multiethnic society, pluralism, multiculturalism and foreign, SARTORI. BRIEF COMMENTS ON THE absurdity of a political scientist, IN DH multiethnic society, pluralism, multiculturalism and FOREIGN Giovanni Sartori. BRIEF COMMENTS ON THE absurdity of a political scientist, HUMAN RIGHTS IN
By Victor Atencio G. [1] "
In the last twenty years, in almost all Western countries, social rights -from the right to health, through the right to education, to the rights subsistence and social assistance
have been targeted and growing restrictions by politicians considered "liberal." The constitutionalization of such rights and welfare policies, which are perhaps the most important achievement of the legal and political civilization of the last century - were thus put at issue and are now at risk to be compromised.
This political weakness is also due to a theoretical weakness.
While social rights are formally enshrined in all international charters and the twentieth century, an important part of culture, political science, not just the conservative-of Friedrich A. Barbalet von Hayek, Giovanni Sartori Danilo Zolo, "does not consider itself question of" rights. " The arguments for this singular lack of positive law, not by chance articulated by political scientists rather than lawyers, are always the same : that these rights belong to them, before the prohibitions of injury, positive benefit obligations, whose satisfaction is not a lack of action but a do not as such formalized and universalized, and the violation, by contrast, is not punishable acts or conduct or voidable but in simple omissions, which would not be enforceable or justiciable. " (Our emphasis)
Extract from Foreword by Luigi Ferrajoli, makes page 9 of the work of Victor Abramovich, Christian Courtis. Social rights as enforceable rights. Editorial Trotta. Madrid. 2002.
I. Introduction. The idea behind this article arose in our minds a few years ago. It was perhaps late 2006, and recently we acquired the book "The Multi-Ethnic Society. Pluralism, multiculturalism and foreigners "of Italian political scientist Giovanni Sartori
[2] .
The book is fun to read, until we approached the Chapter 5 "Human Rights, Rights of Man, Rights of Citizens."
From the perspective of our activism in human rights, this chapter was unacceptable, largely because of the serious inaccuracies in the matter, incurred the famous author. This mood
talks with our friends who we suggested writing an article, so be brief, on the subject. The idea of \u200b\u200bcourse we caught, however, we saw how it was left to side, as a result of activism, or more mundane occupations. You know it takes time away from urgent to important. But time as football, always seems to give revenge. Already
date book reading Sartori, we address the concern of further political studies. Once again the friends played a key role, as we warned that our unusual way (at least in the Panama scenario) to reach human rights (they had done since the anti-dictatorship political activism, I was made directly from the right), made it desirable to foray into the arts political science as the study of these disciplines supplemented our legal education, which in turn allow it to deal with broader light of the study, promotion and advocacy human, or because we were looking for deeper answers and were not in the right (as a continent), but we should look outside, for example in politics (and content)
[3] , among other recommendations gave us.
The truth is that with that in mind, we take the post, and we accept the invitation to the Masters in Social Sciences with emphasis in Sociology and Political Science, to be taught in the cloisters of the Specialized University of the Americas (UDELAS).
Our initial enthusiasm was quickly cooled by a confusing succession of incidents, from many different sources, and was a professor of Sociology, Political Theory, Methodology, or even co Grandee, they all united by a common denominator, the disdain for human rights, whom they saw as being expendable, even superfluous, if not negative for the Panamanian society.
result of these experiences, shared even by peers than from other trenches activism, with concern tolerate this kind of mentality, I intend to write this article, using as an excuse Sartori, and as a vehicle, and carry their ideas not only excusable ignorance of the law (though not so in the case of a thinker Sartori in size), but something perhaps more sinister, reflected in the Panamanian case, inheritance is not repudiated, were terrible from our history, perhaps more authoritarian times. Let
this idea in the pipeline at the moment. Haste, however, to get down to what we dedicate ourselves to citing the "controversial" positions in the work Sartori in review, to then present alternative positions, if not deny his position, perspectives marked by the doctrine of human rights, or from the jurisprudence of various international organizations (regional or universal) in its efforts to monitor compliance with their respective international instruments by the State Parties.
course note that since the text is intended to guide an audience not necessarily familiar with legal jargon, try to be as loose as possible (where we do) in the management of international instruments.
