International Law and Human Rights

the United States’ own territory. It has been discussed that both arguments do not withstand scrutiny. There is settled jurisprudence of the ICJ in Nuclear Weapons, The Wall, and Armed Activities, that the prohibition against arbitrary deprivation of life contained within Article 6 of the ICCPR and forming part of customary international law continues to apply during a situation of armed conflict, alongside the lex specialis of international humanitarian law, and that the test of whether a deprivation of life is arbitrary must be determined by reference to the applicable rules of international humanitarian law. 7 Further, it is now almost universally accepted that a state’s obligations under international human rights law apply extraterritorially, and thus the US finds scant support for its assertion to the contrary, sitting as it does at odds with state practice and opinio juris. Outside situations of armed conflict, the use of lethal force is lawful under international human rights law only in those circumstances where it is strictly necessary and proportionate, if it is aimed at preventing an immediate threat to life, and if there is no other means of preventing the threat from materialising. As UN Special Rapporteur Ben Emmerson QC rightly submits, only in the most exceptional of circumstances would it be permissible under international human rights law for killing to be the sole or primary purpose of an operation. 8 As the principal purpose of a drone strike is the employment of lethal force to kill a targeted individual(s), it follows that drone strikes will rarely comply with established

longer predicated on consent, and have been expanded to include General Assembly resolutions, the products of the International Law Commission, general principles (particularly in the fi eld of human rights and humanitarian law) and “soft law” contained in the declarations of international conferences. Some rules of international law, particularly those governing the use of force and human rights, are characterized as peremptory norms or norms of jus cogens and are viewed as being of a higher status than other rules. Domestic jurisdiction is no longer exclusive where human rights are concerned as a result of human rights conventions and the practice of the United Nations. A distinction is drawn between obligations that involve only the parties to a dispute and obligations that concern all states - obligations erga omnes. All states have an interest in enforcement of such obligations. Consequently, states now have legal standing to protect non-nationals in international litigation - according to the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on State Responsibility 6 and a separate opinion of Judge Simma in the case of DRC v Uganda. 7 Finally there is now a permanent international criminal court, in addition to several ad hoc tribunals, which ensures that there is no impunity for international crimes.

Upon accession, the EU will not only be subject to human rights obligations by virtue of its internal legal order, but also due to its obligations under international law. According to EU law, international treaties are binding upon the Union from the moment they enter into force. 50 The human rights obligations owed by the Union will therefore stem from international law as well as from EU law. This is a subtle, but potentially important difference in the nature of the obligations. Upon accession the EU will be subject to a system of external human rights review. This is perhaps the most important change. The EU legal system as it currently stands does not have manifest deficiencies with regard to human rights. However, the EU’s overall positive human rights record is not in itself an argument against accession. There are many states within the ECHR system that have excellent human rights records and whose legal systems are designed to ensure human rights protection within their jurisdictions. The fact that these states are party to the Convention in no way implies that there is any deficiency or inadequacy in their legal systems. Similarly, the EU’s accession to the ECHR is not an admission that there are deficiencies in the EU system of human rights protection. It simply means that the EU is subject to the same level of scrutiny as its Member States. Put another way, it means that a citizen’s human rights are subject to the same level of protection irrespective of whether the breach stems from an act committed by the EU or an EU Member State. Moreover, while the EU may protect human rights today, it may be possible that its actions could give rise to human rights violations in the future. The EU, like its Member States, is constantly evolving and adapting, and one could imagine a situation whereby its actions could have far-reaching human rights consequences and where its internal mechanisms are unable or unwilling to address them. External review is a mechanism to help ensure that those internal legal safeguards are in place and working.

Despite the development of the International community in the International field of human rights, and the issue of protecting man has become one of the most important in the International law, and that the International work is still linking the requirement of recognizing the State, so as to enjoy the right to stay, even if not said clearly, the State is not recognized the States that dominate the world, does not enjoy the right to stay, while the UN Declaration in the International Fiqh (jurisdiction), does not require recognizing the State so as to enjoy the right to stay, except in the practical application that witnesses various violations against the State's right to stay. The States that are unrecognized by the dominating States have worked to eliminate some States, completely with the knowledge and consent of the UN. As examples for that: terminating the existence of Palestine in 1948, damaging Iraq by the International alliance in 2003, igniting the national war in Syria through direct intervention, damaging Libya in 2011, Yemen by the Gulf States in 2015. the elimination of those States resulted in damaging millions of their peoples between a dead, injured, displacement and mass immigration. In addition to that, such acts resulted in threatening a number of other States to be eliminated such as north Korea, Cuba and Sudan. Those States were not accepted by the USA, and to damage them applies on damaging their peoples. On the other hand, the race of armament among the States, and continuing to create damaging weapons means that the whole humanity is waiting devastation, damaging and extinction. Therefore, it is necessary to create an International legal procedure that protects man's right to live regardless of the acts of the State, or whether it is accepted or rejected by other dominating States. For these reasons, we would recommend the following:

