Fragmentation and Integration in Human Rights Law
Users’ Perspectives Edited by Eva Brems, Professor and Saïla Ouald-Chaib, Post Doctoral Researcher, Human Rights Centre, Ghent University, Belgium
From the perspective of rights holders and duty bearers, human rights law appears as an increasingly complex field of law, consisting of different levels, actors and norms. The fragmentation of human rights law has resulted in an uncoordinated legal architecture that may in some circumstances create obstacles for effective human rights protection. Against this background, this volume examines how to make sense – in both theoretical and practical terms - of these multiple layers of human rights law through which human rights users have to navigate.
I rather thought "human" rights were supposed to apply equally to all human beings? They're supposed to be universal, not particular. If they're the later, or applied unequally they might be some sort of "rights" of certain human beings, but as sure as hell, they ain't human ones!
Christopher NOCK
Agree... Indigenous peoples never claimed for human rights, however this is how some institutions and organisms still use as a language to make decisions and whatsoever....shame!
I think your explanation touches on a serious error that some commentators seem to have made. Indigenous rights fit the category of what some call "group rights". Such rights are obviously particular so cannot be human rights, but do apply to general groups of human beings. It is then too easy to slip into mixing them up with human rights.
NOCK
For what it's worth, I have clarified the various rights of human beings and explained why too many get wrongly identified as "human rights" when they are not. If you're interested see "The Rights of Men: Political Weapons or Universal Principles" which can be downloaded from my "Contributions" page.
NOCK
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medicine
- Disease
- Infectious Diseases
- Immunization
- Vaccination