II. Sartori 'positions on human rights in the work Multiethnic Society.
A page 180, almost immediately started the controversial chapter 5 of his work, Sartori surprises us with an attempt to define and account of the historical emergence of human rights, which we quote in full in order to proceed to its analysis:
"human rights" And what are they?
Its origin can be traced to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights United Nations (adopted on December 10, 1948 by 44 states, with subsequent enlargement). The term is still "human rights", but now these rights are declared "universal." Are they really? ... Another difference is that the United Nations declaration remain that, a "declaration." The Rights of Man, 1789 are incorporated in the constitutions of the Western type. Universal rights of the United Nations no. The national laws of some states may receive, but the 1948 Declaration itself is not mandatory. " Although
confess not be an expert in Panamanian law (you can imagine that I am much less of Italian law); not cease to surprise Sartori statements in light of the 1947 Italian Constitutional text, which provides that the legal system conforms with the rules of international law generally recognized
[4] . When this is so, it is necessary to know what are those generally recognized international standards?
The answer we found in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice:
"Article 38
1. The Court, whose function is to decide under international law such disputes as are submitted, shall apply: a.
international conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by the contesting states;
b. international custom as evidence of a practice generally accepted as law;
c. general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;
d. judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations, as subsidiary means for the determination of rules of law, without prejudice to the provisions of Article 59.
2. This provision does not limit the power of the Court to decide a case ex aequo et bono if the parties so agree. " (Our emphasis)
Then the Universal Declaration (hereinafter UDHR and the Declaration Universal), you would find many ways to be legally enforceable against states such as Italy. Think
international conventions such as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
[5] . The same in its Article 4 provides:
"Article 4.
"States Parties ... undertake to adopt immediate and positive measures to eradicate all incitement to such discrimination or acts of discrimination against [racial] and to that end,
with due regard to the principles embodied in the Declaration Universal Human Rights and the rights expressly set forth in Article 5 of this Convention, shall, inter alia, the following measures:
a) declare an offense punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or racial hatred, and all act of violence, incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another color or origin, and any assistance to racist activities, including funding;
b) Shall declare illegal and prohibit organizations, as well as organized propaganda activities which promote and incite racial discrimination against her, and shall recognize participation in such organizations or activities as an offense punishable by law;
c) Shall not permit public authorities and public institutions, national or local, to promote or incite racial discrimination to her. "(Emphasis added)
Then we have the curious stage (for Sartori at least) where a norm of international law generally recognized, due to the Italian State on the basis of its constitutional, given the early nature of the contents of the Universal Declaration, which and makes the "Declaration" is not only that, but a legally enforceable standard.
But the possibilities of enforceability to the Declaration does not end there.
In 1999 the president of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter CREDHOS) said:
"4. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, opened for signature in November 1950 and entered into force in September 1953.
The Convention provides a list of rights and civil liberties and political and institutional architecture for the implementation of rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration constituted by the European Commission of Human Rights, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and the Court ECHR. In 1998, following an increasing workload of the Court, the Protocol entered into force 11 of the Convention which changed the way in which the Court acted as the court. "
[6] (Emphasis added)
This is another convention that obliges the Italian State, which is designed to use on European soil, the contents of the Universal Declaration. Then given the validity of the instrument, how it could be understood that the contents of the UDHR is a mere "declaration"? This does not include long-standing practice of the European Court citing the text of the Universal Declaration, to interpret the contents of the Convention For the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter ECHR or the European Convention).
For its part, the best doctrine has held the incorporation of the Universal Declaration in the field of international custom (or not Mr. Sartori, another rule of international law generally recognized!), And recognized its binding
[7] .
This does not look very precise statement of the Italian political scientist, regarding the legal status of the Universal Declaration.
But as we shall see, the work of Sartori gives plenty of room to flip on human rights.
