Read PDF Global Justice and Due Process

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Global Justice and Due Process file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Global Justice and Due Process book. Happy reading Global Justice and Due Process Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Global Justice and Due Process at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Global Justice and Due Process Pocket Guide.

Shmuel Nili - - Journal of Moral Philosophy 11 4 Reconceptualizing Human Rights. Marcus Arvan - - Journal of Global Ethics 8 1 Global Justice and the Limits of Human Rights. Dale Dorsey - - Philosophical Quarterly 55 — The Sovereignty of Human Rights. Candice Rowser - - Human Rights Review 16 2 National Responsibility and Global Justice.

David Miller - - Oxford University Press. Cosmopolitism, Global Justice and International Law. Richard P. Hiskes - - Cambridge University Press. Chris Armstrong - - Ethics and Global Politics 6 2 Listening to the Avant-Garde. Rahul Rao - - Ethics and Global Politics 6 2 Sumner B. Twiss - - Journal of Religious Ethics 39 2 Posner - - Ethics and International Affairs 25 4 There are a number of global justice problems that require remedying, and this raises the issue of remedial responsibilities.

Who should do what to reduce global injustices? Several different agents, groups, organizations and institutions could play a role. Which responsibilities should devolve to corporations, governments, consumers, citizens, international organizations or social movements?


  • Trail of Dead (Scarlett Bernard, Book 2).
  • Global Justice and Due Process by Larry May | SpringerLink;
  • Aircraft Profile No. 30: The North American F-100 Super Sabre!

Several guidelines that are often discussed include issues concerning the contribution agents have made to a problem, their patterns of benefit from the problem, and their capacity to take constructive action now. Two influential frameworks deserve more extended treatment, notably that of Iris Marion Young concerning a social connection model for allocating responsibilities for structural injustice and that of David Miller concerning remedial responsibility Young , Miller In contrast to the idea of responsibility as involving finding fault and individual liability, Iris Marion Young develops a forward-looking model which she argues is more appropriate.

She draws on the idea that participation via institutions sometimes produces injustice, so we have particular responsibilities to address injustice. We share responsibility for remedying injustice but we may have different degrees and kinds of responsibility. She offers different parameters of reasoning that can help individuals and organizations decide what might make the most sense for them to do in efforts to remedy injustice, given that there are so many injustices, whereas time and resources are limited.

Using the case study of the global apparel industry she illustrates how the fact that we are positioned differently can entail varying but important responsibilities for all who participate in activities that sustain sweatshops. There are at least four parameters that agents can use in their reasoning:. In summary, Young encourages us to think about how we can best take responsibility for reducing structural injustice by reflecting on these four parameters—different positions of power, privilege, interest and collective ability.

David Miller offers a tremendously influential connection theory of responsibility that also discusses our remedial responsibilities. There are six ways in which we can be connected to someone, P , who needs help and so be held remedially responsible for assisting. These connections give rise to six ways in which remedial responsibility can be identified. In the global justice literature there are also important concerns about the distribution of responsibilities among collective and individual agents.

Prominently, can we hold nations responsible for global injustices or remedying such injustices? This raises important questions about collective responsibility that are well treated elsewhere in this encyclopedia see the entry on collective responsibility. Is it possible to have global justice in the absence of a world state?

Hobbes argues that this is not possible since there is no global authority that can secure and enforce the requirements of justice. He presents the classic so-called realist case, which is highly influential in international politics, such that there is a state of nature in the international realm.

All states compete in pursuing their own advantage and since there is no global authority there can be no justice in international affairs. Others are more optimistic. Since we already have a high level of interaction among states, organizations and other agents, this has generated various norms and expectations about appropriate conduct which guide behavior in the international sphere Beitz Moreover, we have a strong interest in co-operation when this is necessary to deal practically with a range of problems that have global reach. Global governance is concerned with how we manage interests affecting the residents of more than one state in the absence of a world state.

