scholarly journals SYNERGISING INTERNATIONAL LABOUR LAWS AND HUMAN RIGHTS FOR PROTECTION OF INDONESIAN MIGRANT WORKERS

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Abdul Azis ◽  
Muhammad Syaprin Zahidi ◽  
David Pradhan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Migrant Workers ◽  
World Economy ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Political Commitment ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government ◽  
Globalized World

Efforts in promoting international legal protection of Indonesian migrant workers can be explained that it has complete regulations. This situation cannot be separated from the facts that show the importance of granting Specific labour rights for migrant workers in the international community’s perspective. The purposes of this article are to encourage all people to consider seriously the applying of international human rights law in order to promote of human rights, especially, for Indonesia migrant workers (TKI) and create better migration management. In legal-formal matter, the applying of legal mechanisms has been recognized as human rights by Indonesia law. One of the best ways is trying to join the outside world in order to attain Economic development for the nation. Exploiting Opportunities of globalized world economy does not mean our sovereignty weakened but rather as an effort to achieve more substantive effort. This can be interpreted as a political commitment from the government - by learning and cooperating with Other States - to be more pragmatic by prioritizing the interests of the people as a form of democracy.

Human rights referendum: Dissonance between ‘the will of the people’ and fundamental rights?

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-133
Author(s):  
Ignatius Yordan Nugraha
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Citizen Participation ◽  
Direct Democracy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Quality Of Democracy ◽  
The People ◽  
The Will

Referendums and popular initiatives have proliferated in many parts of the world as part of the effort to improve the quality of democracy and enhance citizen participation in policy making. However, even before the surge of populist nationalism in the 2010s, referendums have become a sort of weapon to restrict various rights. Furthermore, the juxtaposition between ‘the will of the people’ and human rights has once again brought back the classical criticism against direct democracy that it constitutes ‘a tyranny of the majority’ that could erode minority rights. With these concerns in mind, this paper is written to analyse the dissonance between human rights referendums and international human rights law through a positivist lens. The overall goal is to determine whether States have an ex ante obligation to prevent a referendum on a subject matter that is contrary to human rights.

scholarly journals Human Rights Obligations of the Territorial State in the Cyberspace of Areas Outside Its Effective Control

2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antal Berkes
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Territorial State ◽  
Treaty Monitoring ◽  
The Government ◽  
The One

The absence of control of a territorial state over part of its physical territory is closely associated with online human rights violations, on the one hand, and the state's restricted (but not necessarily absent) control over the cyberspace, on the other. Notwithstanding the lack of its effective territorial control, the territorial state continues to be entitled to exercise its sovereignty over both territory and cyberspace. The consequence of sovereignty in international human rights law is the territorial state's presumed jurisdiction over its entire national territory. The article claims that the territorial state, while lacking the effective means to control its cyberspace fully as it does in the government-controlled areas, has continuing jurisdiction, and consequently obligations, to protect human rights online from wrongful acts that originate, occur or have effect in the area outside its effective control. Treaty monitoring bodies have recommended various positive measures that any territorial state is required to take while seeking to restore its ‘internet sovereignty’ in the separatist region, depending on the means in its power that are feasible in the particular situation.

Good Governance and Property Rights of the State: The Dubovets Case before the European Court of Human Rights and the Russian Constitutional Court

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 296-304
Author(s):  
Grigory Vaypan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Government

This contribution discusses the recent Dubovets case before both the European Court of Human Rights and the Russian Constitutional Court, and its implications for the changing design of Russian property law as increasingly shaped by international human rights law and good governance principles. Communicated in December 2016, the application in Dubovets v. Russia continues the line of the European Court’s cases against Russia on the protection of good faith private owners of real estate against property claims by the government. Prompted by this case law, the Russian Constitutional Court in its Judgment of 22 June 2017 No 16-P struck down Article 302 of the Russian Civil Code as unconstitutional insofar as it entitled the government to reclaim possession of state property that had been previously alienated due to the government’s own negligence. This judgment manifests the increasing interdependence between private and public law – of classical property law, on the one hand, and international human rights law and good governance principles, on the other hand. It also contributes to ongoing evolution in the understanding of the state’s property rights in Russia: from the superior status of public property in Soviet times – to formal equality between public and private property rights in the landmark legal instruments of the 1990s – and now to the growing need for special protection of individual property rights vis-à-vis the state, in light of the latter’s double role as both the largest owner and the (quite unrestrained) regulator.