The intellectual and ideological attributes are the most important element in the formation of a nation, and this is why this type of attribute has a significant ef- fect on the distinction between countries, and it defines the boundaries between all countries. Countries get their names from political thought and beliefs before they become named in terms of climatic and geographical conditions or race. One of the bases for dividing political and intellectual flows into the Qur’an is the belief and unbelief of individuals and intellectual and political factions. In this division, humans are divided into believers, polytheists, hypocrites, unbeliev- ers and apostates. Thus, the jurisprudents have referred to countries as “Dar” in terms of their position against Islam, and they set each Dar as the indicator of their people’s ideological and political choices. “Dar” literally means home, which in this case represents the concept of the country. Although there is no Qur’anic do- cumentary about dividing the world into Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Kofr, jurispru- dents have been forced to explain the legal effects of these two regions on the basis of authentic Islamic narratives. However, some thinkers have believed that Roman or Greek thought was involved in this division (Khalilian, 1996: p. 105). The sub- ject of Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Kofr and its scope and beyond is complex, exten- sive and specialized in Islamic international law, and has shaped different but relatively close perspectives among jurisprudents. This issue is defined in inter- national law under the heading of country identification; In this context, identi- fying countries is defined only in two temporary and permanent forms and does not include any other state, but from the various opinions expressed in the Is- lamic jurists’ opinions, it is believed that they also have a third state for the iden- tification of the international states, which itself calls for a detailed and in-depth discussion. Islamic international law does not mean that international law go- verns only the international relations of Muslim countries. Rather, the purpose of this title is the same rules applicable in an international community in which both Muslim and non-Muslim countries are present and the Islamic state can, in many of its foreign relations, follow the rules, which have come from the sources of public international law. On the other hand, contemporary international law also has a specific definition of identification and its enforcement, which recog- nizes the identification as a legal practice by the old governments in the direc- tion of the identification of a new government. Aside from the discussion, in this research, we pass on human rights in Islam and contemporary international law that despite some minor differences, both laws emphasize human dignity and human rights and non-violations of human rights, in line with fighting oppres- sion and helping oppressed people.

64 Rosen also mentions China’s other advantages over some of its competitors, including China’s “impressively modern ports, highways and power supply,” its ability to adopt export processing and attract foreign direct investment, and the fact that it was not encumbered with structural adjustment programs imposed by the International Monetary Fund. Id. at 263. The latter factor was the result of conscious decisions to reject capital account liberalization of portfolio investment. See also D AVID E LLERMAN , H ELPING P EOPLE H ELP T HEMSELVES : F ROM THE W ORLD B ANK TO AN A LTERNATIVE P HILOSOPHY OF D EVELOPMENT A SSISTANCE (2005) (praising China’s incrementalist transition in comparison to Russia’s embrace of the one-size-fits-all “shock-therapy” model pushed by the IMF).

themselves in power even against near-universal popular discontent and opposition. Because they have collateral to offer, the rulers of resource-rich less developed countries have enjoyed greater freedom than their peers to supplement their income from resource sales by imposing huge debt service burdens on their countries (UNDP 2006: 344-347). Needless to say, little of the borrowed funds were channeled into productive investments, for example in education and infrastructure, which would augment economic growth and generate additional tax revenues that could help meet interest and repayment obligations. Much was taken for personal use or expended on ‘internal security’ and the military. Second, the international borrowing privilege imposes upon democratic successor regimes the often huge debts of their corrupt predecessors. It thereby saps the capacity of such democratic governments to implement structural reforms and other political programs, thus rendering such governments less successful and less stable than they would otherwise be. (It is small consolation that putschists are sometimes weakened by being held liable for the debts of their democratic

Article 93 of the Dutch Constitution states, "[pirovisions of treaties and of resolutions of international institutions, which may be binding upon all persons by vi[r]

o COMMENT: Is this chapter (Art8 & 9) in the right place in the law? The structure and tasks of the Council should be determined by the bylaws of the Council, which should be passed by the majority of the members present at the first meeting. Bylaws etc should be decided at the first meeting of the Council by the whole Council and not just by the President of the Council alone. Gives too much power to the President.

While international criminal accountability for private organizations is not provided for in the Hague tribunals," civil liability and other forms of accountability for[r]

The dcclaration (which I bclicve is not hinding law, although some more way-out thinkers would argue it is) sets a common standard of achievement for all pl·ople. The[r]

The Organization of African Unity adopted a strong resolution against it, and the Mrican states went to the United Nations and got the Security Council to adopt a resoluti[r]

We are entitled to take his assertion that "an occasional state cannot veto law that reflects the contemporary international political-moral intuition" as still le[r]