There is already a high level of co-operation among a variety of networks, organizations and other groups of interested parties at the sub-state level, and this is powerfully influencing the redesign of best practice norms in particular domains Anne-Marie Slaughter Other change agents that can and have exercised considerable reform pressures include global social movements, such as the anti-sweatshop movement, the fair trade movement, and other ethical consumption movements.

Global activism has been an important source of incremental change. These simple examples show that much more is possible in the absence of a world state than realists acknowledge. For more on issues of world government, see the entry world government , which provides extended treatment of this issue.

Philosophers are contributing in important ways to discussions of global justice policy issues. As illustrations, in this entry we have canvassed several institutional reform proposals for addressing global injustices which have enjoyed widespread attention, both within the academy and beyond. There is also the innovative work of Leif Wenar concerning proposals for clean trade Section 9. In addition to those illustrations already highlighted in this article, philosophers are also having an impact on policy discussions in a wide range of areas including climate change, reforming the United Nations, and suggesting the new priorities that should replace the Millennium Development Goals which expire in Philosophers have also contributed to influential international multi-disciplinary projects that seek alternative ways to measure quality of life or poverty Nussbaum and Sen , Pogge One area recently drawing increased attention concerns tax and accounting matters.

Philosophers have discussed rampant abusive tax practices by corporations and wealthy individuals and how this deprives developing countries of much-needed income for human development in developing countries. There has also been discussion of global income taxes, carbon taxes, financial transaction taxes and Tobin Taxes Moellendorf , Caney b, Brock Philosophers continue to make an important contribution to policy debates and this is also likely to be an area in which considerable useful future work on global justice will concentrate. Global Justice First published Fri Mar 6, Some Definitional Issues 1.

Global Economic Injustice 5. Global Gender Justice 6. Immigration 7. Global Environmental Issues 8. Global Health Issues 9. In general, a theory of global justice aims to give us an account of what justice on a global scale consists in and this often includes discussion of the following components: identifying what should count as important problems of global justice positing solutions to each identified problem identifying who might have responsibilities in addressing the identified problem arguing for positions about what particular agents or collections of agents ought to do in connection with solving each problem and providing a normative view which grounds 1 — 4.

A problem is often considered to constitute a global justice problem when one or more of the following conditions obtain: Actions stemming from an agent, institution, practice, activity and so on that can be traced to one or more states negatively affects residents in another state. Institutions, practices, policies, activities and so on in one or more states could bring about a benefit or reduction in harm to those resident in another state.

There are normative considerations that require agents in one state to take certain actions with respect to agents or entities in another. Such actions might be mediated through institutions, policies, or norms. We cannot solve a problem that affects residents of one or more states without co-operation from other states. Principles to Guide Behavior in International and Global Matters What sorts of duties of justice, if any, exist among human beings who do not reside in the same country?

He says: I believe that the causes of the wealth of a people and the forms it takes lie in their political culture and in the religious, philosophical, and moral traditions that support the basic structure of their political and social institutions, as well as in the industriousness and cooperative talents of its members … The crucial elements that make the difference are the political culture, the political virtues and civic society of the country Rawls , p.

Some key questions are: What principles should govern interactions among peoples at the global level? What are the causes of prosperity and are they traceable entirely to domestic factors or are international considerations relevant? What should count as the kind of prosperity or well-being that we are aiming to promote?

What duties do we have to those peoples who do not yet have what they need for self-determination or prosperity? If human rights serve an important role in world affairs, which rights should be on our list of those to endorse? What duties arise from such commitment? Can we properly hold nations to be entirely responsible for the well-being of their people and if so, in what kinds of conditions might this make sense?

When we consider what we owe one another, do compatriots deserve special consideration? I trace some of the influential positions that have shaped answers to these questions next. Global Economic Injustice Possibly the next most prominent global justice issue after considerations of proper use of force concerns the impact of, and responsibilities created by, globalization. Global Gender Justice The effects of poverty do not fall equally on men and women, nor on boys and girls.

