Search

Increasingly, urban actors invoke human rights to address inequalities, combat privatisation, and underline common aspirations, or to protect vested (private) interests. The potential and the pitfalls of these processes are conditioned by the urban, and deeply political. These urban politics of human rights are at the heart of this book.An international line-up of contributors with long-term engagement in this field shed light on these politics in cities on four continents and eight cities, presenting a wealth of empirical detail and disciplinary theoreticalisation perspectives. They analyse the ‘city society’, the urban actors involved, and the mechanisms of human rights mobilisation. In doing so, they show the commonalities in rights engagement in today’s globalised and often deeply unequal cities characterised by urban law, private capital but also communities that rally around concepts as the ‘right to the city’. Most importantly, the chapters highlight the conditions under which this mobilisation truly contributes to social justice, be it concerning the simple right to presence, cultural rights, accessible housing or – in times of COVID – health care.Urban Politics of Human Rights provides indispensable reading for anyone with a practical or theoretical interest in the complex, deeply political, and at times also truly promising interrelationship between human rights and the urban.

This article classifies and theorizes the strategies of divergence that local authorities employ when confronting the discretionary spaces offered by domestic migration law. We propose a distinction between strategies that are either within or outside the perceived boundaries of the law and those that adopt an explicit or an implicit approach to positioning, thus harnessing or downplaying the communicative potential of the law. Based thereon, we introduce a fourfold typology of strategies of divergences that include defiance, dodging, deviation, and dilution. This typology was developed and refined based on field research in local authorities in Greece, Turkey, Italy, and The Netherlands. The case material also leads us into a preliminary exploration of which types of cities and conditions may lead to the adoption of one strategy over another. As such, this article draws attention to the relevance of law within multi-level migration governance and to the meaning of legal ambiguity and discretion as shaped by law and legal interpretation. The strategies of divergence that mould discretionary spaces, in turn, either mitigate or exacerbate legal uncertainty and should be considered a significant factor to account for change in migration governance.

Net als de najaarsbijeenkomst van de VASR in 2021 gaat deze bijdrage over de afwikkeling van de aardbevingsschade in Groningen, en dan met name over de spanningen die kunnen optreden bij de keuze tussen individuele en collectieve schadeafwikkeling. Bij de vraag naar de keuze tussen het een of het ander, of de zoektocht naar een vorm van afdoening waarbij er een optimale mix tussen die vormen van schadeafwikkeling kan worden gevonden, zullen wij vooral de psychologische kant van deze kwestie bekijken. Meer specifiek zullen wij het perspectief van ervaren procedurele rechtvaardigheid in het debat over (de keuze tussen) individuele of collectieve schadeafwikkeling betrekken.

Although the tale about tort law and risks is almost as old as time itself, the concept of judge-made risk regulation is an odd one out in the world of tort law scholarship. Traditionally, tort law practitioners and (most) scholars understand the tort law system as an individual dispute resolution mechanism with its very raison d’etre to do justice in a bipolar relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant.1 According to this conception, tort law offers a victim the possibility to hold the wrongdoer accountable for his alleged wrongful behavior and when he or she does so, a civil judge allocates the responsibilities in relation to the risks involved between the proceeding parties.2 The judge determines the extent to which the plaintiff or the defendant is ex ante responsible for the management of the risk and whether the defendant ex post has to compensate the victim for the costs of the negative consequences of a risk that has materialised. [...]

The ever-increasing scholarship on the politics of human rights focuses on either international treaty negotiations or domestic politics after ratification. It thus misses how the stage of implementation is often crucially set in the period between signing and ratifying. This article addresses this lacuna via an in-depth discussion of the ratification process of the Disability Convention (CRPD) in the Netherlands. In this period, stakeholders highlight certain treaty obligations, while downplaying or ignoring others. This theory of preratification politics calls for more differentiation between treaty obligations and attention to the politics of their mobilization, even in the most monist countries. Interuniversity Attraction Poles Programme

In recent years, local authorities in Europe have increasingly developed bordering practices that hinder or further migrant rights, such as the freedom of movement. They bypass national borders by facilitating refugee resettlement, they claim local space to welcome or shun certain migrants, and they develop or break down local impediments to migrant mobility. These local practices, we argue, can best be understood from a multiscalar perspective, which considers processes of placemaking as reproductive of power dynamics. Applying such a perspective to local bordering practices in Greece, Turkey, the Netherlands, Italy, and Germany, we point out the importance of the multitude of the actors involved; legal pluralism; and the contextual role of social, economic, and spatial factors. This offers a theoretical foothold for understanding the power dynamics at play when local authorities become bastions or bulwarks, in which some migrants are welcomed, and others are not.

