Legal pluralism as a human right and/or as a human rights violation

INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS law can be analysed in terms of legal pluralism. In public opinion, ‘ human rights ’ are often portrayed as a clear and homogenous concept. Yet those who work in the field of human rights know that the reality is very different. A seemingly simple question such as ‘ show me the list of all human rights ’ or ‘ draft me a list of all human rights ’ is certain to generate as many different lists as there are human rights experts. Indeed, there is no such thing as a single human rights catalogue. Instead, human rights are found in a multitude of highly diverse sources. Even if we leave aside domestic legal sources and focus only on international human rights law, we are dealing with a complex, multilayered reality. The sources and mechanisms of international human rights law can be differentiated along several lines

Stereotypes and human rights law

The scope of the book includes different stereotyping grounds – such as race, gender, and disability. Moreover, this book examines stereotyping approaches across a broad range of supranational human rights monitoring bodies, including the United Nations human rights treaty system as well as the regional systems that are most developed when it comes to addressing stereotypes: the Council of Europe and the inter-American system

Doing minority justice through procedural fairness: face veil bans in Europe

The French and Belgian bans on face veils in public places have been subjected to strong substantive human rights critiques. This article takes a complementary approach, examining the bans from the perspective of procedural fairness. Indeed, the French and Belgian bans are extreme examples of legislative processes taking place above the heads of the people concerned, neglecting the ban’s possible human rights impact. After exploring what the social psychology notion of procedural fairness entails for the judiciary and the legislator, especially in a multicultural context, this article details procedural fairness shortcomings with respect to the face veil ban in France and Belgium. Subsequently, the article sets out how the European Court of Human Rights might compensate for these shortcomings

Addressing multicultural conflicts : an emphasis on procedural fairness

This paper examines the procedural fairness dimensions of approaches to multicultural conflicts. The paper explains the findings of procedural fairness research in social psychology and explores its relevance for the field of (human rights) law, and for the setting of multicultural conflicts. It argues that there are strong reasons in favour of seeking to optimize procedural fairness —with its criteria of participation, trustworthiness, neutrality and respect— across all types of procedures that address multicultural conflicts. The paper illustrates these criteria through three reallife cases, concerning multicultural conflicts that occurred in Belgium in recent years. The paper furthermore explores the relationship between the normative implications that may be drawn from empirical procedural fairness research and existing procedural fairness norms in human rights law.Received: 21 June 2017Accepted: 10 October 2017Published online: 31 January 2018</p

Face veil bans in the European Court of Human Rights: the importance of empirical findings

First, this Article will set out the facts and context of face veil bans in Europe and the legal challenges surrounding them. Then, the Article will explain the legal criteria that will be used by the European Court of Human Rights when deciding on this issue. Next, in its central argument, this Article will discuss the possible outcome of S.A.S. v. France, by assessing whether the arguments advanced by European governments to ban face veils can pass the human rights test instituted by the court. This assessment will rely on the court’s case law, as well as on the case file of the case currently pending before it. It will also include the results of empirical research conducted among women wearing face veils in Europe and analyze whether the government’s claims are consistent with those empirical studies

Head Coverings in the Courtroom: A Question of Respect for the Judge or of Judicial Tolerance?

The Human Rights Centre at Ghent University (the HRC) first initiated the present research while preparing an amicus curiae brief in the Lachiri v. Belgium case before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The applicant in Lachiri, who was a civil party in legal proceedings concerning the murder of her brother, was denied access to a Brussels courtroom after refusing to remove her Islamic headscarf . Ms. Lachiri’s admission was refused in reliance on Article 759 of the Belgian Judicial Code (Gerechtelijk Wetboek/ Code Judiciaire), which provides that “[t]he audience will attend the sessions with their heads uncovered, respectfully and silently; whatever the judge commands for the maintenance of order will be punctually and immediately executed.” In its third-party intervention, the HRC sought to supply the ECtHR with additional information concerning three points: the debate on the wearing of Islamic headscarves in Belgium, the history, object and purpose of Article 759 of the Belgian Judicial Code, and the scope of the State margin of appreciation in prohibiting religious items of clothing

Children’s rights law and human rights law : analysing present and possible future interactions

Following the development of different categorical and thematic human rights regimes, human rights scholarship has become increasingly specialised and departmentalised. Academics too rarely look beyond their niche of expertise. This book shows, however, that much can be learnt from taking off our blinkers and widening our gaze. Realising human rights – both in general and with respect to particular groups – may be well served by analysing more in depth the conceptual and practical developments in certain/other subfields of international human rights law. This does not imply that innovative concepts or distinctive approaches should be blindly transposed to other fields. It does mean that carefully analysing the benefits and drawbacks of the particularities of one human rights regime, may contribute to the enhanced effectiveness of human rights law as a whole and also lead to a more integrated experience of human rights

International actors and traditional justice in Sub-Saharan Africa :policies and interventions in transitional justice and justice sector aid

Due to a number of important differences between transitional justice and justice sector aid, this book explored how international actors address ‘traditional justice’ in these fields in two distinct parts, which has led to separate analyses. Justice sector aid is often part of broader development cooperation programmes, which may or may not take place in a ost-conflict country. Transitional justice processes are part of conflict-related international interventions, such as peacebuilding programmes, which are often implemented before the wheels of more longterm development cooperation programmes are set in motion. Chronologically speaking, both kinds of programmes – support for transitional justice and justice sector aid – often do not run parallel, although there can be overlaps. It also turns out that the international actors are not necessarily the same. Although in principle the same donor countries are involved, justice sector aid is often provided by bilateral or multilateral development organisations, while transitional justice interventions are more often – but certainly not exclusively – initiatives of specific agencies aimed at post-conflict reconstruction, which are established by several donor countries. Although respect for human rights is heavily emphasised in both domains, policy and interventions regarding transitional justice also need to take international norms regarding the criminal prosecution of international crimes into account. In spite of these differences, this concluding chapter formulates a number of mutual findings and recommendations. First, it discusses common elements at the level of policies, then it identifies a number of trends regarding interventions, and finally it examines the way in which linternational actors handle the tension between traditional justice and human rights

Gender and the monarchy in Belgium : succession and the exercise of constitutional and symbolic power

This article explores the gendered dimensions of the Belgian monarchy by focusing on three distinct topics. First, the article addresses the matter of succession to the throne. In Belgium, the exclusion of women from succeeding to the monarchy came to an end in 1991, but the first female monarch has yet to ascend to the throne. Next, the article examines the gendered dimensions of the way in which Belgium’s recent monarchs have exercised their role. As the King’s political role is limited, this article also considers the symbolic role of the King, which carries over to his private and family life. After the crisis known as the “royal issue” in the early 1950s, there has been only one constitutional crisis in Belgium that directly involved the monarchy: the refusal of King Boudewijn (Baudouin/Baldwin) to assent to the law legalizing abortion in 1990. The refusal concerned not only the exercise of the constitutional role of the monarch, but also a key issue of the women’s movement, and this article examines the development and significance of this crisis. Finally, the article analyses the current controversy concerning the refusal of the former king, Albert II, to recognize an extramarital daughter. Men’s refusal to take on responsibility for (some of) the children they father is a classical theme of feminist indignation. Arguably, the former king’s attitude on this matter in his private and family life affects the symbolic power of the monarchy