In the text, insert on the debate in Italy on reforms to the immigration laws, the author can try to distort the human right to asylum (shelter "?), to describe internally and externally displaced as a result of armed conflict" internally displaced "
[8 ] or fugitives
[9] (at least in the English version of the text), ie as people, not fleeing poverty, death or violence, but criminals fleeing the authority and law; and well expresses once again its denial or ignorance of the process of international positivization human rights (and their legal effects), led after the second of the great wars, this process being necessary to prevent human rights violations that led to internal states, usually on its citizens, ignoring the rights embedded in the liberal-democratic constitutions
[10] :
"
rights in liberal states human and civil rights overlap, and if the latter are those who give positive force and the former ... the role of human rights is to uphold the liberal principles in societies "decent" and legitimize the rejection of States outside the law. On the contrary, I infer, a judge
[11] in Italy or France invokes human rights gives samples which are not clear or requires something that has "
[12] . (Our emphasis)
If true the first statement of Mr. Sartori, where art would be actions such as the Human Rights Committee United Nations (hereinafter UNHRC or the Committee) in the sense of order to the USA and Panama, amending their constitutions to remove discriminatory provisions
[13] ?, what value does the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on unconventionality of constitutional
[14] , and the role of guardians of conventionality that the international body has recognized domestic judges of the States Parties of the Convention
[15] ?.
This would merit further consideration, if we think that despite the higher hierarchical status of international standards on human rights, they do not seek to repeal the higher standards on human rights protection, which may be internally states, since the aim of this very special branch of international law is the protection of human beings. To further this point, serve the reflections expressed by Judge CrIDH Cancado Trindade, in his separate opinion to the Judgement of 22 January of 1999 (Repairs and costs) in the Case vs. Blake. Guatemala:
"5. The tension between the precepts of International Law and International Law of Human Rights is not difficult to explain:
as legal concepts and categories of first formed and crystallized mostly at the level of interstate relations and concepts ... second legal categories are formed and crystallized at the level of intrastate relations, ie relations between States and human beings under their respective jurisdictions (the latter erected in subjects of that law.)
6. The aforementioned stress - which gives eloquent testimony to this case Blake - was therefore expected.
legal concepts and categories of public international law, built on a legal framework for coordination in line with the principle of legal equality of States, began to show not always suitable when transposed to the realm of International Law Human Rights. The latter, in turn, became a decisive contribution to the historic rescue of the human position in the law of nations (droit des gens), consistent, inclusive, with the historical origins of this discipline. By regulating new forms of legal, imbued with the imperatives of protection, the International Law of Human Rights came naturally to question and challenge some of the dogma of the past.
7. Distinctly public international law,
International Law of Human Rights does not apply peer relationships; operates precisely in defense of the ostensibly weaker and vulnerable (victims of human rights violations). In relations between unequal positions in defense of the most need of protection. No abstract is seeking a balance between the parties, but rather to remedy the effects of imbalance and disparities as they affect the rights human. Not nourished by reciprocal concessions, but rather is based on considerations of ordre public in defense of common interests above. It is a true right of protection, marked by its own logic and
aimed at safeguarding the rights of human beings and not States. " (Our emphasis)
worth mentioning the statement Sartori, in the sense that the role of human rights is
support liberal principles in the decent societies. Today, with developments such as decent living in
[16] present in international jurisprudence Human rights principles also hold socialist in a bid perhaps pragmatic, no matter which part of the ideological spectrum comes the answer, the important thing to ensure the protection of human beings, for the suffering caused by fear and misery, based on what they have guiding principles such as pro homine
[17] or please debilis [18] .
This raises questions whether a society that does not guarantee access to decent living of the population could remain classified "decent."
addition to these failures, the Italian political scientist can, try to a kind of definition of what constitutes human rights, and provide a list of these.