It is clear that the protection of man is one of the significant issues in the international law. Moreover, the international community views the Islamic states as illiterate. However, before one thousand and four hundred years, the Islamic Shari'a has confirmed on the protection of the states' aspects (people, government and the region). The matters that raise disputes among the Islamic states are due to the interference of the great states in the Islamic affairs. In this context, Islam looks at the stay of the state through man's right to live, but no to importance of the state to stay, as the important issue is the sustain man's life. In this regard, various verses in the Holly Qor'an stipulate prohibiting killing man and were not concerned about the state as a requirement for man's right to live; man enjoys live whether within or not in a state. In addition, Islam did not require recognizing the state so as to enjoy the right to stay. For these reasons, it is necessary to create an international legal system that protects man's live regardless of the state's behaviors, or whether such behaviors are accepted or not by the dominating states. For that, we would recommend the following:

The UAE is a unique country in terms of its economic growth, development and demographic make-up. The dynamic interplay of these three elements has made it a competitive player on the global landscape. Nevertheless, there is a considerable body of literature which suggests that the rapid expansion and prosperity enjoyed by the UAE has come at the expense of the exploitation of vulnerable migrants who also live there. A vast array of human rights abuses have been brought to the attention of the international community, including a rising number of fatalities, causing many to conclude that the UAE is a key destination and transit country for human trafficking. In response, the UAE government has taken decisive steps to quell these allegations; it has ratified international instruments, formed new committees and opened its doors for inspection to three UN Special Rapporteurs. Yet, do these actions suggest that the UAE is fully compliant with international law on human trafficking? This is a critical question, as there are over 8 million migrants in the UAE and mechanisms in law which are specifically designed to oppress and/or deliberately exclude them, such as the kafala-sponsorship system. International human rights law states that governments are obligated to fulfill, respect and protect the human rights and freedoms of all human beings, irrespective of their nationality or ethnic origin. Hence, this article provides both a comprehensive and timely analysis of the UAE’s relationship with international human rights law and migration to ascertain if it is indeed meeting its obligations.

The violation of the right to humane treatment is extremely grave – owing to the importance of the juridical rights affected and the type of the acts that comprise this violation – when a victim is subjected to torture. The violation of the right to life becomes notoriously and intensely grave when it is the deprivation of the life of a series of individuals who are executed brutally. The violation of the right to liberty, among others, is very grave when it is practiced arbitrarily, prolonged for some time, and becomes forced disappearance in the terms of international law. It can also be maintained that the facts are more serious when the authors are senior State officials, from whom there are higher expectations of guarantee – hence, they are essential guarantors – from whom exemplary conduct is expected and who are called on to ensure the legitimacy of the acts of all public servants. Violations are also especially grave when they are perpetrated by those specifically responsible for certain obligations of respect and guarantee of human rights, or when they occur in circumstances in which the harmful conduct is extreme and when these circumstances even become part of the facts. All of this increases the ‘gravity of the facts’. 143

Lower courts which try to import or imaginatively develop the norms of general or customary international law of human rights as rules of decision in cases before t[r]

There are some opportunities for direct individual participation in human rights law­ making. Firstly, there are examples of particular individuals having a direct impact on the formation o f particular legal principles; the term ‘genocide’ and the impetus behind the Genocide Convention are attributed to an individual lawyer, Raphael Lemkin, who performed a “lobbying miracle” to gain acceptance of the convention,782 although such examples are exceptional rather than usual. In general, individual participation is via expert participation in the committees and/or working groups which draft human rights instruments. The contribution of such individuals can have an important impact on human rights norms. For example, the Hague, Oslo and Lund Recommendations on the education, linguistic and political rights of minorities were drafted by groups of individual experts, and, although they have not been formally adopted by states, have been widely translated and are in active use in the work of the High Commissioner on National Minorities.783 As noted in section 1.1, the writings of jurists and academics are a source of law, and members of treaty bodies can have direct influence over the development of soft law instruments. Nonetheless, jurists, academics and treaty body members are all clearly experts on international human rights law. Individuals can also participate in the work of the International Law Commission on an independent basis, rather than as representatives of

Rehabilitation is a preferable form of reparation mechanisms when there is a violation resulting from acts of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The reason is that rehabilitation, as in individual measure, might play an essential role in order to reduce and diminish the consequences of such violations as much as possible. Despite its importance, international law has maintained silence on rehabilitation as an element of reparation for too long and this gap has been filled, on normative ground, by international human rights law conventions and by the jurisprudence of international human rights law mechanisms of the United Nations and Inter-American Court of Human Rights Law.

A BSTRACT : Starting from the previous implemented processes to recognize the human right to water, and the observation that human rights are indivisible, interdependent and interrelated, we argue that it is time to establish a human right to land under international law. Indeed, two strong arguments constitute a convincing pillar: the first is the importance of land for the realization of a number of internationally recognized human rights, and the second is the alarming situation of serious violations of human rights resulting from the expansion, in the recent years, of international investment in farmlands. Such basis is supported by providing a number of widely accepted international instruments and both regionally and nationally advanced jurisprudence. However, efforts to interpret and apply international standards remain a permanent challenge, and their effectiveness has not been definitively established, given the fragmented nature of international human rights law.