Number of results to display per page
Search Results
22. Enhancing Multilateral Support for Security Sector Reform:A Mapping Study covering the United Nations, the African Union, the European Union, and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
- Author:
- Vincenza Scherrer and Alba Bescos Pou
- Publication Date:
- 01-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance (DCAF)
- Abstract:
- Multilateral organizations are playing an important role in shaping the SSR agenda through the development of policy and guidance and by engaging in the provision of a wide range of SSR support on the ground. However, despite their significant engagement in this area, there is no predictability in terms of the type of support that multilateral organizations will take on. While policy frameworks concur that international support should be well coordinated, the support provided by these organizations tends to be compartmentalized in practice. As a result, considerable time is often lost while each organization separately assesses a conflict, maps what others are doing, and agrees on a division of labour. The report presents the findings of a multi-year research project on the approaches of the United Nations (UN), the African Union (AU), the European Union (EU), and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) to supporting nationally-led SSR processes. The study aims at developing an empirically-based understanding of the roles and potential comparative advantages of these organizations in SSR support, as well as avenues for enhanced cooperation. For this purpose, the study examines the following three categories related to the role of multilateral organizations in SSR support: normative frameworks, institutional capacities, and operational practices. This report was commissioned from DCAF by the Security Sector Reform Unit (SSRU) of the United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO).
- Topic:
- Security, Human Rights, Peacekeeping, Reform, and Multilateralism
- Political Geography:
- Geneva, Africa, Europe, United Nations, European Union, and African Union
23. Caught in the middle: A human rights and peace-building approach to migration governance in the Sahel
- Author:
- Fransje Molenaar, Jérôme Tubiana, and Clotilde Warin
- Publication Date:
- 12-2018
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
- Abstract:
- In recent years, the Sahel region has attracted the attention of European policy makers aiming to prevent Europe-bound irregular migrants from reaching the Libyan coastline. Policies implemented under this approach propose to address the root causes of irregular migration from non-EU countries, such as through support for socio-economic development of countries of origin, the dismantling of smuggling and trafficking networks, and the definition of actions for the better application of return policies. Does this approach to mixed migration governance take sufficient stock of the larger development and stability contexts within which irregular migration and human smuggling takes place? Does migration governance suffciently address the human rights consequences and destabilising effects that migratory movements and the policies that address them may have? And how could human rights and peace-building principles – that is, processes and measures that contribute to a society’s capacity to address conflict in a constructive manner – be incorporated to achieve more holistic and conflict-sensitive migration governance? In their report authors Fransje Molenaar, Jérôme Tubiana and Clotilde Warin address these issues and find that the implementation of migration policies in the Sahel has contributed to an increase in human rights abuses and risks for migrants and refugees, as well as rises in human trafficking and forced labour. They argue that national and sub-national institutions and capacities be supported to take the lead in comprehensive and sustainable migration management and migrant protection presenting the following recommendations: Contribute to the development of (sub)national migrant protection frameworks and structures; Ensure that migration governance benefits local communities and addresses the (perceived) negative effects of migration on host communities; Strengthen community security and ensure that securitised migration policies do not harm local communities. In their conclusion, the authors also offer concrete pointers to implement these recommendations.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, Migration, Governance, Trafficking, and Peace