This introduction sets out key aspects of the relationship between human rights and legal pluralism in cities and towns. Over the years, such localities have come to engage with human rights in many ways that contribute to the pluralization of understandings of human rights. For one, cities and towns are agents, or norm entrepreneurs rather than the passive receivers of human rights as international law and politics. In addition, local governments are actors, bringing into question to what extent they could become subjects rather than mere objects of international law, with their own international competences and obligations, making and enforcing law. Thirdly, localities serve as arenas, far from homogenous entities but rather spaces which bring different local actors and positions together, in which plural understandings of human rights clash and are produced, questioned, contested, and re-negotiated. These forms of urban engagement bring about a rich pluralization of human rights, ranging from the actors involved in its contestation, to the specific rights prioritized by localities; from the ways in which human rights debates can play out in certain spaces, to how human rights norms are transported between the global and the local becoming vernacularized. In setting out this interrelationship between urban activity, human rights and legal pluralism, this introduction also serves as an outline of how the different perspectives in the articles in this Special Issue contribute to a better understanding of the role of local governments in putting forward plural understandings of human rights.

Increasingly, local authorities around the world invoke international law to tackle global challenges autonomously while distancing themselves from national laws and policies, sometimes stimulated by international authorities. This chapter addresses the relevance of national constitutional arrangements for the way in which the resulting conflicts are, or are not, resolved. More specifically, how do domestic courts respond to ‘accelerating cities’ invoking international law as they oppose policies of the national government? Discussing cases from Germany, Turkey, France, the Netherlands and Spain, we offer an initial exploration of how such cases have the potential to challenge the constitutional order in federal and unitary states alike. At the same time, ‘accelerating cities’ are confronted with ‘constitutional brakes’—barriers in national constitutional and administrative rules. Our analysis suggests that national courts may permit harmless symbolic acts, but step down, or even create a ‘backlash’ in the case of more consequential actions. Given the potential in local engagement with international law, and the rise of the phenomenon, it is urgent to set up systematic and detailed investigations and comparisons of the dynamics of local government law in different countries and how they are shaped by an invocation of international law in general, and human rights law in particular.

This chapter addresses the possible contributions and limitations of empirical research for legal research in the domains of private law, criminal law and constitutional and administrative law. The authors do this to gain a better insight in the nature of legal research and – based on that – to try to inspire legal scholars to embrace and possibly engage in empirical research themselves, to enrich their work. After a general introduction, some of the peculiarities of legal research are dealt with, offering a possible explanation for the seemingly slow reception of empirical scholarship within legal research. Next, the possibilities and the pros and cons of empirical research methods for the three legal domains covered are dealt with. The chapter takes a special look at the empirical research methods that are dealt with elsewhere in this volume and discusses the possibilities and limitations of these methods for legal research in the three legal domains covered.

The growing influence and self-confidence of local authorities count among the most interesting recent phenomena in global governance. While not entirely oblivious, international law as a field has struggled to get ahead of this dynamic, focusing instead on how to integrate local authorities into static conventional frameworks firmly based on the notion of state sovereignty. However, as a discussion of the global state of affairs and a focus on human rights cities shows, local actors increasingly claim and obtain a key role in the realization of international law. Additionally, they hold important potential to address some of the most pressing challenges to international human rights law concerning its efficacy and legitimacy. This article therefore calls for a proactive approach to the study of local authorities that considers local authorities as a ‘new frontier’ in international law generally and in human rights law specifically. It proposes a critical research agenda for this purpose that could produce important new insights into (i) the continued relevance and legitimacy of human rights as a discourse of governance; (ii) the bearing of domestic constitutional arrangements on the implementation of human rights law and (iii) questions of, and possible shifts in, legal subjecthood in the contexts of ‘state failure’.

When the idea of this special edition occurred to the team behind the New Journal of European Criminal Law, my first thought was to go back through all of Scott Crosby’s contributions in print as editor-in-chief and see whether a mini-retrospective on the themes and views therein would be worthy of inclusion here – by Scott’s own standards. These notes focus on what gradually became the single biggest concern expressed in Scott’s editorials: the perilous position of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in a post-Brexit UK – in concreto, the prospect of what he labelled ‘Brexit plus’: a British exit from the ECHR system. I begin with Scott’s views on the European Union (EU) Referendum and the Brexit process. Next comes the great uncertainty currently surrounding the future of Convention rights in the United Kingdom, set against the emphasis placed by the editorials on the instrumental role of the ECHR in fostering peace across the whole of Europe, within and beyond the territory of the EU. In the event that Brexit plus should materialise, writing in the wake of polls showing all-time record support in Scotland for secession from the United Kingdom I close by asking whether Scotland might be able to ‘leave a light on for Strasbourg’.

