¡Qué hay de nuevo!
Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos
Boletín No. 185, Año 9, 2016
SKYPE WHATSAPP FACEBOOK TWITTER CORREO


The problematic applicability of subsidiarity to international law and institutions.
Paolo G. Carozza.
En: The American Journal of Jurisprudence.
Vol. 61, No. 1 (2016)



Resumen: This article seeks to explore some of the reasons why the principle of subsidiarity, although applicable in some sectors of international law and particularly in the field of international human rights law, has difficulty in serving as a general principle of public international law more broadly. The obstacles to advancing a more robust understanding of subsidiarity's place in the current structure of global norms and institutions include: the normative and institutional fragmentation of international law; the continuing centrality of state sovereignty in the international legal system; and the endemic weaknesses and incapacity of states and sub-state communities with respect to any general system of global governance. The article concludes with some suggestions regarding how these difficulties can be mitigated.


Subsidiarity's roots and history: Some observations.
John Finnis.
En: The American Journal of Jurisprudence.
Vol. 61, No. 1 (2016)



Resumen: Subsidiarity, i.e., "the principle of subsidiarity," i.e., "the principle of subsidiary function/responsibility," i.e., the principle that it is unjust for a higher authority (e.g., the state's government and law) to usurp the self-governing authority that lower authorities (e.g., in families or other civil associations), acting in the service of their own members (groups and persons), rightly have over those members, is a presumptive and defeasible, not an absolute, principle. But it excludes any general policy or aim of assuming the control or managerial direction of lower groups. Its deepest rationale is the intrinsic desirability of self-direction (not least in cooperatively associating with other persons), a good that is to be favored and respected even at the expense of some efficiency in the pursuit of other goods. Though arising out of Aristotelean moral and political theory, it denies or strongly disambiguates a cardinal principle of Aristotelean political theory. It is reflected in the work of Aquinas, Taparelli, Mill and Maitland, before its articulation by Pius XI (1931).


Subsidiarity in international human rights law: What is subsidiary about human rights?
Samantha Besson.
En: The American Journal of Jurisprudence.
Vol. 61, No. 1 (2016)

 
   

Resumen: Subsidiarity is en vogue in international human rights law. From a largely implicit and mainly jurisprudential principle used in discrete guises by international human rights courts, it has become increasingly present in human rights reasoning and is about to become entrenched in the text of international human rights treaties. Past the usual truisms about States having the primary responsibility to secure human rights and international human rights institutions having only a supervisory function, however, the notion, role and justification of subsidiarity in international human rights law remain very difficult to capture. Broadly speaking, scholarly strategies have divided into two groups. Most authors focus on one aspect of subsidiarity (usually the margin of appreciation of domestic authorities), while fewer look for the broader underpinning principle.


Member States' compliance with the Inter-American Court of Human Rights' judgments and orders requiring non-pecuniary reparations.
Sabrina Vannuccini.
En: Inter-American and European Human Rights Journal.
No. 1 (2014)

 

Resumen: This article centres on the topic of the implementation process of the IACtHR's judicial decisions adopted within the framework of the system of individual petitions of the ACHR, by delving into the degree of actual compliance with final condemnatory judgments and the reasons why member States may not implement in practice these judgments, with a special focus on those ordering non-pecuniary reparations, rather than on those fixing monetary damage. The reason of this selective choice resides in the fact that execution by the responsible states of the IACtHR's innovative, extensive and detailed equitable remedies – or injunctive orders – creates more difficulties than that of compensatory orders, invokes action by more disparate domestic actors (especially legislators, executives, judges and judicial systems), and makes compliance challenging.


Cognitive behavioral psychotherapeutic treatment at a psychiatric trauma clinic for refugees: Description and evaluation.
Cæcilie Buhmann, Ida Andersen, Erik Lykke Mortensen, Jasmina Ryberg, Merete Nordentoft, Morten EkstrØm.
En: Torture: Journal on rehabilitation of torture victims and prevention of torture.
Vol. 25, No. 1 (2015)

 
   

Resumen: The purpose of this article is to describe and evaluate a manualized cognitive behavioral therapy for traumatized refugees incorporating exposure therapy, mindfulness and acceptance and commitment therapy.


Follow-up study of the treatment outcomes at a psychiatric trauma clinic for refugees.
Cæcilie Buhmann, Erik Lykke Mortensen, Merete Nordentoft, Jasmina Ryberg, Morten EkstrØm.
En: Torture: Journal on rehabilitation of torture victims and prevention of torture.
Vol. 25, No. 1 (2015)


Resumen: The purpose of this article is to describes change in mental health after treatment with antidepressants and trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy.


"After all the traumas my body has been through, I feel good that it is still working."- Basic body awareness therapy for traumatised refugees.
Kajsa Stade, Signe Skammeritz, Charlotte Hjotkær.
En: Torture: Journal on rehabilitation of torture victims and prevention of torture.
Vol. 25, No. 1 (2015)


Resumen: The objective of this article is to explore the compliance, acceptability and treatment satisfaction using group BBAT in traumatised refugees. To study changes in psychiatric and somatic symptoms as well as quality of life, level of functioning and quality of movement during treatment with BBAT.


The DSM 5 and the Istanbul Protocol: Diagnosis of psychological sequels of torture
Thomas Wenzel, Andreas Frewer, Siroos Mirzaei.
En: Torture: Journal on rehabilitation of torture victims and prevention of torture.
Vol. 25, No. 1 (2015)


Resumen: The Manual on Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, commonly known as the Istanbul Protocol, is an interdisciplinary standard supported by, among others, the United Nations and the World Medical Association. It aims at aiding the fight against torture by giving clear guidelines to ensure better and more effective assessment of physical and psychological sequels. Mental health is a key aspect of diagnostical assessment and documentation due to the severe and frequently long-lasting impact of torture that often lasts longer than physical sequels. The inclusion of psychological aspects and a psychiatric diagnosis is to be treated as an important obligatory. Care must be taken to avoid common pitfalls. The new and substantial revisions in the frequently used but also criticised Diagnostical and Statistical Manual (DSM) reflect challenges and opportunities in a comprehensive approach to the documentation of torture.



Human Rights
Law Review

Inter-American and European Human Rights
Journal

Human Rights
Quarterly

V-LEX

Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights

HeinOnline