FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W62628504> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W62628504 startingPage "59" @default.
• W62628504 abstract "I. INTRODUCTION Few would dispute that international rights law has grown exponentially in the last few decades. Legal arguments based on international rights law, as well as domestic law that is interpreted or otherwise influenced by international rights law, are increasingly common. The pressing question is no longer whether international rights law exists, but whether, to what extent, and how, international rights law makes a difference. It is not surprising that there is some skepticism about the relevance of international rights law. One need only look to the last half century to see atrocities and genocide committed with seeming impunity. In response to the call of 11 never again after the Nazi genocide, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention) was drafted and ratified by most of the world's states. The Genocide Convention obligates states to undertake to prevent and to punish acts of genocide wherever committed! Yet genocide continues to be committed, most notably and recently (but by no means exclusively) in Cambodia, Bosnia, and Rwanda. In the field of international law, a rich body of scholarship has developed among social scientists, international relations theorists, and legal academics focusing on the relationship between international law and the behavior of states. That inquiry, however, has primarily focused on the impact of law on the behavior of states vis-a-vis each other (or on the behavior of sub-state institutions, such as courts or parliaments), and not directly on the impact of law on the individuals within those states. This is not surprising, given that international law was traditionally understood to have as its subject and object the nation-state, with private individuals deriving benefits, if at all, through and at the discretion of the state. This view of international law has changed, both with the development of areas of international law which explicitly identify private individuals as the subject and object of international law-most notably international rights law-and with the recognition that international law is not restricted to international institutions, but is embedded in a much more complicated and pervasive environment of transnational legal interactions.2 In this article, I want to focus the question of the relevance of international rights law and ask about its impact on those it is designed to benefit-the poor and oppressed of the world. For ease of discussion, I will refer to this broad class of people as human rights beneficiaries. Recognizing that every individual is a beneficiary of rights, I intend to focus on those whose rights have already been violated and continue to be violated. The application of this relevance inquiry to international rights is relatively new. It is an inquiry that until recently engaged very few specialists in international rights law and has been mostly taken up by social and political scientists.3 This essay is in part a suggestion that international legal scholars, and particularly those of us specializing in international rights law, incorporate into our teaching and scholarship the empirical and normative research undertaken by some of our colleagues in the social sciences. Incorporating such materials may make our undertaking more relevant to the everyday concerns of the victims of rights violations throughout the world. While the focus on law-making and normative rhetoric at the international level is important, it often appears quite removed from the real concerns of those individuals on whose behalf many of those efforts are undertaken. What follows are some brief thoughts on how one might approach a scholarship of rights that more closely reflects the concerns of the oppressed. My interest in this question arises in part out of my work and research over the past four years in connection with South Africa's transition from apartheid to democracy. …" @default.
• W62628504 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W62628504 creator A5043663530 @default.
• W62628504 date "2001-04-01" @default.
• W62628504 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W62628504 title "International Law, Human Rights Beneficiaries, and South Africa: Some Thoughts on the Utility of International Human Rights Law" @default.
• W62628504 hasPublicationYear "2001" @default.
• W62628504 type Work @default.
• W62628504 sameAs 62628504 @default.
• W62628504 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W62628504 countsByYear W626285042014 @default.
• W62628504 countsByYear W626285042019 @default.
• W62628504 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W62628504 hasAuthorship W62628504A5043663530 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C169437150 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C185436325 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C204342414 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C2779921323 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C2780224667 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C42027317 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C55447825 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C86615163 @default.
• W62628504 hasConcept C8705443 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C169437150 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C17744445 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C185436325 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C199539241 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C204342414 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C2779921323 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C2780224667 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C42027317 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C55447825 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C86615163 @default.
• W62628504 hasConceptScore W62628504C8705443 @default.
• W62628504 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W62628504 hasLocation W626285041 @default.
• W62628504 hasOpenAccess W62628504 @default.
• W62628504 hasPrimaryLocation W626285041 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W1487213945 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W1579800893 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W1581243684 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W164047465 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W1848453203 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W2050094388 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W2103960934 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W2123746018 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W2137179566 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W2167398889 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W2346336983 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W2501376152 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W2801890703 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W2895527423 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W2935878342 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W3030843761 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W3121836717 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W3123056069 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W3132544905 @default.
• W62628504 hasRelatedWork W599055454 @default.
• W62628504 hasVolume "2" @default.
• W62628504 isParatext "false" @default.
• W62628504 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W62628504 magId "62628504" @default.
• W62628504 workType "article" @default.