| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
147852
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Traditional analyses of Canada’s behaviour on international human rights tend to view it through the prism of the state’s global identity as a good international citizen. Such explanations are limited in helping us understand Canada’s inconsistent responses to allegations that two citizens were tortured in the war on terror—Maher Arar and Omar Khadr. This article uses Jutta Brunnée and Stephen Toope’s interactional account, which emphasizes the need for continuous shared practices of legality in order for international human rights norms to exert influence, to analyze Canada’s responses to the torture of citizens. It argues that to make sense of Canada’s behaviour, we need to examine the role of different state and non-state actors in terms of whether they were agitating for Canada’s compliance with the international prohibition against torture. Civil society was critical in shaping the responses of the Canadian state to the torture of citizens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
158585
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Even though the principles of various international conventions as well as humanitarian and human rights law have been routinely flouted, these instruments remain genuine landmarks providing a basis for action. Lacking are the mechanisms and will for enforcement. According to Oinam Jitendra Singh, protecting children requires broad participation in monitoring and reporting human rights abuses, an enforcement of the law and a determined effort to prosecute offenders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
099002
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
There is considerable disagreement among governments, civil society groups and scholars as to whether the prosecution of child soldiers who have committed war crimes is ever appropriate. In one camp are those who argue that child soldiers should always be considered as victims, and that prosecutions are necessarily at odds with rehabilitation and reintegration efforts. On the other side of the debate are those who maintain that the prosecution of the worst child offenders - those who have occupied command positions in armed forces, and carried out particularly egregious crimes - can help to end impunity for war criminals and bring a degree of solace to the victims of their brutal assaults. This article considers the different approaches to criminal responsibility for minors in domestic legal systems and under international law, and concludes that the prosecution of child soldiers should only be pursued in exceptional circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|