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Europe, Libya, and Sahel
24. The Dawn of Article 18 ECHR: A Safeguard Against European Rule of Law Backsliding?
- Author:
- Floris Tan
- Publication Date:
- 12-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Goettingen Journal of International Law
- Institution:
- The Goettingen Journal of International Law
- Abstract:
- This article examines an underexplored avenue for the protection of the rule of law in Europe: Article 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This provision prohibits States from restricting the rights enshrined in the European Convention for any other purpose than provided for in the Convention. In this contribution, the author argues, based on a combination of textual, systematic and purposive interpretations of Article 18, that the provision is meant to safeguard against rule of law backsliding, in particular because governmental restrictions of human rights under false pretenses present a clear danger to the principles of legality and the supremacy of law. Such limitations of rights under the guise of legitimate purposes go against the assumption of good faith underlying the Convention, which presupposes that all States share a common goal of reinforcing human rights and the rule of law. Article 18 could therefore function as an early warning that European States are at risk of becoming an illiberal democracy or even of reverting to totalitarianism and the destruction of the rule of law. The article then goes on to assess the extent to which the European Court’s case-law reflects and realizes this aim of rule of law protection, and finds that whereas the Court’s earlier case-law left very little room for an effective application of Article 18, the November 2017 Grand Chamber judgment in Merabishvili v. Georgia has made large strides in effectuating the provision’s raison d’être. As the article shows, however, even under this new interpretation, challenges remain.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Law, and Rule of Law
- Political Geography:
- Europe
25. The Arctic Railway and the Sámi: Reconciling national interests with indigenous rights
- Author:
- Agne Cepinsktye
- Publication Date:
- 12-2018
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- Finland and Norway are planning to build the Arctic Railway, stretching from Rovaniemi to Kirkenes through the homeland of the indigenous Sámi people. The state governments have acknowledged their duty to consult with the Sámi, whose culture and livelihoods the railway would affect, but the Sámi have dismissed the consultation efforts thus far as inadequate and have denounced the project. The dispute has exposed the ambiguity of the state’s duty to consult with indigenous peoples: international law firmly establishes the duty but does not prescribe specific rules for carrying it out. In Norway, the domestic regulatory framework concerning the consultation duty is more evolved and the practice of implementation is more consistent than in Finland, but both states still lack an effective legal incorporation of the duty. Despite the ambiguity, the scope of the consultation duty is determined by its purpose: creating favourable conditions to reduce power disparity between the state and indigenous peoples in order to reach an agreement that reconciles national interests with indigenous rights.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, Regional Cooperation, Indigenous, Transportation, and Railways
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Finland, Norway, and Arctic
26. The Impact of the European Court of Human Rights on Justice Sector Reform in the Republic of Moldova
- Author:
- Judithanne Scourfield McLauchlan
- Publication Date:
- 11-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
- Institution:
- Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
- Abstract:
- For this study, I reviewed the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights against the Republic of Moldova and the corresponding reports of the Committee of Ministers from 1997 through 2014. In addition, I interviewed more than 25 lawyers, judges, and human rights advocates. After analyzing the effectiveness of the Court in terms of compliance with the judgments in specific cases (individual measures), I will assess the broader impact of these decisions (general measures) on legal reforms and public policy in the Republic of Moldova. I will evaluate the effectiveness of the decisions of the ECtHR in the context of the implementation of Moldova’s Justice Sector Reform Strategy (2011-2015), the Council of Europe’s Action Plan to Support Democratic Reforms in the Republic of Moldova (2013-2016), and Moldova’s National Human Rights Action Plan (2011-2014). My findings will offer insights into the constraints faced by the ECtHR in implementing its decisions and the impact of the ECtHR on national legal systems.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, Reform, European Union, and Judiciary
- Political Geography:
- Europe and Moldova
27. The Scope of Application of the Charter’s Right to Good Administration of the European Union
- Author:
- Irena Cuculoska
- Publication Date:
- 02-2018
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal of Liberty and International Affairs
- Institution:
- Institute for Research and European Studies (IRES)
- Abstract:
- Article 41 of the Charter for Fundamental Rights of the EU guarantees the right to good administration as a fundamental right of the EU citizens. It seems from the wording that Article 41 applies only to the institutions, bodies, and agencies of the Union, without mentioning the Member States. This gives it a narrower scope than that given in Article 51.1 concerning the scope of the Charter as a whole. This paper discusses the question of applicability of the right to good administration regarding the implications of Article 41 in this respect. The doubt that stems from this is whether the content of 51.1 prevails or, on the contrary, it must be ignored and taken as reference to the particular provision in Article 41.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, Treaties and Agreements, Governance, European Union, and Political Rights
- Political Geography:
- Europe
28. The Global Exchange (Summer 2017)
- Author:
- David J. Bercuson, Hugh Stephens, Robert Hage, Robert Huebert, Stefanie Von Hlatky, Lindsay Rodman, Stephen M. Saideman, Hugh Segal, and Vanja Petricevic
- Publication Date:
- 06-2017
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- The Global Exchange
- Institution:
- Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
- Abstract:
- The Global Exchange is the Canadian Global Affairs Institute’s quarterly magazine featuring topical articles written by our fellows and other contributing experts. Each issue contains approximately a dozen articles exploring political and strategic challenges in international affairs and Canadian foreign and defence policy. This Summer 2017 issue covers trade deals, human rights, defense, cybersecurity and more.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, NATO, Human Rights, Territorial Disputes, Cybersecurity, Trans-Pacific Partnership, Free Trade, Transparency, and Deterrence
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, Canada, North America, and Arctic
