FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W223072017> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W223072017 startingPage "301" @default.
• W223072017 abstract "I. INTRODUCTIONOver the past three decades, indigenous peoples have effected a remarkable redefinition of their status and rights under international law, giving rise a collection of international norms that are highly favorable their aspirations.1 But as S. James Anaya has powerfully argued, [i]t is one thing ... for international law incorporate norms concerning indigenous peoples; it is quite another thing for the norms take effect in the actual lives of people.2 Indeed, meaningful enforcement of these highly favorable norms at the local level has been elusive.3 International law has proved be rather Janus-faced for indigenous peoples: on the one hand international law's concern for human rights and the right of all peoples determine their own political destinies has been the central underpinning the assertion of indigenous peoples' rights on the international level; on the other hand, international law's traditional structure built upon the twin precepts of state sovereignty and consent-with the resulting corollaries of territorial integrity, exclusive jurisdiction, and non-intervention in domestic affairs-has impeded attempts translate success at the international level the domestic and local level.4 As a result, indigenous peoples wishing secure and advance their rights are faced with an uninviting choice: they can take their claims before often hostile domestic courts that do not recognize favorable existing international law, or they can advance their claims before more sympathetic but largely toothless international bodies without hope for resulting enforcement of whatever decree they might win. Put simply, the important gains achieved at the international level by indigenous peoples and their advocates must find their way the local level in order to take effect in the actual lives of people.5 The challenge is find the most effective means make this transition.This Comment takes up this challenge in the specific contexts of Australia and the United States, arguing that indigenous peoples in these two countries should employ the emerging international indigenous rights jurisprudence as persuasive authority in asserting their claims in domestic courts. Such soft enforcement of international law in the domestic courts of Australia and the United States is the most promising avenue available for securing and advancing indigenous peoples' rights through the international law principles of both countries. Direct enforcement in the U.S. and Australia is generally unavailable in the absence of a fully customary international law or a binding international treaty schema. However, because U.S. and Australian indigenous rights jurisprudence was itself founded upon principles of international law, this jurisprudence should receive international law as highly persuasive authority.Part II of this Comment examines the emerging customary international law of indigenous peoples' rights, clarifying what has crystallized and what is still in the process of formation. In addition, Part II identifies and focuses on the firmest edge of this emerging jurisprudence: the right sovereignty. Part III explores the best methods for enforcing this generally favorable customary international law for indigenous peoples in the domestic courts of Australia and the United States. Part III argues that direct enforcement is currently largely unavailable but that international law should be used as persuasive authority with interpretive force in domestic courts. In other words, emerging customary law of indigenous rights may not provide a cause of action in Australian or U.S. courts, but it can provide a rule of decision. Part IV then applies these general recommendations the specific context of cultural sovereignty, revisiting the High Court of Australia's recent Kartinyeri v. The Commonwealth6 decision and the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Ass 'n. …" @default.
• W223072017 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W223072017 creator A5046908982 @default.
• W223072017 date "2006-02-01" @default.
• W223072017 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W223072017 title "Using International Law More Effectively to Secure and Advance Indigenous Peoples' Rights: Towards Enforcement in U.S. and Australian Domestic Courts" @default.
• W223072017 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W223072017 type Work @default.
• W223072017 sameAs 223072017 @default.
• W223072017 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W223072017 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W223072017 hasAuthorship W223072017A5046908982 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C169437150 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C186229450 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C2776949292 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C2779777834 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C55447825 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C55958113 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C86615163 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C8705443 @default.
• W223072017 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C144024400 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C169437150 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C17744445 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C186229450 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C18903297 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C190253527 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C199539241 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C2776949292 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C2779777834 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C55447825 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C55958113 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C86615163 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C86803240 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C8705443 @default.
• W223072017 hasConceptScore W223072017C94625758 @default.
• W223072017 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W223072017 hasLocation W2230720171 @default.
• W223072017 hasOpenAccess W223072017 @default.
• W223072017 hasPrimaryLocation W2230720171 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W1045233509 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W1487213945 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W1890349809 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W1939638372 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W1940917585 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W2065056579 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W2289931019 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W2469780603 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W2519765056 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W255650559 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W2895527423 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W2952922502 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W29740480 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W3122624080 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W3123197547 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W3132081840 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W3132544905 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W62628504 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W1742196322 @default.
• W223072017 hasRelatedWork W2971551155 @default.
• W223072017 hasVolume "15" @default.
• W223072017 isParatext "false" @default.
• W223072017 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W223072017 magId "223072017" @default.
• W223072017 workType "article" @default.