The Experts below are selected from a list of 66363 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Estibalitz Jimenez - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
foreigners and the Right to Justice in the aftermath of 9 11
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 2004Co-Authors: Francois Crepeau, Estibalitz JimenezAbstract:The Government is, quite simply, using September 11 as an excuse for new collections and uses of personal information about all of us Canadians that cannot be justified by the requirements of antiterrorism and that, indeed, have no place in a free and democratic society. . . Now I am informing Parliament that there is every appearance that governmental disregard for crucially important privacy Rights is moving beyond isolated instances and becoming systematic. This puts a fundamental Right of every Canadian profoundly at risk. It is a trend that urgently needs to be reversed. . . Regrettably, this Government has lost its moral compass with regard to the fundamental human Right of privacy.
-
foreigners and the Right to Justice in the aftermath of 9 11
Social Science Research Network, 2004Co-Authors: Francois Crepeau, Estibalitz JimenezAbstract:Whether foreigner or citizen, as whether innocent or guilty, we are all worthy of being accorded Justice when our fundamental Rights are at stake. Working with international law and, where available, constitutional guarantees, tribunals in Canada and elsewhere will have to continue to push for the ultimate pre-eminence of human Rights and freedoms over the interests of the State, especially in troubled times such as these. The protection of Canada, of its sovereignty, of its borders, cannot legitimately be based on the negation of the Rights and freedoms of foreigners: ultimately, they are not different from the Rights and freedoms of the citizen. It took us a long time to understand that fighting organized crime could not legitimately be achieved at the cost of the Rights of the accused and many a criminal has been set free because of obscure procedural errors. Fighting terrorism is an essential social, political and legal objective, but not at any cost. Certainly it should not be pursued at the cost of anyone's fundamental Rights and freedoms, as these are the benchmarks of a civilization based on the pre-eminence of human dignity.Foreigners slowly gained in recent decades what criminals obtained in previous centuries, that is recognition that their human Rights will prevail over their host State's interest. Challenging those gains is a blow to the whole of the human Rights construct: if the Rights of foreigners can be reduced today, why not the Rights of the beneficiaries of social benefits tomorrow, when a government will declare that such a move is in the State's interest‘ This blow to fundamental Rights and freedoms is a negation of the common humanity of all human beings, including foreigners. It entails a negation of their individuality, a refusal to hear their individual story, a refusal to understand their particular plight. This course of action can have disastrous consequences for the life and health of foreigners who are thus targeted.The absolute prohibition of torture, without exception, is one of the most fundamental legacies of the generation that lived through the Second World War and the Shoah. Yet, when the cover of The Economist of January 11, 2003, asks the question: “Is torture ever justified‘”, one understands how tempting it is to disregard the Rights and freedoms of terrorists (who are necessarily imagined as foreigners) in the very name of freedom. “O Liberte! Que de crimes on commet en ton nom”, said Madame Rolland on the scaffold in 1794. Jurists and citizens should be extremely vigilant not to let their governments decide which category of persons is worthy of Justice: the human Rights regime is, after all, a common good that we all share for our common benefit.
Francois Crepeau - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
foreigners and the Right to Justice in the aftermath of 9 11
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 2004Co-Authors: Francois Crepeau, Estibalitz JimenezAbstract:The Government is, quite simply, using September 11 as an excuse for new collections and uses of personal information about all of us Canadians that cannot be justified by the requirements of antiterrorism and that, indeed, have no place in a free and democratic society. . . Now I am informing Parliament that there is every appearance that governmental disregard for crucially important privacy Rights is moving beyond isolated instances and becoming systematic. This puts a fundamental Right of every Canadian profoundly at risk. It is a trend that urgently needs to be reversed. . . Regrettably, this Government has lost its moral compass with regard to the fundamental human Right of privacy.
