Spelling suggestions: "subject:"invisibility"" "subject:"divisibility""
11 |
Shifting institutional paradigms to advance socio-economic rights in AfricaUdombana, Nsongurua Johnson 31 October 2007 (has links)
The thesis offers new paradigms for advancing socio-economic rights in Africa. Many States Parties to human rights instruments have failed to promote the common welfare of their citizens partly because of the justiciability debate, which continues to complicate intellectual and practical efforts at advancing socio-economic rights. The debate also prevents the normative development of these rights through adjudication. Furthermore, traditional human rights theory and practice have been state-centric, with non-state actors largely ignored in the identification, formulation, and implementation of human rights norms. Yet, the involvement of non-state entities in international arena has limited states' autonomies considerably, with serious implications for human rights. Transnational Corporations (TNCs) have capacities to foster economic well-being, development, tenchnological improvement, and wealth, but they also often cause deleterious human rights impacts through thei employment practices, environmental policies, relationships with suppliers and consumers, interactions with governments, and other activities.
The thesis argues that socio-economic rights are normative and justiciable. It argues that traditional approaches are no longer sufficient to secure human rights and calls for a dismantatling of some structures erected by doctrinal systems; for realignment of relationships among social institutions; and for integrated bundles of fundamental interests that harness benefits of human rights norms and widen the landscape to commit both formal and informal regimes. Fashioning out a new paradigm for advancement of socio-economic rights requires addressing state capacity. It requires an integrative and global interpretive framework. It requires, finally, a new paradigm to commit non-state actors in Africa. The illustrative chapter uses the rights to work and to social security as templates for some prescriptions towards reaslising socio-economic rights in Africa. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.
|
12 |
Le droit international et l'Etat de droit : enjeux et défis de l'action internationale à travers l'exemple d'Haïti / International Law and the Rule of Law : issues and chalenges of the international action through the example of HaitiMondelice, Mulry 21 September 2015 (has links)
La société internationale promeut l’État de droit notamment depuis le début des années 1990, en particulier en Haïti. En quête d’une démocratie introuvable et ravagé par des crises politiques et humanitaires, cet État fait constater les difficultés de l’action internationale. Interdisciplinaire, la thèse, centrée sur l’accès à la justice, examine comment et dans quelles mesures les normes utilisées pour la promotion de l’État de droit peuvent constituer une obligation juridique de l’État et un moyen de changement. Invoquant le droit international protégeant la personne, États, organisations internationales et acteurs non étatiques brandissent l’État de droit dans des circonstances variées, concourant à son élasticité au coeur d’une institutionnalisation évolutive aux niveaux national et international. Le cas haïtien montre que le droit international contribue à une structuration et une consolidation de l’État de droit par la recherche d’un meilleur encadrement de l’État dont les compétences sont limitées par un droit interne conforme au droit international et des institutions solides, protégeant les droits et libertés dont le respect est surveillé par divers mécanismes et institutions. Néanmoins, articulation entre droit interne et droit international, État de droit et immunités, souveraineté, relations entre État et membres permanents du Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU, faiblesses structurelles entravant une culture favorable à la primauté du droit, ce sont autant de limites à l’accès effectif à la justice. Il apparaît donc nécessaire de réorienter les actions menées par des réformes transversales pour de meilleures pratiques au sein de l’État valorisant la personne. / Since the beginning of the 90’s, international community bosltered the Rule of Law, particularly in Haiti. Looking in vain to establish a democracy and devastated by humanitarian and political crises, this State emphasizes the difficulties of acting at the international level. This interdisciplinary thesis focuses on access to justice as a guarantee of rights and freedoms. It examines how and to what extent the norms used to promote the Rule of Law can be considered as States’ legal duties and as a mean of change. Appealing to international human rights law, States, international organizations and non-state actors use different legal sources of the Rule of Law in various circumstances and contribute to its elasticity in the context of progressive institutionalization at the national and international levels. The Haitian example shows that by being internationalized, the Rule of Law becomes structured and consolidated through improved State guidance, the exercise of its competences being part of a national law that respects international law, and because of strong institutions protecting rights and freedoms of which the respect is monitored by various mechanisms and institutions. Nonetheless, the relationships between national and international law, the Rule of Law and immunities, sovereignty, relations between State and permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, as well as structural weaknesses impeding the development of a culture favorable to the Rule of Law restrain individuals’ effective access to justice. Therefore, it seems necessary to reorient actions through transversal reforms that should result in better practices of valuing human beings.