Sartori In fact identifies with civil and political rights, indicating that these "are not different from those already raised and received in all liberal-democratic constitutions"
[19] , making it "a subset of rights that
citizens have a liberal-democratic constitutional regime "
[20] . (Emphasis added)
Unfortunately for the political scientist, the development of the International Law of Human Rights belies his claims. It appears indisputable
Advisory Opinion No. 18 CrIDH on Undocumented Migrants
[21] .
Here the Court (at paragraph 101) not only takes the dramatic step of declaring that the principles of equality before the law and nondiscrimination are part of jus cogens (peremptory norms of international law), ie higher hierarchical level of international standards (with erga omnes effects
, or whatever it is, required of all members of the international community, individuals, etc.), but according to this:
"117. Under this, the international community has recognized the need to take special measures to ensure protection human rights of migrants
[22] .
118. It should be noted that the regular situation of a person in a State is not a necessary condition for the state to respect and ensure the principle of equality and non discrimination, since, as already mentioned, this principle is fundamental and all States must guarantee its citizens and any foreign person who is in their territory. This does not mean you can not take any action against migrants who do not comply with state law. The important thing is that by taking appropriate measures, States should respect human rights and ensure their exercise and enjoyment to all persons within its territory, without discrimination on the regular or irregular residence, nationality, race, gender or any other cause.
119.
States therefore can not discriminate or tolerate discriminatory situations to the detriment of migrants. However, the State may give different treatment to documented migrants with regard to undocumented migrants, or between migrants and nationals, provided that this differential treatment is fair, objective, proportionate and does not harm human rights. For example, they made distinctions between migrants and nationals regarding ownership of some political rights. Also, States may establish mechanisms for input and output control of undocumented migrants to its territory, which must always be applied with strict adherence to due process and respect for human dignity. " (Our emphasis)
Although we believe that the mere reading of Article 1 of the ECHR would have sufficed to Mr. Sartori, to leave their
error [23] , except that he believes that migrants are human beings.
But what is the legal and political importance of the existence of human rights principles
Jus Cogens ? Trindade
clearly shows us to answer that question:
“73. Las manifestaciones del jus cogens internacional marcan presencia en la propia manera como los tratados de derechos humanos han sido interpretados y aplicados: las restricciones, en estos previstas, a los derechos humanos que consagran, son restrictivamente interpretadas, salvaguardando el Estado de Derecho, y
demonstrando que los derechos humanos no pertenecen al dominio del jus dispositivum, y no pueden ser considerados como simplemente "negociables" [24] ; todo lo contrario, permean ellos el propio orden jurídico nacional e internacional. En suma y conclusión sobre el punto en examen,
la emergencia y consagración del jus cogens evocan las nociones of international public order and a hierarchy of legal norms and the prevalence of the jus jus voluntarium necessarium , the jus cogens is presented as the legal expression of the international community as a whole, which, finally, making self-awareness, and fundamental principles and values \u200b\u200bthat guide
[25] . " (Our emphasis)
is clear that the establishment of the will of States, political language, minimally involve making policy decisions within the democratic interplay and within the powers of the bodies of power that are part of the system political (whether in international or internal states). Needless to emphasize that it is forbidden to instances of policy decisions to take any action that impairs the enjoyment and exercise, beyond the terms on which international law considers it lawful, and when this is possible
[26] .
If we further consider that the proposed advisory opinion addressed topics as diverse as, for example, labor rights of migrant workers, the gap between the reality of international practice in human rights, and the doctrines of political scientists is increasingly abysmal.
But our bewilderment political scientist's assertions came to a climax, to read sentences how are you:
"When defining human rights, humanitarian,
and when it is established that courts have jurisdiction over what issues, then I am willing to bow to his majesty. But not before, now .
Now observe, however, that the appeal to human rights-humanitarian is incubating a right-destructive to the right.
In part because it is a right hand put humanitarian rising tide of ignorant (at right). The to-right open wide the doors to incompetent.
But partly it is because they are also precisely the legal experts who are losing their expertise "
[27] . (Our emphasis)
These claims deserve answers at various levels. First, if Professor Sartori person was in Panama, probably by now be accused of illegal practice of the profession, in attempting to interpret the law, reserved for the appropriate year, ie lawyers with expertise in interpreting the law. However
is curious in the right supine ignorance manifested again and again, by Sartori (although claimed to scholars of human rights).
