Episode fifteen: How the Inter-American Court takes a different approach to human rights

How does the approach of the Costa Rica-based Inter-American Court of Human Rights compare to that of the European Court of Human Rights?

We start exploring this question through two cases that involved Mexico and the US. Both cases gave rise to advisory opinions.

In the first, the Inter-American Court explained how it thought human rights law applied to the failure of authorities in the United States to ensure that Mexico be in a position to offer support to Mexican nationals detained in the US.

The second case concerned Mexican workers, again in the United States, who had been sacked after forming a trade union, without receiving back pay. The US Supreme Court did not find this objectionable. This episode reveals how and why the Inter-American Court of Human Rights’ own interpretation took lawyers around the world by surprise.

 

(If you have problems with the embedded player use this link to listen).

To download a copy of this podcast right-click this link and choose ‘Download Linked File’ or ‘Save Link As…’.

In other news Marie is delivering her inaugural lecture on Wednesday 6th May 2015 entitled: Human rights can save lives, but whose? Click the link for further details including the time and location.

Episode fourteen: Treating nationals and non-nationals equally — a human rights duty

In this episode I discuss the way we currently allow nation states to treat nationals and non-nationals differently.

 

(If you have problems with the embedded player use this link to listen).

Liberty and equality are the two key principles that underpin human rights law. Every human being should be free, every human being is equal in dignity and worth.

Historically, it was long considered acceptable to treat different human beings differently on the basis of characteristics such as gender and race. This no longer goes unchallenged.

The question arises: will our descendants look back at us wondering how we could let our governments treat human beings differently based on their nationality?

The book has just been published and is available to our podcast listeners at a 20% discount. To take advantage of this offer click here.

To download a copy of this podcast right-click this link and choose ‘Download Linked File’ or ‘Save Link As…’.

Episode thirteen: All equals?

Would you say it should be acceptable to deny a legally settled foreign worker who has contributed to a national social security system the opportunity to draw on a pension fund simply because he is a foreigner?

 

(If you have problems with the embedded player use this link to listen).

The European Court of Human Rights said no in Gaygusuz v. Austria.

This judgment was celebrated as a great victory for equality when it was adopted in 1996.

Conspicuously, however, the Court refrained from asserting the principle of equality of all human beings irrespective of nationality a major goal in the Council of Europe.

The book has just been published and is available to our podcast listeners at a 20% discount. To take advantage of this offer click here.

To download a copy of this podcast right-click this link and choose ‘Download Linked File’ or ‘Save Link As…’.