29. The “Right to Remain Here” as an Evolving Component of Global Refugee Protection: Current Initiatives and Critical Questions
- Author:
- Daniel Kanstroom
- Publication Date:
- 01-2017
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- Journal on Migration and Human Security
- Institution:
- Center for Migration Studies of New York
- Abstract:
- This article considers the relationship between two human rights discourses (and two specific legal regimes): refugee and asylum protection and the evolving body of international law that regulates expulsions and deportations. Legal protections for refugees and asylum seekers are, of course, venerable, well-known, and in many respects still cherished, if challenged and perhaps a bit frail. Anti-deportation discourse is much newer, multifaceted, and evolving. It is in many respects a young work in progress. It has arisen in response to a rising tide of deportations, and the worrisome development of massive, harsh deportation machinery in the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Mexico, Australia, and South Africa, among others. This article’s main goal is to consider how these two discourses do and might relate to each other. More specifically, it suggests that the development of procedural and substantive rights against removal — as well as rights during and after removal — aids our understanding of the current state and possible future of the refugee protection regime. The article’s basic thesis is this: The global refugee regime, though challenged both theoretically and in practice, must be maintained and strengthened. Its historical focus on developing criteria for admission into safe states, on protections against expulsion (i.e., non-refoulement), and on regimes of temporary protection all remain critically important. However, a focus on other protections for all noncitizens facing deportation is equally important. Deportation has become a major international system that transcends the power of any single nation-state. Its methods have migrated from one regime to another; its size and scope are substantial and expanding; its costs are enormous; and its effects frequently constitute major human rights violations against millions who do not qualify as refugees. In recent years there has been increasing reliance by states on generally applicable deportation systems, led in large measure by the United States’ radical 25 year-plus experiment with large-scale deportation. Europe has also witnessed a rising tide of deportation, some of which has developed in reaction to European asylum practices. Deportation has been facilitated globally (e.g., in Australia) by well-funded, efficient (but relatively little known) intergovernmental idea sharing, training, and cooperation. This global expansion, standardization, and increasing intergovernmental cooperation on deportation has been met by powerful — if in some respects still nascent — human rights responses by activists, courts, some political actors, and scholars. It might seem counterintuitive to think that emerging ideas about deportation protections could help refugees and asylum seekers, as those people by definition often have greater rights protections both in admission and expulsion. However, the emerging anti-deportation discourses should be systematically studied by those interested in the global refugee regime for three basic reasons. First, what Matthew Gibney has described as “the deportation turn” has historically been deeply connected to anxiety about asylum seekers. Although we lack exact figures of the number of asylum seekers who have been subsequently expelled worldwide, there seems little doubt that it has been a significant phenomenon and will be an increasingly important challenge in the future. The two phenomena of refugee/asylum protections and deportation, in short, are now and have long been linked. What has sometimes been gained through the front door, so to speak, may be lost through the back door. Second, current deportation human rights discourses embody creative framing models that might aid constructive critique and reform of the existing refugee protection regime. They tend to be more functionally oriented, less definitional in terms of who warrants protection, and more fluid and transnational. Third, these discourses offer important specific rights protections that could strengthen the refugee and asylum regime, even as we continue to see weakening state support for the basic 1951/1967 protection regime. This is especially true in regard to the extraterritorial scope of the (deporting) state’s obligations post-deportation. This article particularly examines two initiatives in this emerging field: The International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Expulsion of Aliens and the draft Declaration on the Rights of Expelled and Deported Persons developed through the Boston College Post-Deportation Human Rights Project (of which the author is a co-director). It compares their provisions to the existing corpus of substantive and procedural protections for refugees relating to expulsion and removal. It concludes with consideration of how these discourses may strengthen protections for refugees while also helping to develop more capacious and protective systems in the future.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, International Cooperation, Border Control, Refugees, and Humanitarian Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Africa, United States, Europe, France, South Africa, Germany, Australia, Mexico, and Global Focus
30. Exported as a Commodity: North Korean Workers Officially Dispatched Overseas
- Author:
- Greg Scarlatoiu
- Publication Date:
- 04-2017
- Content Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal:
- International Journal of Korean Studies
- Institution:
- International Council on Korean Studies
- Abstract:
- North Korea officially dispatches over 60,000 workers to a minimum of 20 countries in Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. The regime confiscates much of the USD 200 million earned by these workers annually. Despite the known exploitation and hardship, North Koreans continue to covet these positions, which provide rare opportunities to spend time outside the world’s most isolated dictatorial regime and send small amounts of money to their families at home. Only those deemed loyal to the regime as measured by North Korea’s songbun system have access to these jobs. Even those with “good songbun” frequently bribe government officials to secure one of the few positions available. Once overseas, workers labor under harsh and dangerous conditions that border on slavery. North Korea’s pervasive security apparatus continues to survey all activities while spouses and children serve as de facto hostages to prevent defections. The Kim Family Regime’s dispatch of workers amounts to exporting its subjects as a commodity. Efforts to address this issue must be based on applicable international standards. Governments bound by international agreements should first seek redress, as difficult as it may be, before terminating the contracts that cover North Korea’s overseas workers.
- Topic:
- Human Rights, Labor Issues, Economy, and UN Security Council
- Political Geography:
- Africa, Europe, Middle East, Asia, and North Korea