And, we insist, there are many human rights treaties, some of which said, setting bodies (which may be regional or universal, depending on the subsequent territorial jurisdiction thereof) to monitor compliance by States that have ratified.
Thus, it would inform the political scientist, for example, the UNHRC has jurisdiction under article 1 of the Optional Protocol I (hereinafter POI or the Protocol) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter ICCPR) , "to receive and consider communications from individuals subject to the jurisdiction of that State, claiming to be victims of a violation by that State Party of any of the rights contained in the Covenant. "
This Protocol was signed by Italy on April 30, 1976, and ratified on September 15, 1978. The same came into force on March 23, 1976.
However, if the quasi-judicial nature of the Committee is satisficiere Sartori's claims, we could tell you more illuminating.
For example Italy has signed (November 4, 1950) and ratified (October 26, 1955) the ECHR, and recognized the jurisdiction of the CREDHO. Amen to ponder that this Tribunal has already met many proceedings against the Italian State.
stressful is to insist on the jurisdiction of the request how are you, when we quoted liberally throughout the text. However Mr Sartori need, apparently, plenty of clarification.
So, unless otherwise calcification in the coccyx, the political scientist should bow to the majesty of the full enforcement and observance of human rights today, and to its universality, equality, inalienable and interdependent.
III. Conclusions.
These lessons we're taking out of the unhappy Sartori statements should not go unnoticed by political scientists and other Panamanian social scientists, which in many cases, barring a few honorable exceptions
[28] , incurred for the same reasons, the errors ("horrors?) from its Italian counterpart. And is that Panama has also ratified the Optional Protocol I of the Covenant on Civil and Political
[29] , love to have ratified many international human rights instruments, including the American Convention on Human Rights
[30] and acknowledged for example, the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court
[31] .
It is worth noting that the answers provided by Sartori are marked not only by the Italian political environment, but actually their interpretation of the law of the country. However these are wrong as seen in many cases, and other highly questionable if not reprehensible, because my taste the same reveal not only a powerful vision-centric policy, or his conservatism, but sometimes a veiled racism and xenophobia. It would be artificial
move the debate on the enforceability of the Universal Declaration for the State of Panama
[32] , under which, for example, internal rules and the ACHR, have been interpreted by the CrIDH in the sense that it can not be performed by States in a way that can "exclude or limit the effect that the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man and other international events of the same nature "
[33] . Then
believe that it is no exaggeration to assume that the American Convention can not be interpreted in a way that would limit or exclude the protection provided by the Universal Declaration, an international instrument of the same nature as the American Declaration.
the other face we are rewriting an article that will explain what you mean by powerful-centric vision of the Policy. However we believe that the current dialogue on human rights relations-democracy, has been credited to a path where both law and policy are humanized. That is, the balance is tilting to place a central role for the human (human-centric), and not the exercise of political power, or their reasons, not subordinate to him to be valid for the purposes of this.
The reason of humanity on the grounds of the state, the supremacy of the individual (with equality and freedom) and finally to other purposes such as security concepts must be handled by experts in political science, as theories, but intend to be anachronistic, should try to take at least until the state of the art
on human rights.
This course, provided that their traveling on the roads for the protection of the weak, the suffering, in short, the human person. But we know, serve the purpose of power.
Hopefully, this does not happen.
[1] The author holds a degree in Law and Political Science. Grandee of the Master of Social Sciences with emphasis in Sociology and Political Science Specialized University of the Americas (UDELAS). Human rights activist and Vice-President of the Center for Democratic Initiatives (ICW).
[2] Giovanni Sartori. Multiethnic Society. Pluralism, multiculturalism and foreign. Editorial Taurus. Madrid, Spain. August 2001.
[3] Although now I think that's the conclusion of the long (and perhaps endless) ways of knowing the policy, we will find the answers we seek, as they can be found in the philosophical field. However, we understand that there may never find the answers you seek. The philosophy includes men who have made interpretations about the root causes. The word interpretation and tells us why not find the kind of answers we were looking, and is that may not exist, at least as we understood it to begin our search.