|
13 |
Shifting institutional paradigms to advance socio-economic rights in AfricaUdombana, Nsongurua Johnson 31 October 2007 (has links)
The thesis offers new paradigms for advancing socio-economic rights in Africa. Many States Parties to human rights instruments have failed to promote the common welfare of their citizens partly because of the justiciability debate, which continues to complicate intellectual and practical efforts at advancing socio-economic rights. The debate also prevents the normative development of these rights through adjudication. Furthermore, traditional human rights theory and practice have been state-centric, with non-state actors largely ignored in the identification, formulation, and implementation of human rights norms. Yet, the involvement of non-state entities in international arena has limited states' autonomies considerably, with serious implications for human rights. Transnational Corporations (TNCs) have capacities to foster economic well-being, development, tenchnological improvement, and wealth, but they also often cause deleterious human rights impacts through thei employment practices, environmental policies, relationships with suppliers and consumers, interactions with governments, and other activities.
The thesis argues that socio-economic rights are normative and justiciable. It argues that traditional approaches are no longer sufficient to secure human rights and calls for a dismantatling of some structures erected by doctrinal systems; for realignment of relationships among social institutions; and for integrated bundles of fundamental interests that harness benefits of human rights norms and widen the landscape to commit both formal and informal regimes. Fashioning out a new paradigm for advancement of socio-economic rights requires addressing state capacity. It requires an integrative and global interpretive framework. It requires, finally, a new paradigm to commit non-state actors in Africa. The illustrative chapter uses the rights to work and to social security as templates for some prescriptions towards reaslising socio-economic rights in Africa. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.
|
14 |
La coaction en droit pénal / Co-perpetration in criminal lawBaron, Elisa 07 December 2012 (has links)
Le coauteur est traditionnellement défini en droit pénal comme l’individu qui, agissant avec un autre, réunit sur sa tête l’ensemble des éléments constitutifs de l’infraction. Pourtant, il est permis de douter de la pertinence de cette affirmation tant la jurisprudence comme la doctrine en dévoient le sens.En réalité, loin d’être cantonnée à une simple juxtaposition d’actions, la coaction doit être appréhendée comme un mode à part entière de participation à l’infraction. En effet, elle apparaît comme un titre d’imputation à mi-chemin entre l’action et la complicité, auxquelles elle emprunte certains caractères. Autrement dit, elle se révèle être un mode de participation à sa propre infraction. Surtout, son particularisme est assuré par l’interdépendance unissant les coauteurs : parce que chacun s’associe à son alter ego, tous sont placés sur un pied d’égalité. Ces différents éléments, qui se retrouvent dans sa notion et dans son régime, permettent ainsi d’affirmer la spécificité de la coaction tout en renforçant la cohérence entre les différents modes de participation criminelle. / In criminal law, the co-perpetrator is classically presented as an individual who, acting jointly with another, gathers all the constitutive elements of the offence. However, one may harbor doubts concerning the relevance of this assertion since both case law and legal scholars denature its meaning.Actually, far from being limited to a mere juxtaposition of perpetrations, co-perpetration must be understood as a full mode of participation in the offence. Indeed, it appears as a form of imputation halfway between perpetration and complicity, from which it borrows some characteristics. In other words, it proves to be a mode of participation in one’s own offence. Above all, its particularism is provided by the interdependence between the co-perpetrators : because each of them joins forces with his alter ego, all are placed on an equal footing. These elements, which are found both in it’s concept and in it’s regime, demonstrate thereby the specificity of co-perpetration while strengthening the coherence of the different modes of criminal participation.
