Emory International Law Review

Volume 33Issue 2
Articles

The Unique Jurisdiction of the African Court on Human and People’s Rights: Protection of Human Rights Beyond the African Charter

Yakaré-Oulé (Nani) Jansen Reventlow & Rosa Curling | 33 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 203 (2019)

The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Court) is explicitly mandated to consider violations under any relevant human rights instruments as ratified by the concern Member States under Article 3 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Humans and Peoples’ Rights (the Protocol). This Article summarizes the legal mandate given to the Court by the Protocol, provides an overview of the Court’s case law as it relates to the interpretation of this mandate, argues that the Court does not yet have a consistent approach on matters of jurisdiction, and explores routes the Court could take in this regard.

Read More »

A Gendered Refutation of Epiphenomenal Norms Through the Median Voter: A Case Study of India’s CEDAW Compliance

Shritha Vasudevan | 33 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 223 (2019)

This Article hypothesizes on the reasons behind India’s Declaration to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) Article 5(a) as a manifestation of the intensive compliance deadlock over its due diligence obligation which castigates traditional, cultural attitudes as responsible for gender-based violence. A qualitative analysis of two historical moments when India was confronted with an empirical conflict of the CEDAW’s due diligence obligation: the sati of Roop Kanwar in 1987 and the Shah Bano judgment in 1985, even prior to its CEDAW accession in 1993 is undertaken, to argue that the rational choice theory of voting and elections perfectly explains non-compliance. This Article contests the position that norms are epiphenomenal and makes the case that only a study of gendered compliance alters the epistemological lens. This finding implies norms could be rationally restructured to make it in nations’ interest to comply, simultaneously contesting the post-positivist feminist IR contention that eschews the relevance of the mainstream discipline.

Read More »

Iraqi Women as Legally Vulnerable Subjects: Applying Gender-Mainstreaming and Vulnerability Theory in the Post-Conflict Iraqi State

Jenna Breslin | 33 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 259 (2019)

Despite U.N.S.C.R 1325 being hailed as a momentous breakthrough for women in international law, such post-conflict reconstruction policies that rely on injecting women into the peacemaking process to achieve gendered equality prove ineffective and dangerous when applied to foreign nations torn apart by war. In the context of post-conflict Iraq, Resolution 1325 not only rendered Iraqi women more vulnerable as symbols of western invasion but failed to address the crumbling state infrastructure that left women without electricity, clean drinking water, employment, food, and security. This Comment argues that the “add women and stir” equality of Resolution 1325 must be abandoned in favor of reconstruction following Martha Fineman’s Vulnerability Theory. Vulnerability Theory focuses instead on rebuilding the political, economic, and social infrastructure of the post-conflict state, ameliorating the conditions that exacerbate vulnerability, recognizing that poverty, diminished access to life-saving resources, unemployment, and insecurity intersect with gender to perpetuate suffering and violence.

Read More »

The United States’ Convention Against Torture RUDs: Allowing the Use of Solitary Confinement in Lieu of Mental Health Treatment in U.S. Immigration Detention Centers

Erika Voreh | 33 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 287 (2019)

Currently in civil immigration detention centers around the United States, the practice of placing detained immigrants who are mentally ill is allowed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In some detention centers, placement into solitary confinement is now the main form of psychological “treatment.” Solitary confinement can have negative psychological effects especially for individuals with mental illness. Other international bodies, including the European Court of Human Rights, have acknowledged the harmful effects of solitary confinement. This Comment focuses on decisions by the European Court of Human Rights as to what constitutes torture. This Comment argues that placing detained immigrants who are mentally ill into solitary confinement constitutes torture, however, because the U.S.’s interpretation of torture is much narrower than other international bodies there is still a long journey to achieve the prohibition of this shameful practice in the United States.

Read More »