REGIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COURTS: PROTECTORS OF HUMAN RIGHTS, OR OF NATIONAL AND REGIONAL IDENTITIES – OR BOTH?

Regional human rights systems are between Scylla and Charybdis: On the one hand they should uphold the states‘ human rights treaty obligations. On the other hand, they should arguably show appropriate respect for value pluralism, for various expressions of the majority‘s conception of national identity, and regionally shared modes of ‘balancing‘ rights and other important...

Panel 22, MONDAY 25 June 2018 16:45-18:15

Do ‘Asian Values‘ on human rights exist?

To scholars and practitioners of international human rights law, the 1990s Asian Values Debate was irrefutably debunked by the Asian Financial Crisis and regional rights progress. Yet ASEAN states are stuck in a strange ‘time-warp‘ and invariably resurrect the Asian values defence to ward off ‘intrusive‘ human rights engagement, consequently preventing them attaining their ironically...

Panel 22, MONDAY 25 June 2018 16:45-18:15

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights and its Control over National Practices Concerning Serious Human Rights Violations: Developments, Challenges, and Prospects

In 2001, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) was the first court at the international level that found national legislation, namely, self-amnesty laws on serious violations of human rights, to be null and void. This seminal development was lauded by human rights practitioners and scholars alike. However, subsequent national reactions to the decisions of...

Panel 22, MONDAY 25 June 2018 16:45-18:15

The significance of ‘consensus‘

Why if at all should a perceived (emerging) regional consensus on human rights affect states‘ margin of appreciation? The European Court of Human Rights‘ practice in this regard may respond to a shared regional ‘identity‘ and reduce the fear of supranational interference – but it also runs the risk of failing to uphold human rights.

Panel 22, MONDAY 25 June 2018 16:45-18:15