|
15 |
L’existence d’une hiérarchie juridique favorisant la protection des convictions religieuses au sein des droits fondamentaux canadiens / The existence of a legal hierarchy advantaging the protection of religious convictions in the Canadian Catalog of Human RightsLampron, Louis-Philippe 14 December 2010 (has links)
Depuis l’arrêt Dagenais c. Radio-Canada, rendu en 1994, la Cour suprême du Canada n’a jamais remis en cause le principe selon lequel il ne doit exister aucune hiérarchie juridique entre les droits et libertés protégés par les chartes canadienne et québécoise. Or, une revue attentive de la jurisprudence canadienne en matière de protection des convictions religieuses nous a permis d’identifier une certaine réticence sinon un « certain malaise » des institutions judiciaires lorsqu’elles doivent déterminer des limites claires au-delà desquelles les revendications fondées sur les convictions religieuses ne peuvent plus bénéficier d’une protection constitutionnelle ou quasi-constitutionnelle. Cette « réticence judiciaire » étant toute particulière aux dispositions protégeant les convictions religieuses au Canada, il nous a semblé plausible que ses impacts juridiques soient symptomatiques de l’établissement implicite – mais bien réel – d’une hiérarchie juridique matérielle (ou systémique) entre les différents droits fondamentaux protégés par les chartes canadienne et québécoise. En nous fondant sur un cadre d’analyse théorique inspiré par les travaux du professeur Rik Torfs, de l’Université catholique de Louvain en Belgique, et au moyen d’une étude focalisée sur le contexte des relations de travail, nous entendons démontrer que l’état actuel du droit canadien et québécois concernant les revendications fondées sur les différentes croyances et coutumes religieuses témoigne de l’application d’un modèle hiérarchique (le « modèle de confiance ») qui assigne aux dispositions concernant la protection des convictions religieuses individuelles une place parmi les plus élevées de cette même hiérarchie. Nous espérons ainsi contribuer de manière significative à la théorie du droit par l’atteinte de trois objectifs principaux : (1) Établir et mettre en œuvre une méthode permettant d’identifier une hiérarchie matérielle entre deux ensembles de droits fondamentaux ; (2) Mettre à jour l’étroite relation susceptible d’exister entre les différents modèles nationaux de gestion du pluralisme religieux et le concept de hiérarchie matérielle entre droits fondamentaux ; et (3) Établir l’existence d’une hiérarchie matérielle entre droits fondamentaux de nature constitutionnelle au Canada, par l’entremise de la démonstration du déséquilibre hiérarchique favorisant les dispositions protégeant les convictions religieuses au sein du plus large ensemble des droits et libertés de nature constitutionnelle au Canada / Since Dagenais c. Radio-Canada, rendered in 1994, the Supreme Court of Canada has never questioned the principle of “no legal hierarchy between the different Human Rights protected by the Canadian and Quebec charters. However, a careful review of Canadian jurisprudence on the protection of religious beliefs permits to detect a certain reluctance if not a "discomfort" of judicial institutions when they must identify clear boundaries beyond which the claims based on religious beliefs can not be constitutionnaly (or quasi-constitutionnaly) protected. This "judicial reluctance" being particular to provisions protecting religious convictions in Canada, it seemed possible to us that its impacts may be symptomatic of the implicit - but real - establishment a legal hierarchy between the various Human Rights protected by the Canadian and Quebec charters. Based on a theoretical framework inspired by the work of Rik Torfs, Professor in the Catholic University of Leuven in Belgium, and through a study focused on the context of labor relations, we intend to demonstrate that the current state of Canadian and Quebec law on claims based on different religious beliefs and customs underlies the application of a hierarchical model (the "trust model") which assigns to the provisions protecting individual religious beliefs a place among the highest in the same hierarchy. In doing so, we hope to contribute significantly to the theory of law by achieving three main objectives : (1) To establish and implement a method permitting to identify a material hierarchy between two sets of fundamental rights, (2) To expose the close relationship that may exist between the different national models of management of religious pluralism and the concept of material hierarchy among human rights, and (3) To establish the existence of a material hierarchy between constitutional Human rights in Canada through the demonstration of hierarchical imbalance favoring the provisions protecting religious beliefs within the broader set of constitutionnal Human Rights in Canada
|
Page generated in 0.0766 seconds