This chapter introduces the book, situating it in the context of the most closely related literature.

Understanding access to justice in any jurisdiction requires identification of factors which create the dynamic in which access functions. Jurisdictions can have factors in common, but each jurisdiction has a dynamic of its own. Without an understanding of these factors and how they interact, proposed improvements in access may not accomplish much. Viewing access to justice in this way arguably allows for a clearer vision of positive change, because it acknowledges why particular changes may be difficult or unlikely. Establishing access to justice dynamics in sufficient complexity is also necessary for comparative understandings across jurisdictions, but comparative insight requires reference to an expanded set of jurisdictions, including Asia and beyond.

After recalling the context and purposes of the research, the chapter introduces the main challenges raised by the legal protection of animals during warfare: the silence of international humanitarian law on the issue, the difficulty in identifying which animals should be safeguarded, the inaptitude of international humanitarian law to adequately protect animals, and the ambivalent nature of the violence inflicted upon animals in wartime. The chapter then introduces the principal paradigms on which the legal protection of animals is grounded: animal species conservation regimes, animal welfare norms and animal rights. It subsequently emphasises three specific difficulties posed for animals by the current state of international law: the animal welfare gap in international law, the tension between species conservation and concern for individual animal welfare, and the fact that notably international trade and financial law has stymied animal welfare and protection efforts. The chapter then explores options to face these challenges while making best use of the legal strategies available within the existing normative framework. Potential new directions for developing international law on armed conflict are finally identified.

Chapter 1 immerses the reader into the Za'atari refugee camp. Situated in Jordan just seven and a half miles south of the Syrian border, the camp – a two-square-mile rectangle divided into twelve districts – is nestled in the very heart of the Middle East. Here, in the desert heat, a community was born in the swell of crisis. The reader is immediately introduced to the book's three featured Syrian women entrepreneurs – Yasmina, Asma, and Malak – in their elements. Yasmina, a salon and wedding dress shop owner, is relaxing in the salon with her family as her client celebrates a beautiful wedding a couple of districts away. Asma, a social entrepreneur and teacher, is reading a story to a group of children – including three of her own – in her trailer, which she has converted into a magical hideout for the children. Malak, an artist, is putting the finishing touches on a series of drawings for an event at a youth center that is meant to encourage the girls in Za'atari to push against the harmful practice of child marriage.

An initial glimpse into the ICC courtroom introduces the lead participants on the first day of the Court’s first trial. This chapter contrasts the modern courtroom in The Hague with culturally distant conflicts arising in the Congo, which tested the Court’s stamina for implementing international legal norms. The Court’s legal mission was formulated in the Rome Statute, a treaty accepted after 1998 by some 120 member states, building on earlier court models from Nuremberg, Yugoslavia, and Rwanda. Its moral scope contained broad ideals: promoting long-term peace and justice by prosecuting those deemed most responsible for atrocities that “shock the conscience of humanity.” Among the ICC’s innovations was a commitment to elevate victims of mass atrocities, enabling their active participation in trial proceedings. The Court’s overall design included a series of tensions and conflicts that would emerge during the years covered by the Congo trials. In addition to the cultural contrast between The Hague and the Congo, there were tensions between the strictly legal courtroom proceedings and the inevitable political entanglements facing an international court.

This handbook intends to offer a comprehensive and authoritative overview of the human rights implications of emerging technologies in the fields of life sciences and information and communication technologies (ICT). To this end, the volume brings together leading experts whose expertise encompasses several disciplinary domains (law, ethics, technology, basic science, medicine, business etc.) with the purpose of gathering extensive multidisciplinary knowledge about the evolutive transformation of the human rights framework in response to technological innovation.

The human rights to water and sanitation (HRtWS) have their genesis, history and interpretations. They are also subject to tension, controversy and dispute. A studied approach to these foundations is necessary in order to ensure a basis for their formulation, implementation, evaluation and monitoring. For the approach to the three dimensions that make up the analytical framework used in this book, an understanding of these aspects is not only desirable but necessary. Understanding the factors involved in the realization or violation of HRtWS, the ways in which the policies actually reach them, to a greater or lesser degree, and the population groups at particular risk, pre-supposes clarity regarding the different approaches for the rights and the elements that underlie each of these. In this context, the objective of this part of the book is to provide elements for the reader to get a closer view of these fundamentals, to get a more complete understanding of the topic and, from there, to have a theoretical-conceptual basis to address drivers, policies and people.

