Browse results
Abstract
Religious Freedom without the Rule of Law: The Constitutional Odysseys of Afghanistan, Egypt, and Iraq and the Fate of the Middle East compares the domestic and international efforts to instill the values and practices of the rule of law in the Middle East in the early twenty-first century with their disappointing performances in terms of safety, political volatility, human rights violations, and, especially, religious freedom. It zooms in on Afghanistan, Egypt, and Iraq to argue that international interventions and local struggles underestimated the ethno-religious mosaic of these countries and their ideological cleavages. The rule of law could not reasonably replace local rights and promote religious freedom as many hoped. The notions of individualism, equality, rights, and courts, which are among the strongest philosophical underpinnings of the rule of law, are explored and contrasted with the political and constitutional culture of the Middle East. The work concludes that securing stability and protecting religious freedom in the region requires compromising on the rule of law and that the consociational model of constitutionalism would probably have better chances of achieving them.
Abstract
From a practitioner’s perspective the intervention explores how digital technologies have enhanced the capacities of policy-makers in anticipating and responding to atrocity crimes including through development and access to sophisticated technologies to collect and verify evidence of crimes for justice and accountability. Digital technologies have also provided perpetrators with enhanced tools to target populations with greater precision and commit atrocities against them. The intervention argues that the harm perpetuated by digital technologies can be mitigated by holding developers of these technologies accountable for creating operating environments that are safe and by naming and shaming governments that use new technologies to target populations.
Abstract
The article explores the evolution of a key, yet relatively obscure, instrument relating to the ‘head’ of proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights (Court), namely interim measures. By employing the decisions related to the Polish rule of law crisis as a case study, the article contends that the Court’s use of interim measures in this context exhibits significant novelties compared to its previous practice, regarding both the scope and content of interim protection. More broadly, the Polish case study, along with other recent developments in the Court’s practice under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, highlights a growing tendency to use interim measures for addressing systemic issues in the Contracting Parties. This aspect prompts a reflection on the evolving nature and function of interim relief under the European Convention on Human Rights, and on the outstanding procedural shortcomings of the Rule 39 machinery, which is currently undergoing a process of reform.