Vreemdelingenrecht.com - het weblog

Universiteit Utrecht lanceert MOOC over Mensenrechten (26-10-2016) Op 14 november zal de Universiteit Utrecht een nieuwe MOOC lanceren met de titel: ‘Human Rights for Open Societies – An Introduction to the European Convention on Human Rights’. Deze ‘Massive Open Online Course’, of wel MOOC, wordt aangeboden via Coursera. Antoine Buyse, hoogleraar Mensenrechten en Janneke Gerards, hoogleraar Fundamentele rechten, beiden verbonden aan het Studie- en Informatie Mensenrechten (SIM) en het strategisch onderzoeksthema ‘Institutions for Open Societies’ van de Universiteit Utrecht, bieden deelnemers een inleiding bij een van ’s werelds meest complexe mensenrechtensystemen: het Europees Verdrag voor de Rechten van de Mens. Dit mensenrechtenverdrag is een van de meest succesvolle instrumenten ter bescherming van de menselijke waardigheid, en een cruciaal instrument voor het bereiken van een open samenleving. Voertaal: ENGELS Schrijf je HIER in. Bekijk HIER een int...

Seventy years ago, on December 17 1942, British Foreign Minister Sir Anthony Eden reported to the House of Commons that the Jews of Germany and German-occupied Eastern Europe were being systematically starved and murdered.  He read a declaration by the Allies (named by Franklin Delano Roosevelt the “United Nations”) condemning this “bestial policy.”  The declaration included a “solemn resolution to ensure that those responsible for these crimes shall not escape retribution.”  The Allies, declared Eden, would try to give asylum to as many refugees as possible. After the Second World War, the General Assembly of the newly created United Nations, a body larger than the anti-Hitler coalition, accepted a Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948.  Five months later, a group of European countries created a Council of Europe, agreed to a European Convention on Human Rights, and gradually accepted the jurisdiction of a European Court of H...

March 15, 2012 by Rosalind English The road to hell as we know is paved with good intentions and here they are, laid bare by the Daily Politics broadcaster in his exposition of everything that has gone wrong with the Convention since it was forged in the crucible of two world wars.  Post war prosperity ensured that genocide and dictatorships did not arise again. But the Convention has become a “political poison” that goes to the very core of how the country is governed. Lees verder hier/ continue: http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/03/15/a-whiff-of-brimstone-andrew-neil-critiques-human-rights-on-prime-time-tv/ Law blog Klik op +1 als u dit een interessant artikel vindt en Google zal het dan beter zichtbaar maken in de zoekresultaten.

Abstract: The debate as to whether courts are too eager, or not eager enough, in holding that government regulations violate individuals’ fundamental rights has raged across decades and across jurisdictions. The underlying considerations are particularly acute when the courts concerned are supranational courts – and thus further removed than national judges from the societies affected by their judgments. The European Court of Human Rights has grappled with this issue by developing the concept of a margin of appreciation and thereby according to Contracting States an element of judgment in securing the rights enshrined in the Convention. The margin of appreciation has been central to the jurisprudence of the Court and is of major importance to the Contracting States. It has assumed even more significance as the Court through its case law has expanded Convention rights. This paper focuses on the use by the Court of the concept of a margin of appreciation and considers, in particula...

Giuseppe Martinico, of the Centro de Estudios Politicos y Constitucionales in Madrid and the European University Institute in Florence, has posted a paper on the differences and similarities between EU and ECHR law in national legal orders. It is entitled 'The National Judicial Treatment of European Laws: Are National Judges Extending Primacy and Direct Effect to the ECHR?' . This is the abstract: The aim of this study is to answer the question: “Are national judges extending the structural EU law principles (primacy and direct effect) to the European Convention on Human Rights”? This paper investigates the similarities and differences between the national judicial treatment of the ECHR and EU laws in the context of some selected constitutional experiences. It examines whether or not national judges treat the ECHR and EU law in the same manner, and the extent to which they facilitate the convergence of these laws. In this respect the goal of the project is to study the judici...