Domestic Human Rights Adjudication in the Shadow of International Law: The Status of Human Rights Conventions in Israel

2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barak Medina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Quarter Century ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Government

The quarter-century anniversary of Israel's ratification of the major United Nations (UN) human rights treaties is an opportunity to revisit the formal and informal interaction between domestic and international Bills of Rights in Israel. This study reveals that the human rights conventions lack almost entirely a formal domestic legal status. The study identifies a minor shift in the scope of the Israeli Supreme Court's reference to international law, as the Court now cites international human rights law to justify decisions that a state action is unlawful, and not only to support findings that an action is valid. This shift may be the result of other reasons, for instance, a ‘radiation’ of the Court's relatively extensive use of international humanitarian law in reviewing state actions taken in the Occupied Territories. However, it may also reflect a perception of enhanced legitimacy of referring to international human rights law as a point of reference in human rights adjudication following ratification of the treaties.At the same time, the Court continues to avoid acknowledging incompatibility between domestic law and international law. It refers to the latter only to support its interpretation of Israeli constitutional law, as it did before the ratification. This article critically evaluates this practice. While international human rights law should not be binding at the domestic level, because of its lack of sufficient democratic legitimacy in Israel, it should serve as an essential benchmark. The Court may legitimise a human rights infringement that is unjustified according to international law, but such incompatibility requires an explicit justification. The Court, together with the legislature and the government, are required to engage critically with the non-binding norms set by the ratified UN human rights treaties.

scholarly journals The State Responsibilities Relating to Human Rights Violations to The People with Stateless Persons Status in Rohingnya Crisis

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 154
Author(s):  
I Putu Dwika Ariestu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Citizenship Status ◽  
The People ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Consequences

Human Rights and the State could not be separated from one another. Both are interconnected in terms of how to ensure internal stability in a country. With the existence of human rights, it is hoped that state is not arbitrary to treat its people and is obliged to protect everyone in its territory including in this case Stateless persons mentioned in Article 7 paragraph 1 of the Convention relating Status of Stateless Persons in 1954. This study aims to analyze the obligations the State must take in relation to the protection of persons with stateless persons status, and to recognize the legal consequences and responsibilities of States in the event of omitting acts of human rights violations against people with stateless persons status. This paper using normative research methods with statute approach and conceptual approach. The study shows that in relation to the obligation of the state that each State shall be obliged to provide protection to persons with stateless persons status as stipulated in the 1954 Convention and the provisions of the International Human Rights Law, the obligations of state protection include the protection of the right to life, the right to employment and even the right to obtain citizenship status. The international legal consequences accepted by the state are listed in Article 39, Article 41, and 42 of the UN Charter. Then for state responsibility are listed under Article 35, Article 36, and Article 37 of UNGA 56/83 of 2001.   Hak Asasi Manusia dan Negara tidak bisa dipisahkan satu sama lain. Keduanya saling terkait dalam hal bagaimana menjamin stabilitas internal di suatu negara. Dengan adanya hak asasi manusia, diharapkan negara tidak sewenang-wenang memperlakukan rakyatnya dan berkewajiban melindungi semua orang di wilayahnya termasuk dalam hal ini para warga negara yang disebutkan dalam Pasal 7 ayat 1 Konvensi terkait Status Orang Tanpa Negara di tahun 1954. Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kewajiban yang harus diambil Negara sehubungan dengan perlindungan orang-orang dengan status orang tanpa kewarganegaraan, dan untuk mengakui konsekuensi hukum serta tanggung jawab negara dalam hal melakukan  tindakan pelanggaran hak asasi manusia terhadap orang-orang dengan status  tanpa kewarganegaraan. Tulisan ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konseptual. Hasil studi menunjukkan bahwa sehubungan dengan kewajiban negara bahwa setiap Negara wajib memberikan perlindungan kepada orang-orang dengan status orang tanpa kewarganegaraan sebagaimana diatur dalam Konvensi 1954 dan ketentuan-ketentuan Hukum Hak Asasi Manusia Internasional, kewajiban perlindungan negara termasuk perlindungan hak untuk hidup, hak untuk bekerja dan bahkan hak untuk mendapatkan status kewarganegaraan. Konsekuensi hukum internasional yang diterima oleh negara tercantum dalam Pasal 39, Pasal 41, dan 42 Piagam PBB. Kemudian untuk tanggung jawab negara tercantum di bawah Pasal 35, Pasal 36, dan Pasal 37 UNGA 56/83 tahun 2001.

‘Past’ Violations under International Human Rights Law: The Indigenous ‘Stolen Generation’ in Australia

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 243-272
Author(s):  
Maria O'Sullivan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Racial Discrimination ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Government

This article examines the debate relating to reparations for ‘past’ human rights violations, with particular focus on the case of the indigenous ‘Stolen Generation’ in Australia. The ‘Stolen Generation’ is a term used to describe the government-sanctioned practice of forced removals of part-Aboriginal children from their indigenous parents and placement into non-indigenous institutions and homes, which occurred in Australia from approximately 1910–1970. The ‘Stolen Generation’ violations present a unique and difficult legal question for international human rights law because they straddle the divide between ‘historic’ violations and contemporary acts, that is, they were committed by Australia after Australia signed key agreements such as the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the Declaration on the Rights of the Child and the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, but prior to its ratification of international human rights treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. This means that bringing a claim under international human rights law in relation to the violations raises a number of problems. The object of this article will be to explore whether Australia can be held responsible under international human rights law for the ‘Stolen Generation’ violations and possible avenues of redress. In this regard, the focus of the article will be on the possible claims victims could make to relevant treaty monitoring bodies and the types of obstacles they would face in doing so. These legal questions are also relevant to the wider debate that is taking place in relation to reparations, namely the extent to which a State can be held legally responsible to provide reparations for past violations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document