Article 20(2) of the un’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr) is an odd human rights clause. It provides that “[a]ny advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.” Accordingly, this provision does not appear to codify a fundamental right but rather a sui generis state obligation. The present article aims at providing a legal taxonomy of this international incitement clause, ultimately also answering the question as to whether, despite its unique formulation as speech prohibition, it contains a justiciable right to protection from incitement.
This essay introduces the Special Issue of the Journal. It discusses how changing religious demographics and heightened religious plurality are challenging existing thinking about, and patterns of, state-religion relations and the nature of the ‘secular state’. The essay briefly surveys each of the papers in the Special Issue and highlights that one of the key lessons that emerges from the papers is the importance of context. As the contexts evolve, fresh thinking and new arrangements would be needed.
While the system of international law is improving enormously and certain legal provisions are becoming an integral part of jus cogens norms, this body of law must be studied together with other systems which have basically been effective in its development. The principles of the rule of law must be evaluated collectively rather than selectively. In fact, most Islamic nations have ratified the ICC Statute. They have thereby contributed to the establishment of the pillars of morality, equality, peace and justice. At the same time, those pillars may be strengthened by means of an accurate interpretation of the principles of international criminal laws by all parties. The objective of these comparative philosophies is to examine their core principles, similarities and differences. The intention is to indicate that the variation in theories may not obstruct the legal implementation of international criminal law if their dimensions are judged objectively and with the noblest of motives towards mankind.