subject of any reservations whatsoever since these would be inconsistent with the aim and purpose of Protocol I and undermine its basis”. Chapter 3: International Human Rights Law International human Rights law is set of law which is International legal Framework to protect rights of humans and to promote human rights on regional, civil and domestic level. Concept of human rights, entitles every human being to have hisher basic human rights without any discrimination on the basis of political or religious affiliation, race, sex, nationality, language or any other characteristic. This domain of law is widely accepted and practiced in almost whole world. States have acknowledged the need and significance of Human Rights from the past examples of World wars when Human were tortured, humiliated, and brutally treated.
The first President to make claims about the world importance of the United States was Theodore Roosvelt who believed that the foreign policy was aimed at imposing the American policy for the balance of global powers. Woodrow Wilson appeared to be another personality who believed in the role of the US in promotion of democracy. He was seeking to keep America neutral in international relations performing the role of mediator, which was enhanced by the establishment of international organizations. Franklin Roosvelt also continued the line, and promoted the idea of international peace based on the American
There would be chaos and anarchy everywhere; one could do whatever he/she wants irrespective of it being right or wrong; there would be no communal life as we have nowadays. Moreover, there would be no concept of accountability, responsibility or social goods. Hence, the natural condition of mankind, which is termed as “State of Nature”, would exist if there were no governments, no civilization, no laws, and no common power to restrain human nature. To evolve as human beings, it is imperative for humans to come to an agreement by which they overcome this state of nature and make the world a better place to live in. For this to happen, they entered into two agreements.
The UN Charter is the most recognized sets of rules that guarantee intervention, it save as the most important convention in regards to humanitarian intervention. United Nations Security Council (UNSC) have power to authorize member states to carry out humanitarian intervention base on Article 39 of the UN Charter which empowered the UNSC “ may authorize the UN Security Council the use of force in response to any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression ( UN Charter, 1945). The intervention in Libya under humanitarian ground however have a wider approval of many scholars base on the legitimate mandate operating backing from the UNSC. However, the still exist some ambiguity on the manner of the intervention and it exaggerated mandate of regime change as well as concerns on legal proceeding of participating
Sovereignty for states could mean two things: either in relation to the government within its territory or its relationship with other states. All international laws are drafted in such a way that that the sovereignty of states is preserved unless it involves an issue considered to be a threat to international peace and security. International Criminal law is embodied in the form of treaties and customs that all states have agreed to adhere to however, in exercising their sovereignty, states are only obligated to adhere to statutes or treaties to which they are signatories. Now, the ICC is obligated to deal with matters regarding genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity however, it has been criticized on the basis that since it is an independent entity, it has powers to supersede the sovereignty of states. “Senator John Ashcroft, a US Foreign Relations Committee Member and later the Attorney General in the George W. Bush administration, has argued that a criminal court will comprise sovereignty in a fundamental manner” (Wind, 2009).
The most significant progress since then have included: 1215: The Magna Carta—gave people new rights and made the king subject to the law. 1628: The Appeal of Right—set out the rights of the people. 1776: The United States Declaration of Independence—declared the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 1789: The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen—a charter of France, stating that all natives are unbiased under the law. 1948: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights—the first charter listing the 30 rights to which everyone is entitled.
Common Law and Equity [NAME] [PROFESSOR] [COURSE/UNIVERSITY] [DATE] Common Law and Equity The Relationship between Common Law and equity: Is Equity a gloss on the common law? Equity therefore does not destroy the law, nor create it, but assist it Dudley v Dudley, 1705 Introduction Since ancient time, law had already played an important role in the history of human race. Specifically, it allowed people to live together harmoniously and problem free. Consequently, in today’s world, law is often associated with state and sovereignty. However, these three are also interlinked with national identity in the history of law in the United Kingdom.
Human rights are’’ commonly understood as inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled because she or he is human being’’ human rights are thus conceived as universal [applicable everywhere] and egalitarian [the same for everyone] these rights may exist as natural rights as legal rights, in both national and international law. The doctrine of human rights in international practice within government organizations, has been a cornerstone of public policy around the world .in the idea of human rights it says,’’ if the public discourse of peacetime global society can b said to have a common moral language it is that of human rights.’’ Despite this, the strong claims made by the doctrine of human rights continue to provoke
United States have vivid predilection in favor of enforcement of a foreign award. American law has no uniform standards in governing the enforcement of foreign awards. They totally depend on doctrine of comity to enforce awards and they may also consider the doctrine of reciprocity. Reciprocity is a permissible factor, but not a prerequisite . Majority of the countries constitute rule of practice, convenience and expediency.
A distorted notion of public interest litigation has resulted in this kind of overreaching. PILs, as originally conceived in 1979 by the Supreme Court, were for to protect the rights of those who had no means of access to the courts to protect them. For example, the court issued orders to prevent the exploitation of labourers on construction sites and the release of bonded labourers. The SC was on firm ground to intervene in such matters, as it had a clear mandate to protect the fundamental rights of individuals. Overall the meaning and content of human rights and personal liberty was enlarged by such orders, and the SC 's activism in such cases was lauded in India and abroad.