No description available.

Yes / This paper examines the conceptual origins of individual rights that shaped the UN and UNESCO model of human rights and the origins of group rights as they emerged in the post–colonial era to challenge inequality. It argues that the idea of rights to self determination, associated initially with decolonization in Africa based on equal statehood status in international relations, has, since decolonization, reinvigorated the promotion of group or peoples’ rights as a framework for challenging poverty and inequality, including access or rights to development.

Thesis advisor: David M. Rasmussen / Following the idea that human rights are anchored in many cultures and find their support in many traditions, the contemporary human rights corpus is a fruit of a long history whose roots can be traced back to different societies in addressing the universal questions of injustice. If one adopts such a historical evolution of human rights, their universality might be affirmed on the assumption that they are coexistent to every human society. This view is, however, challenged by scholars who claim that the current human rights regime does not owe anything to other cultures, since they are essentially Western. The consequence of such an understanding touches the heart of the human rights’ perennial question concerning their universality, and it is the source of the Third World’s critiques. Indeed, if conceptually, culturally and historically, human rights are Western, how do they become universal? This question was first raised by the American Anthropological Association in its now well-known 1947 statement, even before the existing human rights instruments were framed. Today, it has been taken up by some Third World critics. For them, human right movement is an imperialistic swirl of Western liberalism upon other societies under the banner of United States of America that has replaced the former European imperialistic powers such as France and United Kingdom. According to these critics, there is no other area where human rights are imperialistically used by the West than in the so-called humanitarian intervention. Usually evoked as an urgent need to protect human rights, humanitarian intervention is seen as another name for the neo-colonialism in the Third World, as it is carried out by Western Powers against states in the Third World. Two challenges arise from these views. On the one hand, because of their Western origin, human rights are decried as Western and, therefore, they should not be imposed on other cultures. On the other hand, their imperialistic use by the West is an acute difficulty stemming from the global political context after the fall of Communism as a competing ideology with liberalism in 1990s. These challenges affect the theoretical justification as well as the implementation of human rights. For, according to the critics, human rights are purposely framed in liberal terms because they have to pursue and advance the Western project of conquering the whole world. Therefore, they claim, the actual spread of Western liberalism under human rights label is neither incidental nor accidental; it is a continuation of the Western imperialism which started long ago with economic exploitation, slavery and colonization of the rest of the world. Human rights is only a neutral term to translate the same reality. To those who reply that the contemporary human rights regime, starting with Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is a fruit of an international group with a diverse background, the critics respond that all of them were trained in the Western culture. And if one presents the role of the local human rights activists in the non-Western world, the critics consider them as Western mercenaries in local colors. That is why, while it springs from the cultural critique, the imperialistic challenge to human rights is a serious one because it attacks the human rights regime in its purpose and in its practice. It does not reject human rights only because they are extrinsic to the non-Western culture –cultural relativism—; rather, human rights are rejected because they are channels of oppression and exploitation as was and has always been the Western imperialism. The question now is: what do human rights become in this case? Is it possible to rescue them from both the cultural critics and imperialistic crusaders? Such a project would aim at maintaining and affirming their historicity as Western, yet showing that they are open to the possibility of being practiced in other cultures and other contexts. That it is the goal of this dissertation whose thesis is that, by domesticating human rights we retrieve the purpose of human rights of protecting and enhancing human dignity and, at the same time, it becomes possible to satisfactorily address the cultural and imperialistic challenges. Indeed, instead of thinking that people adopt and use human rights discourse because they like their individualistic side, the domestication of human rights pays attention to the process through which human rights as moral norms are incorporated in local cultures. Relying on the anthropological works that focus on the way human rights norms are integrated in different cultural contexts, this project endeavors to build a normative account of human rights based on these local practices. Philosophically speaking, domestication of human rights takes up Beitz’s insight of human rights as an emerging practice, and brings it to the beneficiaries of human rights purpose, instead of remaining at the legal level where only states are accepted as credible interlocutors, while they are the most suspected violators of human rights. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2016. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Philosophy.

This thesis explores the meaning and content of s. 41 of the Official Languages Act of Canada, which imposes certain duties on all federal institutions towards French- and English-language minority communities. While vitally important as a component of Canada's language rights archictecture, the nature and content of s. 41 as a legal norm remain woefully unclear. The immediate aim is to determine: (1) whether s. 41 confers a right to specific measures in particular cases; (2) whether such rights are individual or collective; and (3) if collective, what sort of interests are protected. Section 41 presents a number of interpretive challenges. First, it uses terminology which is undefined in the Act and yet has no self-evident meaning. Thus, the nature of the primary legal subject, 'linguistic minority communities' (LMCs), is unclear, as are the nature of the protected interests, 'vitality' and 'development'. Second, the interpretive principles developed by the case-law for official language rights rely on a conceptual framework that is vague and under-theorized. Key components of that framework, like the concept of a necessary link between language and culture, have yet to be fully explored, either in the case-law or in legal scholarship. This presents an acute problem in the case of s. 41, where the content of these concepts will likely prove dispositive. In order to grapple with these challenges, this thesis develops an account of language rights as collective rights. Drawing on the philosophical literature and existing case-law, I argue that LMCs should be conceived of as collectivities rather than mere aggregates of individuals, and that a number of language rights, such as s. 41 of the OLA, and ss. 16.1 and 23 of the Charter, aim to protect the collective interests of these collectivities. I then define some of these interests from both an empirical and a normative perspective. I conclude by arguing that s. 41 of the OLA protects an 'autonomy interest', which both prohibits federal institutions from interfering with existing LMC autonomy, and provides a basis for claiming enhancements to that autonomy, within the confines of the statutory mandate of the institution in question.

