Human rights are a source of friction between Southeast Asian and European governments. Southeast Asian politicians generally emphasise principles of sovereignty and non-interference in internal... Show moreHuman rights are a source of friction between Southeast Asian and European governments. Southeast Asian politicians generally emphasise principles of sovereignty and non-interference in internal matters, while their European counterparts tend to champion democracy, human rights and good governance beyond their borders. The differences in approach, however, do not seem as daunting today as they once did. Show less
What can international civil society do to further justice for victims and survivors of war crimes and crimes against humanity in cases where perpetrators will never be brought to trial? Is it time... Show moreWhat can international civil society do to further justice for victims and survivors of war crimes and crimes against humanity in cases where perpetrators will never be brought to trial? Is it time to look beyond official state and international organs? Initiatives from civil society can return dignity to survivors, empower ordinary people, educate the public and create lasting records where official justice has been denied. Show less
Yes, according to two landmark decisions of 2006. In January, the High Court of South Korea ordered Dow Chemical and Monsanto, US producers of Agent Orange used during the Vietnam War, to... Show moreYes, according to two landmark decisions of 2006. In January, the High Court of South Korea ordered Dow Chemical and Monsanto, US producers of Agent Orange used during the Vietnam War, to compensate South Korean troops affected by the agents. In June, a French court ordered both the French government and the state railway company SNCF to compensate two families of Jews deported during the Nazi occupation. Will these rulings have any effect on similar cases pending elsewhere? How might they affect law governing the responsibility of non-state actors for crimes under international law? Show less
Beginning in October 2005 a new campaign against Cambodia was launched in the international press. It alleged, as does much news from that country, heavy-handed repression and human rights... Show moreBeginning in October 2005 a new campaign against Cambodia was launched in the international press. It alleged, as does much news from that country, heavy-handed repression and human rights violations by Prime Minister Hun Sen, citing, among other sources, Brad Adams - a prominent figure in the international NGO Human Rights Watch, which like all such self-defined organisations is assumed by the public to be defending the true and the good. Show less
In a time of terrorist attacks and other crises, governments are faced with the question how to protect the population and the national security. Many states tend to use instruments and take... Show moreIn a time of terrorist attacks and other crises, governments are faced with the question how to protect the population and the national security. Many states tend to use instruments and take measures that infringe upon human rights and individual freedoms in order to protect national security. At the same time, UN Security Council resolutions stress that the 'fight against tarrorism' should take place within the borders set by the rule of law, by international human rights treaties and international humanitarian law. Next to that, international human rights contain a certain 'positive obligation' for states to adequately protect national security and the right to life of the population against terrorist attacks. Therefore, there is a tense and also complicated relation between human rights and national security. The question arises whether there is a way to secure that human rights and national security are compatible entities. This study analyses the relevant articles from human rights treaties and the jurisprudence of international monitoring organs (European Court of Human Rights/UN Human Rights Committee) in order to find out whether international law leaves room for states to limit or even derogate human rights in states of emergency or other situations that threaten national security. The study shows that international law indeed does leave some room, but only limited. In very serious crises that amount to a public emergency threatening the life of the nation, states may derogate from the ordinary level of human right protection, but even during such serious crisis situations there is no 'carte blanche' for states to take any measures they deem necessary. Certain human rights are given absolute protection, even in crisis situations, and emergency measures that interfere with non-absolute human rights should pass a test of strict necessity and proportionality. In this field new norms and concepts have been developed during the last decades. It is, however, clear that the international monitoring of human rights protection during states of emergency and other severe crises needs improvement. Show less