This chapter sets out the rationale, scope and organization of the book. It situates the two policy tensions of interest in the book within wider debates about the meaning of ‘care’ and appropriate policy and legal responses to societies’ care and support needs, in light of the growing demand for, and declining supply of, care and support. While the book is intended to contribute to international conversations currently underway, its main focus is on policy in ‘liberal’ welfare states. The principles proposed in the book are designed to respond to the shortcomings of both long-standing features of these systems (including the provision of modest ‘safety net’ benefits for those who cannot resort to the family or market) and more recent effects of neoliberal reforms that had led to the withdrawal and marketization of services and the prioritization of paid work participation as the essential activity of citizenship. Case studies of recent policy reforms in two broadly liberal welfare states – Australia and the UK – explore the care policy tensions and application of the principles in this wider context later in the book, and this chapter also includes an explanation of the purpose of these case studies and the case study methodology.

The need to rebuild the security infrastructure in a postconflict state is of paramount importance for ensuring a durable peace. This chapter examines the complicated tradeoffs parties face sharing and/or reestablishing the monopoly of force, including when sharing force with the international community; the questions of the consent of the state, and often the consent of the nonstate parties; the nature and configuration of the international forces, including the command structure of the international forces; and the mandate of those forces. The chapter also analyzes cases during which the state seeks to integrate nonstate armed actors into the national forces, when parties are faced with the questions of how best to provide for the disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration of nonstate forces, coupled with security sector reform for the national forces. The chapter additionally examines the questions that arise when the state seeks to restore limited control over the monopoly of force by permitting nonstate actors to come under the umbrella command of the national forces, including to what extent to promote some degree of integration among special units of the state and nonstate forces, as well as a timeline for the eventual integration of forces.

The premise of this book is that, like everything else in life and human experience since the beginning of time, evolution is the key for understanding how the world works. For me, as a Muslim, only God is the permanent reality, while everything else evolves with time and in response to changing circumstances. Since human rights are rendered in the service of human beings, they must evolve with the life experience of their subject, namely, human beings on the ground everywhere, for each person and community on their own terms. This is the true meaning of universal human rights which are worthy of global struggle for their realization and protection. By the principle of the concept itself, no other person, group, or entity can impose their view in defining, interpreting, or elaborating human rights norms and institutions for others. The way remains open for respectful debate, contestation, suggestions, and recommendations, but these should never violate the dignity and freedom of the human subject. This is what we all know as the Golden Rule, or the principle of reciprocity. If in doubt as to whether a debate or challenge is in violation of this fundamental principle, imagine the situation with you as the subject of violation of human dignity and freedom.1

Some years ago, I was invited to a fancy dinner in an elegant city full of international law elites. Gathered at the table were a few current and former judges from international courts, a famous international arbitrator or two, renowned international legal scholars, and the odd family member. The mood was celebratory and the wine flowed. Conversations in French, German, Spanish, and English hung in the air above the long, candlelit table. As a guest of an invited guest, I was not an insider, so I played the part of eager and respectful listener. At least until the end of the evening.

This analytical gap can be explained at least in part by reference to the tradition of most developed states simply to admit refugees, formally or in practice, as long-term or permanent residents. While not required by the Refugee Convention,2 this approach led de facto to respect for most Convention rights (and often more). Because refugee rights were not at risk, there was understandably little perceived need to elaborate their meaning.

Today, however, governments of the industrialized world increasingly question the logic of routinely assimilating refugees, and have therefore sought to limit their access to Convention rights. Most commonly, questions are now raised about whether refugees should be allowed to enjoy freedom of movement, to work, to access public welfare programs, or to be reunited with family members.

The phenomenon of flight from poverty, economic degradation and disadvantage poses a range of difficult ethical, legal and policy challenges for decision-makers and policy-makers alike. How should states that receive such persons respond to claims based on economic and social deprivation? In particular, what international legal principles operate to constrain the decision-making authority of states receiving such persons, and what rights are provided in international law for those wishing to avoid repatriation to a situation in which they will be subject to economic deprivation?

This book explores the legal challenges created by the phenomenon of migration caused by the deprivation of economic and social rights. In particular, it directly engages with the question whether the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (‘Refugee Convention’) – the key instrument in international law for the protection of refugees – is capable of encompassing claims based on economic destitution. In exploring this question, the book identifies the conceptual and analytical challenges presented by such claims and assesses the extent to which these challenges may be resolved or overcome by a creative interpretation of the Refugee Convention consistent with correct principles of international treaty interpretation. The hypothesis is that, notwithstanding the dichotomy between ‘economic migrants’ and ‘genuine’ refugees which pervades both the refugee and migration literature and refugee determination, the Refugee Convention is capable of accommodating a more complex and nuanced analysis that recognizes that many types of claims with an economic element are properly considered within the purview of the Refugee Convention.