-
foreigners and the Right to Justice in the aftermath of 9 11
Social Science Research Network, 2004Co-Authors: Francois Crepeau, Estibalitz JimenezAbstract:Whether foreigner or citizen, as whether innocent or guilty, we are all worthy of being accorded Justice when our fundamental Rights are at stake. Working with international law and, where available, constitutional guarantees, tribunals in Canada and elsewhere will have to continue to push for the ultimate pre-eminence of human Rights and freedoms over the interests of the State, especially in troubled times such as these. The protection of Canada, of its sovereignty, of its borders, cannot legitimately be based on the negation of the Rights and freedoms of foreigners: ultimately, they are not different from the Rights and freedoms of the citizen. It took us a long time to understand that fighting organized crime could not legitimately be achieved at the cost of the Rights of the accused and many a criminal has been set free because of obscure procedural errors. Fighting terrorism is an essential social, political and legal objective, but not at any cost. Certainly it should not be pursued at the cost of anyone's fundamental Rights and freedoms, as these are the benchmarks of a civilization based on the pre-eminence of human dignity.Foreigners slowly gained in recent decades what criminals obtained in previous centuries, that is recognition that their human Rights will prevail over their host State's interest. Challenging those gains is a blow to the whole of the human Rights construct: if the Rights of foreigners can be reduced today, why not the Rights of the beneficiaries of social benefits tomorrow, when a government will declare that such a move is in the State's interest‘ This blow to fundamental Rights and freedoms is a negation of the common humanity of all human beings, including foreigners. It entails a negation of their individuality, a refusal to hear their individual story, a refusal to understand their particular plight. This course of action can have disastrous consequences for the life and health of foreigners who are thus targeted.The absolute prohibition of torture, without exception, is one of the most fundamental legacies of the generation that lived through the Second World War and the Shoah. Yet, when the cover of The Economist of January 11, 2003, asks the question: “Is torture ever justified‘”, one understands how tempting it is to disregard the Rights and freedoms of terrorists (who are necessarily imagined as foreigners) in the very name of freedom. “O Liberte! Que de crimes on commet en ton nom”, said Madame Rolland on the scaffold in 1794. Jurists and citizens should be extremely vigilant not to let their governments decide which category of persons is worthy of Justice: the human Rights regime is, after all, a common good that we all share for our common benefit.
Klinkner, Melanie Josefine - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Divergent meaning of transitional Justice principles: A Kosovo case study of social memory and incomplete transitional Justice in the context of missing persons
'Informa UK Limited', 2022Co-Authors: Schwandner-sievers Stephanie, Klinkner, Melanie JosefineAbstract:Survivors of gross human Rights violations can tell individual stories of suffering and lessons learnt which can feed into the collective memory of a population. According to Transitional Justice, however, core common principles are posited to apply universally when dealing with past gross human Rights violations. These include the human-Rights based Dealing with the Past framework derived from the Joinet-Orentlicher Principles to fight impunity, including four core principles: (1) the Right to know, (2) the Right to Justice, (3) the Right to reparation and (4) guarantees of non-recurrence. We compare and contrast the intended meaning of this principled Rights-based approach with local survivors’ perspectives and interpretations as elucidated through a micro-ethnographic approach. Our case study focuses on the story, activism and continued memorialisation efforts of Ferdonije Qerkezi of Gjakova in Kosovo, whose husband, four sons and six further relatives were abducted from her home in spring 1998. This ethnographically-grounded, systematic comparison of intended versus locally constructed interpretations of, and associated meanings given to, the four core principles points to the importance of a nuanced Right-based approach which can take local systems of knowledge into account when considering transitional Justice aims vis-a-vis social realities on the ground
-
Transitional Justice principles versus survivors’ experience – conflicting interpretations in Kosovo case study involving missing persons and their memorialisation