Er is al veel bekend over toezicht, verantwoording en beoordeling in de publieke sector enerzijds en over menselijk oordeelsvermogen, biases en beoordelingsfouten anderzijds. Maar die kennis is nog maar in zeer beperkte mate onderling verbonden. In dit artikel wordt verslag gedaan van drie verkennende experimenten naar de kwaliteit van beoordelingen door professionele beoordelaars in de publieke sector. De inzet daarvan is om te leren van de gedragswetenschappen in onderzoek naar kwaliteit en effectiviteit van professioneel oordelen. In het onderzoek is een klassiek sociaalpsychologisch experiment over verantwoording, biases en oordeelsvermogen (Tetlock, 1983) vertaald naar de publieke sector en uitgevoerd met achtereenvolgens toezichthouders, studenten en rechters en gerechtssecretarissen.

Discursieve motivering is in de mode. In (delen van) de rechtspraak en rechtswetenschap leeft de gedachte dat discursieve motivering de acceptatie van rechterlijke uitspraken in de maatschappij ten goede komt. In dit onderzoek hebben we onderzocht of, en zo ja, in hoeverre, de gehanteerde motiveringsstijl de maatschappelijke aanvaarding van rechterlijke uitspraken beïnvloedt. Uit onze studie blijkt dat men de invloed van een discursieve motiveringsstijl op de acceptatie van rechtspraak niet dient te overschatten. Dat is een belangrijke nuance in het debat over de wenselijkheid van bepaalde motiveringsstijlen. Vanuit het oogpunt van aanvaardbaarheid van rechtspraak voor de justitiabele is discursieve motivering niet per se noodzakelijk.

A key aspect of investigating the foundations of justice in Europe is to understand how these developed over time. Such an inquiry can begin in many different places and at many different moments. This chapter, however, focuses on the period during and after the Second World War, from 1941 to 1957. One reason for this is that the Second World War was, in many different ways, the reason for closer cooperation within Europe and for the institutionalization of such cooperation. Another is the degree to which this particular period was still characterized by an openness and indefiniteness in terms of the type of justice to be institutionalized in Europe. By the time of the formation of the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1957 this was very different – clear choices had been made in terms of the type of justice institutionalized in the European project. A close consideration of the particular debates that led to these institutional outcomes, of the people involved and the ideas that they held can offer important insight into the conceptions of justice on and off the table in this early period of European formation (Norman and Zaidi 2008).

In seeking to understand contemporary renegotiations of sovereignty, Cities of Refuge form an important inroad. The term designates those cities that explicitly go beyond the national standard in refugee welcome and integration and are thus actively involved in the definition and renegotiation of refugee rights, and of human rights in general. In doing so, Cities of Refuge engage in practices of bordering, either creating new borders or breaking down existing ones. This results in a localized interplay between law, culture and human rights which amounts to the creation of a “cityzenship” in which rights and obligations are defined inclusively, with the idea that all present in the city should be treated equally. Such efforts are not only located in the realm of politics but also, crucially, in the cultural domain. On the basis of cases from, mostly, Europe this article sets out how these processes of strengthening local cultures of welcome and setting out related rights lead to strengthening of local sovereignty but, simultaneously, contribute to the realization of cosmopolitan, human rights.

The manuscript studies the arranged marriage from within its own cultural tradition.

This research investigates the extent to which informal justice systems protect and violate children rights and well-being. It involves an empirical study of the Kipsigis community in Kenya. The study revealed how informal and formal justice systems interact to address child abuse in this community and the location of Kipsigis children as both subjects and objects of child abuse. Although formal child protection systems at both domestic and international level consider informal justice systems to be inconsistent with the interest and well-being of the child, many community members among grassroots communities rely on them as the main dispute resolution platforms. Children officers, and other state agents, in recognizing the inadequacy of formal law to resolve some child-related disputes, rely on customary law to resolve the same. The study revealed that the best interest of the child under Kipsigis customary law is guaranteed through; promotion of a harmonious co-existence between the child and the clan/family members; prioritisation of the long-term (rather than short-term) interest of the child; adherence to the customary duties and obligation by the parents; and a contextual understanding of the best interest of the child in which the needs of each child are considered to be different and therefore warranting a child-specific approach. It also established that the ‘wholesale’ condemnation of child labour by international and domestic child rights regimes is counterproductive to the child well-being because it ignores the social construction of child labour and the role that some forms of ‘child labour’ play in integrating the child in the family and guaranteeing other basic services, such as education. The study also observed that child well-being at the grassroots level is guaranteed through the language of care and ordinary virtues rather than rights. Finally, the study revealed the existence of cross-cultural dialogue platforms that seek to reconcile the different conceptions of child well-being at the community level.

In this publication in the Dutch Journal for Alien Law, Barbara Oomen argues that municipalities play an ever larger role in acting as forerunners in responding to international challenges, like migration. She sets out three recent developments: the divergence between local and national policies, the cooperation in the context of networks and the formation of humanitarian corridors. On this basis she reflects upon the report on the future of migration published by the Advisory Committee on Migration Affairs.