Many countries confront similar human rights controversies, but, despite the claimed universality of human rights values they are not always resolved in the same way. Why? What role do local legal conditions play? Is human rights discourse more potent where rights are constitutionally entrenched, rather than where there is a tradition of respect for underlying human rights values but no bill of rights?
Comparative socio-legal examination of three recent controversies - double jeopardy reform, recognition of same-sex relationships and the operation of hate speech laws - in four countries - Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom provides answers to these questions.
Examination of these controversies suggests that differences in the design of domestic legal institutions and procedures for the injection of human rights values into legal decision-making processes can have a powerful effect on the manner in which human rights issues are constructed, handled and resolved.
Zahle einfach mit Karte, Klarna, Apple Pay oder Google Pay. Nicht zufrieden? Du hast immer ein 14-tägiges Widerrufsrecht. Lies mehr in unseren AGB. Hast du Fragen, schreib uns eine E-Mail an hello@memmo.org.
Memmo macht das Lernen einfacher – wo auch immer du bist. Bei uns findest du deine Kursbücher und smarte Lerntools an einem Ort: Zusammenfassungen, Quizzes, Podcasts und Lernkarten. Und Ted, dein Lernbuddy, beantwortet alles, was du wissen möchtest. Über 50.000 Studierende lernen bereits hier – gemacht, damit du schneller lernst und weniger Stress hast.