705 research outputs found
Hollands College: debating multiculturalism: interview met Eva Brems
No full textWeergave van de discussie na de presentatie van Eva Brems in Het Hollands College op 18 maart 2013. Over de tijdsgeest, de publieke opinie, eigentijdse 'vervolging' en onverdraagzaamheid in onze samenleving tav Islam
Procedural protection: an examination of procedural safeguards
No full textThe chapter written by Eva Brems throws light on the often-overlooked phenomenon of hidden procedural safeguards embedded in the substantive Convention rights. In numerous fields of its case law, the Court has in fact added a procedural layer to the scope of substantive Convention rights, by deriving state obligations of a procedural nature from substantive ECHR provisions. The main driver for this development appears to be the wish to make human rights guarantees more effective. The chapter first clarifies the reach of procedural obligations under substantive Convention rights, distinguishing between the requirement that a procedure be available and the more specific procedural guarantees that the Court requires. It goes on to analyse the impact of the ‘proceduralisation’ of substantive rights and the role this plays within the Court’s case law
Islamophobia and the ECtHR : a test case for positive subsidiarity for the protection of Europe’s long-term migrants?
No full textIn Chapter 9, Eva Brems, building on the same case-law on religious freedoms, and also on S.A.S. v France, raises the question of whether the Court treats the cases from long term migrants differently from cases that are brought by ‘authentic' citizens. Brems shows, in particular, that the methodology used by the Court in burqa cases is different from the one used by the Court on ‘gay propaganda’. The difference in the Court’s approach to handling these cases, the author argues, reifies the ‘otherness’ of migrants, and, more specifically, the ‘otherness’ of Muslim migrants in Europe. Brems proposes that the Court should revisit the messages it is sending to national authorities regarding their approaches to multicultural conflicts over Islamic migrant minority practices. This is situated in the framework of ‘positive
subsidiarity’. It is argued that even when the margin of appreciation is a wide one, the Court has a responsibility to offer guidance to states parties on three levels: substantive, procedural, and discursive. The paper then explores the messages sent by the Court to states parties in the field of the restriction of Islamic minority practices. First it does so by comparing what is widely considered the Court’s ‘worst practice’ in this field—the face veil cases—with its ‘best practice’ in a different, but comparable field—the ‘gay propaganda’ cases
Developing the full range of state obligations and integrating intersectionality in a case of involuntary sterilization : CEDAW Committee, 4/2004, AS v Hungary
No full textIn rewriting the CEDAW Committee's view in ASv Hungary, the author has chosen to enrich these views with relevant elements that were collected among the resources of the broader international human rights protection system. Most of these sources are posterior to the views in AS v Hungary. It should be clear that this exercise is in no way intended to criticize the CEDAW Committee for doing a poor job. Rather, the purpose was to write a text that reflects as accurately as possible the rights that an individual in the position of AS has under international human rights law today, as well as the corresponding obligations of the state authorities
Introduction to the volume
No full textIn Belgium, as in France, legal restrictions on relegions dress worn by Muslim women have been on the agenda for over two decades....
Conclusion : conflicting views on conflicting rights
No full textThese concluding reflections analyse the approaches and stances adopted across the volume and, on that basis, highlight some of the bones of contention in current human rights scholarship on conflicting (Convention) rights. The first matter on which opinions diverge is ‘to name or not to name’, i.e. whether or not to explicitly identify a conflict between Convention rights. The second is that of ‘choice versus compromise’, i.e. whether a finding of conflicting rights automatically leads to a solution that prioritizes one right over the other, or whether instead a compromise between the conflicting rights is preferable. The third issue is that of ‘balancing’ as opposed to other approaches that allow to prioritize among conflicting rights. The final issue, on which diverging opinions are discussed, is that of subsidiarity and the margin of appreciation.</p
België gidsland: een haalbare utopie
No full textIn deze lezing bouwt Eva Brems vanuit haar academische expertise en haar ervaring als mensenrechtenactivist een politiek project op. De staatshervorming is niet het alfa en omega van de Belgische politiek. Hoe de staat ook georganiseerd is, belangrijker is de visie die deze uitdraagt. Eva Brems durft dromen van een België dat zijn complexen achter zich laat en een voortrekkersrol durft opnemen in een aantal fundamentele debatten. Eén van de thema’s die aan bod komen is de internationale rol van België. Ooit was België voortrekker van de Europese eenmaking. Recenter werd België koploper in de strijd tegen ontoelaatbare wapens (antipersoonsmijnen, clustermunities, wapens met verarmd uranium). Kan België zich profileren als promotor van het internationaal recht en de mensenrechten in de internationale relaties? Ook de mensenrechten in België krijgen een plaats. Eva Brems stelt vast dat er nog gaten zitten in de bescherming van de fundamentele rechten in ons land, en doet concrete voorstellen om deze te dichten. Ten slotte neemt ze het diversiteitsbeleid onder de loep, in het bijzonder de emancipatie van vrouwen en van culturele en religieuze minderheden
Introduction : rewriting decisions from a perspective of human rights integration
No full textAs a political and ethical project, human rights are one, indivisible and universal. As law however, they are fragmented: found in a multitude of different legal sources, several of which have their own monitoring bodies, each with their own dynamic.
Some scholars have proposed a ‘World Court of Human Rights’ as a means to realize the fundamental unity of the human rights project in international human rights law.1 The present project however, intends to show that even within the current fragmented landscape of international human rights law, it is possible to ‘integrate’ human rights to a significantly higher degree than is generally the case.
The book introduces concrete and innovative proposals for a holistic (‘integrated’) approach to supranational human rights justice through a hands-on legal exercise: the rewriting of decisions of supranational human rights monitoring bodies. The scholars who participated in this project have thus redrafted crucial passages of landmark human rights judgments and decisions. In addition to the rewriting exercise, authors have outlined the methodology and/or theoretical framework that guided their approaches and explained how and why, in their opinion, human rights monitoring
bodies may adopt an integrated approach to human rights law
- …
