Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Treaty Interpretation And Constitutional Transformation: Informal Change In International Organizations., Julian Arato
Treaty Interpretation And Constitutional Transformation: Informal Change In International Organizations., Julian Arato
Articles
Like all constituted bodies of government, international organizations change over time-sometimes in profound and unexpected ways. Besides developing through the obvious mechanism of formal amendment by the constituent member states, these governance bodies can and do undergo a more autonomous kind of constitutional development-what might be called informal constitutional change or transformation. This type of quiet evolution may occur on different levels-including the reordering of the organization's internal architecture in terms of the relative competences of its various organs, as well as the development of the powers of the organization as a whole vis-avis the states parties. Unlike formal amendment, …
Rethinking Subsidiarity In International Human Rights Adjudication, William M. Carter Jr.
Rethinking Subsidiarity In International Human Rights Adjudication, William M. Carter Jr.
Articles
This article suggests that a re-evaluation of the principle of subsidiarity is in order. While I make no sweeping claims that the principle of subsidiarity is always preferable or always undesirable, I do suggest that a close look at the myriad ways in which subsidiarity applies reveals that it may sometimes impede, rather than advance, the cause it purports to serve: namely, achieving universality of human rights. This article identifies situations where subsidiarity is more likely to diminish human rights protections that it is to advance them and suggests that subsidiarity should be abandoned or minimized in such areas.
Thoughts From Across The Water On Hearsay And Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman
Thoughts From Across The Water On Hearsay And Confrontation, Richard D. Friedman
Articles
This article draws on the history of the hearsay rule, and on recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, to argue that the right to confrontation should be recognised as a basic principle of the law of evidence, and that aspects of the Law Commission's proposals for reform of the hearsay rule, and of the Home Office's proposals for restrictions on the right of cross-examination, are therefore unsatisfactory.