to enforce and (re)establish the norms of conduct that ought to be action-guiding in office. This changes the expectation-structure within a norm-order and erodes public trust in the authorities, giving rise to willing perpetrators. Complementing this, the internal level of our framework will emphasize the motivational deficits of corrupt acts. It will be argued that this deficit can typically be found in societies that lack civic virtues. This, we suspect, is the functional reason why corrupt societies have such a hard time to overcome the problem: they lack both features and are, as a consequence, caught in a vicious circle as they struggle to strengthen civil society and consolidate institutional structures – whereas corruption increasingly disappears from the radar as it becomes accepted reality.
This chapter consists of three parts. In the first part, I will give a short overview about the integration of the protection of the environment into German constitutional law. This section will start with the presentation of the relevant provision, Art. 20a BL. Then, I will elaborate on its legal character. In the second part, I will make some brief remarks on the practical implications of Art. 20a BL. Finally, I will present some preliminary conclusions.
Back in 1949, and thus only one year after the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the four Geneva Conventions were adopted, providing a strong signal for a new world order created after 1945 with the United Nations at their centre and combining as their goals both the maintenance of peace and security and the protection of human rights, but also recognising, realistically, that succeeding generations had so far not yet been saved from the scourge of war. Hence, the continued need for rules governing, and limiting, the means and methods of warfare once an armed conflict has erupted. At the same time, the international community has unfortunately not been able so far to fully safeguard individual human rights, its efforts to that effect and the continuous development of international human rights law over the years notwithstanding.
Der russische Angriffskrieg auf die Ukraine hat auch die Europäische Menschenrechtsarchitektur ins Wanken gebracht. Der Europarat reagierte schnell und beendete die Mitgliedschaft der Russischen Föderation. Aus diesem Anlass blickt der Beitrag zurück auf die wechselvolle Geschichte der Mitgliedschaft Russlands im Europarat. Seit dem Beitritt vor 26 Jahren haben Konfrontationen die – oftmals kurzen– Phasen der Kooperation überschattet. Das wirft die Frage auf, inwieweit die „Politik des Dialogs“ gegenüber der Russischen Föderation geeignet war, die Menschenrechtslage in Russland zu verbessern. Der Beitrag legt zudem die rechtlichen Grundlagen von Beitritt und Ende der Mitgliedschaft dar und untersucht, wie sich der Ausschluss auf die Anwendbarkeit der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention (EMRK) auswirkt. Der Ausschluss Russlands stellt einen Wendepunkt dar. Zwar wird damit ein potenziell gefährlicher Präzedenzfall geschaffen. Jedoch entsteht durch die geschlossene Reaktion der restlichen Mitgliedstaaten auch ein Momentum für Reformen und eine Rückbesinnung auf das Gründungsziel des Europarates – die kollektive Durchsetzung der Menschenrechte.