[4] Italian Constitution of 1947.
"Article 10
The Italian legal system shall conform to the norms of international law generally recognized.
The legal status of foreigners regulated by law in the terms established by the rules and international treaties.
Any foreigner who is denied in his country the real exercise of democratic freedoms guaranteed by the Italian Constitution, the right of asylum in the territory of the Republic under the conditions laid down by law.
not be extradited for political crimes by foreigners. "
[5] Signed by Italy on March 13, 1968, ratified on January 5, 1976. Entered into force on 4 January 1969. States are linked based on the principle of good faith to comply with the treaties at the time of signing. Ratification makes them enforceable. All this explained in very plain terms.
[6] President of the Permanent European Court of Human Rights, cited in 20 / 3 Hum.Rts.LJ 114 (1999), quoted by Henry J. Steiner and Philip Alston, International Human Rights in Context, Second Edition, 799. Visible in the Digest of Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Human Rights Commission, accessible through http://www.cidh.org/RELATORIA/showarticle
League. asp? artid = 263 & lID = 2 [7] The value of the universal declaration of human rights "in: Manuel Ventura Robles, Ed In: The Modern World of Human Rights-The modern world of Human Rights: Essays in Honour of Thomas Buergenthal / Essays in Honour of Thomas Buergenthal. San José, CR: American Institute of Human Rights, 1996. Pp. 255-265.
[8] Ibid . Cit. page 187.
[9] Ibid . Cit., P.. 186.
[10] As part of the campaign to the Ombudsman of Dr. Alfredo Castillero Hoyos, wrote a short pamphlet, entitled Panama in the Human Rights Committee, United Nations, issued on January 7, 2006 in Panama America newspaper. Is available at the following address
http://victoratenciog.blogspot.com/2009/08/panama-en-el-comite-de-derechos-humanos.html
[11] In critical allusion to the behavior of Italian parliamentarians and judges of the Court Italian Constitutional trying to humanize immigration laws, and apply human rights standards to prevent discrimination and other violations of the rights of these people.
[12] Ibid . Cit. 183.
[13] UNHRC Concluding Observations of the Report presented by the Panamanian government, in keeping with their obligations under Article 40 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In that text, the UNHRC I would point Panamanian State:
"8. The Committee notes with concern that according to Article 12 of the Constitution, the State may deny an application for naturalization on grounds of physical or mental disability. (Article 2 of the Covenant).
The State party should amend the Constitution to eliminate the same this discriminatory provision that is contrary to the Covenant. " (Emphasis of the Committee)
The same applies in Article 35 on religious freedom.
[14] CrIDH. "The Last Temptation of Christ" (Olmedo Bustos et al) v. Chile. Reparations and Costs. Judgement of February 5, 2001. Series C No. 73
[15] CrIDH. Almonacid Arellano et al v. Chile. Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgement of September 26, 2006. Series C No. 154:
"124. The Court is aware that judges and courts are subject to the rule of law and, therefore, are obliged to implement the provisions in the law. But when a State has ratified an international treaty such as the American Convention, its judges, as part of the state apparatus, are also subject to it, which obliges them to ensure that the effects of the provisions of the Convention are not adversely affected by the application of laws contrary to its object and purpose, and that from the beginning have no legal effect. In other words, the Judiciary must exercise a sort of "control of conventionality" between domestic legal standards that apply in specific cases and the American Convention on Human Rights. In this task, the judiciary must take into account not only the treaty, but also the interpretation thereof made by the Court, the ultimate interpreter of the American Convention. " (Emphasis added)
[16] serve as examples the cases of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Report No. 63/99, Case 11,427, vs. Victor Rosario Congo. ECUADOR, April 13, 1999 and CrIDH. Case of the "Street Children" (Villagrán Morales et al) v. Guatemala. Fund. Judgement of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, paragraph 191.