Please read the abstract in the 00front of this document / Thesis (LLD)--University of Pretoria, 2006. / Centre for Human Rights / LLD / Unrestricted

The purpose of this study is to analyse the effectiveness of the Uganda Human Rights Commission UHRC), which possesses judicial powers vis-à-vis the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice of Ghana (CHRAJ) and the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) which do not possess such powers. The difference notwithstanding, all the three have been rated as the best national institutions in Africa. Due to time and space constraints, one will focus specifically with the mandates of the three commissions and in particular, on the different or distinct mandates assigned to them, namely, that of CHRAJ to deal with corruption, that of SAHRC to deal with economic, cultural and social rights and UHRC of dealing with torture matters and generally of constituting a tribunal. This study was motivated by the fact that Lesotho will be setting up a national institution in 2008 and one would like to draw lessons from these institutions and pick up elements that could best suit Lesotho. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2007. / Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Law University of Pretoria, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Masters of Law (LLM in Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa). Prepared under the supervision of Prof Kofi Quashigah of the Faculty of Law, University of Ghana, Legon / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/ / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

The purpose of this work is to examine the nature or form of disability rights, and whether the African regional human rights system adequately protects them. In other words, the study tries to understand whether the current appalling status of people living with disabilities can be blamed on normative paucity of the African human rights system. The author will therefore comb the African human rights instruments to determine this, and based on the findings, will assess the propriety or otherwise of adopting a disability specific instrument for the continent and recommend accordingly. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2007. / A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Law University of Pretoria, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Masters of Law (LLM in Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa). Prepared under the supervision of Christine Dowuona-Hammond Faculty of Law, University of Ghana, Legon Accra. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/ / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

"Implementation of human rights instruments, and protection and promotion of human rights at the national level is a contemporary phenomenon that is still developing. The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and the Paris Principles provide for the creation of national institutions to carry out this task. This has led to national human rights institutions (NHRIs) becoming more prominent actors in the national, regional and international arena. However, NHRIs still face the problems of legitimacy, operational constraints, and ignorant population. These factors constrain the effective functioning of these institutions. It should be noted that the key constraint on the effective functioning of NHRIs is legitimacy. Such institutions usually find themselves not legitimate in the eyes of the people they are created to serve. The above brings to mind the question - what makes a NHRI effective? Generally, there is no consensus as to the effectiveness of NHRIs This study has therefore been triggered by widespread perceptions and reports within civil society that such institutions are left at the mercy of governments in power. Others have seen such institutions as a "double-edged sword" - in the best of circumstances, they strengthen democratic institutions but they can also be mere straw men, part of government's administrative machinery to scuttle international scrutiny. Another issue that has actuated this study is the misconception that people have about some NHRIs. This misconception originates not so much from the actual operation of human rights commissions but from the history of past ombudsman institutions that have purported to protect human rights." -- Chapter 1. / Prepared under the supervision of Professor Michelo Hansungule at the Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria, South Africa / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2002. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

Thesis (doctoral)--University of Utrecht, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 409-427) and index.

The world has seen gradual evolution of regional human rights arrangements. The adoption by the UN General Assembly of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948, was followed by the creation of numerous regional instruments that address concerns of particular importance in the regional context. Three world regions, Africa, the Americas and Europe, have established their respective regional instruments together with the supervisory mechanism, such as commissions and courts. The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, with its emphasis on group rights and individual duties challenges the Western liberal account of rights, as expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The cultural differences brought to the fore not only the tension between individual and group rights but also the question as to whether of the universalism of human rights is possible. The study advocates for a moderate universalism of human rights, which can only be achieved through a dialogue among different cultural approaches to the notion of human rights. This study examines the content and substance of human rights norms of the African system with a view to recommending the possible strategies for their reform. Its central thesis is, the system is rather weak and therefore needs to be reformed. Toward this end, the study analyses the provisions of the African Charter. Thereafter, it explores its weaknesses and proposes strategies for their reform. The African human rights mechanisms face a number of common and particular challenges. Prospectively, Africa is going through a tremendous and interesting phase. These challenges are not insurmountable. / Constitutional, International and Indigenous Law / LL.D.