'Informa UK Limited', 2021Co-Authors: Klinkner, Melanie Josefine, Schwandner-sievers StephanieAbstract:Survivors of gross human Rights violations can tell individual stories of suffering and lessons learnt which can feed into the collective memory of a population. According to Transitional Justice, however, core common principles are posited to apply universally when dealing with past gross human Rights violations. These include the human-Rights based Dealing with the Past framework derived from the Joinet-Orentlicher Principles to fight impunity, including four core principles: (1) the Right to know, (2) the Right to Justice, (3) the Right to reparation and (4) guarantees of non-recurrence. We compare and contrast the intended meaning of this principled Rights-based approach with local survivors’ perspectives and interpretations as elucidated through a micro-ethnographic approach. Our case study focuses on the story, activism and continued memorialisation efforts of Ferdonije Qerkezi of Gjakova in Kosovo, whose husband, four sons and six further relatives were abducted from her home in spring 1998. This ethnographically-grounded, systematic comparison of intended versus locally constructed interpretations of, and associated meanings given to, the four core principles points to the importance of a nuanced Right-based approach which can take local systems of knowledge into account when considering transitional Justice aims vis-a-vis social realities on the ground
Schwandner-sievers Stephanie - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Divergent meaning of transitional Justice principles: A Kosovo case study of social memory and incomplete transitional Justice in the context of missing persons
'Informa UK Limited', 2022Co-Authors: Schwandner-sievers Stephanie, Klinkner, Melanie JosefineAbstract:Survivors of gross human Rights violations can tell individual stories of suffering and lessons learnt which can feed into the collective memory of a population. According to Transitional Justice, however, core common principles are posited to apply universally when dealing with past gross human Rights violations. These include the human-Rights based Dealing with the Past framework derived from the Joinet-Orentlicher Principles to fight impunity, including four core principles: (1) the Right to know, (2) the Right to Justice, (3) the Right to reparation and (4) guarantees of non-recurrence. We compare and contrast the intended meaning of this principled Rights-based approach with local survivors’ perspectives and interpretations as elucidated through a micro-ethnographic approach. Our case study focuses on the story, activism and continued memorialisation efforts of Ferdonije Qerkezi of Gjakova in Kosovo, whose husband, four sons and six further relatives were abducted from her home in spring 1998. This ethnographically-grounded, systematic comparison of intended versus locally constructed interpretations of, and associated meanings given to, the four core principles points to the importance of a nuanced Right-based approach which can take local systems of knowledge into account when considering transitional Justice aims vis-a-vis social realities on the ground
-
Transitional Justice principles versus survivors’ experience – conflicting interpretations in Kosovo case study involving missing persons and their memorialisation
'Informa UK Limited', 2021Co-Authors: Klinkner, Melanie Josefine, Schwandner-sievers StephanieAbstract:Survivors of gross human Rights violations can tell individual stories of suffering and lessons learnt which can feed into the collective memory of a population. According to Transitional Justice, however, core common principles are posited to apply universally when dealing with past gross human Rights violations. These include the human-Rights based Dealing with the Past framework derived from the Joinet-Orentlicher Principles to fight impunity, including four core principles: (1) the Right to know, (2) the Right to Justice, (3) the Right to reparation and (4) guarantees of non-recurrence. We compare and contrast the intended meaning of this principled Rights-based approach with local survivors’ perspectives and interpretations as elucidated through a micro-ethnographic approach. Our case study focuses on the story, activism and continued memorialisation efforts of Ferdonije Qerkezi of Gjakova in Kosovo, whose husband, four sons and six further relatives were abducted from her home in spring 1998. This ethnographically-grounded, systematic comparison of intended versus locally constructed interpretations of, and associated meanings given to, the four core principles points to the importance of a nuanced Right-based approach which can take local systems of knowledge into account when considering transitional Justice aims vis-a-vis social realities on the ground
Marina Aksenova - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the emerging Right to Justice in international criminal law a case study of colombia
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Marina AksenovaAbstract:This paper explores the nature of cross-fertilization between international criminal law and human Rights law. It is argued that international criminal Justice does not only ‘borrow’ from the discipline of human Rights law when defining substance and procedure but also generates its own unique set of Rights and obligations. They stem from the variety of objectives pursued by international criminal law, including retribution, deterrence, reconciliation, setting the historical record and Justice for victims. Different goals produce different societal and individual expectations, which are collectively captured by the emerging sui generis Right to Justice widely promoted by international criminal law. The paper uses for its analysis the case study of Colombia – a country under the preliminary examination of the International Criminal Court since 2004 and currently implementing the peace deal aimed at ending protracted civil war in the country. This case illustrates how international criminal law values enshrined in the Rome Statute trickle down to the specific situation and merge with the goals of transitional Justice and the logic of human Rights.