[17] suggest reading our article "The principle pro homine: an approach", available in the league
http://victoratenciog.blogspot.com/2009/05/el-principio-pro-homine-una . html . A printed version of this article was published on February 13, 2007 in the Journal Star.
[18] Regarding the historical emergence of this principle recommend the article "The Code of Hammurabi: "Legislated the principle first consecration debilis please? Other legal and political considerations. Available in
http://victoratenciog.blogspot.com/2009/05/el-codigo-de-hammurabi-primera.html .
On the conceptual definition and scope thereof suggest reading the article "The principle for debilis v. independence of the Ombudsman. His connection and importance." Visible in the league
http://victoratenciog.blogspot.com/2009/05/el-principio-favor-debilis-vs.html [19] Ibid. Cit., P. 182.
[20] Ibid . Cit., P. 182.
[21] Court. Status and Rights of Undocumented Migrants. Advisory Opinion OC 18/03 of September 17, 2003. Series No. 18.
[22] Cf UN World Summit on Social Development in Copenhagen in March 1995, the Programme of Action, paras. 63, 77 and 78, United Nations, A/CONF.171/13, October 18, 1994, Report of the International Conference on Population and Development held in Cairo from 5 to 13 September 1994, Programme of Action , Chapter XA 10. 2 to 10.20; General Assembly United Nations, A / CONF. 157/23, July 12, 1993, World Conference on Human Rights held send us, Austria, from 14 to 25 June 1993, Declaration and Programme of Action, I.24 and II.33-35.
[23] ECHR:
"Article 1. Obligation to respect human rights
The High Contracting Parties
to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section I of this Convention. " (Emphasis added)
[24]. JA Pastor Ridruejo, "The European Convention on Human Rights and Jus Cogens` 'International', Studies in International Law - A Tribute to Professor Miaja de la Muela, Volume I, Madrid, Ed Tecnos, 1979, pp. 581-590. - The possibility of the impact of jus cogens of the elaboration international projects, cf. discussion in GM Danilenko, "International Jus cogens: Issues of Law-Making", 2 European Journal of International Law (1991) pp. 48-49 and 59-65.
[25]. A. Gómez Robledo, The Jus cogens (Critical Historical Study), Mexico, UNAM, 1982, pp. 20-21, 222-223 and 226, and cf. p. 140, and cf. R.St.J. also Macdonald, "Fundamental Norms in Contemporary International Law", 25 Annuaire canadien de Droit international (1987) pp. 133-134, 140-142 and 148.
[26] Because there are rights that under no circumstances may be limited enjoyment and exercise. These are called "non-derogable rights." In For them the ACHR are initially embodied in paragraph 2 of Article 27.
[27] Ibid. Cit., P. 189.
[28] comes to my mind the example of Dr. Alfredo Castillero Hoyos, current Director General of Foreign Policy, former member of the UN Human Rights.
[29] It is signed by July 26, 1976 and ratified it on March 8, 1977.
[30] The signing on 22 November 1969, and ratified on 5 August 1978.
[31] From May 9, 1990.
[32] Reason for not trying to transform an expert on Italian law, or jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, I have not delved on the jurisprudential position that this court has been able to take on the subject (if any). Of course they will be happy at another time, with more time, I will focus on deepening the subject.
[33] Literal d of Article 29 of the ACHR (with the caveat that not remind you that there is similar provision in the ECHR). On the issue of the enforceability of the American Declaration is available Court. Interpretation of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man Within the Framework of Article 64 of the American Convention on Human Rights. OC-10/89 Advisory Opinion of July 14 1989. Series A No. 10:
. "46 For States Parties to the Convention, the specific source of their obligations regarding the protection of human rights is, in principle, the Convention itself. However, we must bear in mind that in the light of Article 29.d), however, that the governing instrument for States Parties to the Convention is the same, shall not thereby be released from any obligations arising for them Declaration by the fact of being members of the OAS.
47. The fact that the Declaration is a treaty does not, then, to the conclusion that no legal effect, nor that of the Court is unable to interpreted in the framework of principles set out above. "