Immigration There are a large number of issues debated in the global justice literature concerning migration, whether temporary, permanent, legal or illegal. Global Environmental Issues Patterns of human behavior that destroy habitats, accelerate species extinction, exacerbate toxic levels of pollution, contribute to ozone layer destruction, or increase population levels are all issues of global environmental concern.

Global Health Issues One striking feature of the state of global health is that there are large inequalities in health outcomes and opportunities for health. There are at least four parameters that agents can use in their reasoning: Power: we have different levels of influence and capacities to change processes. We should focus on those areas where we have greater capacities to change worrisome structural processes. This might mean focusing on a few key players who have both greater capacity to make changes themselves and to influence others. Privilege: some people have more privilege than others in relation to structures.

So middle-class clothing consumers have more discretionary income, choice and ability to absorb costs—they can change their clothing purchasing practices more easily than those who earn minimum wage, have little discretionary income, and little ability to absorb further costs. Interest: All who have an interest in changing oppressive structures have responsibilities in connection with remedying these.

In a nuanced analysis she argues that they might have responsibilities in certain contexts, such as to speak out about the harsh conditions in which they work. They must take some responsibility for resisting and challenging the structures. Without their participation the need for reforms may be rationalized away or reforms may not take the required form. These obligations may not always exist, especially when the costs of resistance would require extraordinary sacrifices. Collective ability: In some cases we already have collective organization capacities and resources that are well established.

Sometimes it just makes good practical sense to draw on these. So, for instance, sometimes student associations, faith-based organizations, unions, or stockholder groups already exercise significant power in being able to coordinate like-minded members who are willing to take certain actions.

She encourages us to harness organizational resources where doing so would prove effective. The Contribution to Public Policy Philosophers are contributing in important ways to discussions of global justice policy issues. Bibliography Abizadeh, A. Altman, A. Aquinas, T. Dyson ed. Banai, A.

Ronzoni and C. Schemmel eds. Barry, B. Goodin eds. Barry, C. Herman and L. Tomitova eds. Pogge eds. Beitz, C. Bell, D. Benatar, S. Blake, M. Zalta ed. Bohman, J. Brock, G. Brighouse eds. Moellendorf eds. Brooks, T. Brown, G. Held eds. Buchanan, A. Caney, S. Carens, J. Chatterjee, D. Coady, T. Cohen, J.

Jaggar ed. Cole, P. Daniels, N. Benatar and G. Brock eds. Dobson, A. Doyle, M. Geneva: MSF. Dryzek, J. Freeman, S.

Promoting Due Process in Global Antitrust Enforcement

Gardiner, S. Gehring, V. Goodin, R. Gould, C. Hardin, G. Hassoun, N. Hayward, T. Held, D. Held, V. Bell ed. Hobbes, T. Tuck ed. Jaggar, A. Follesdal and T. James, A. Kant, I. Reiss ed. Kleingeld, P. Kuper, A. New York: Routledge. Kuper ed. Lang, A. Liu, C. London, A. Luban, D. Mandle, J. Margalit, A. Martin, R. Malden, MA: Blackwell. McKim, R. McMahan eds. McMahan, J. Mellow, D. Mill, J. Miller, D. Cohen and C. Wellman eds. Miller, R.


  • Global Justice?
  • Mind Games: The Aging Brain and How to Keep it Healthy;
  • Due Process and Global Justice, by Larry May | Mind | Oxford Academic;
  • Join Kobo & start eReading today.

Miscevic, N. Moellendorf, D. Moore, M. Moseley, A. Fieser and B. Dowden eds. Nagel, T. Nickel, J. Nowicka, M. Rovisco eds. Nussbaum, M. Nussbaum and J. Glover eds. Cohen ed. Sen eds. Direct incorporation is a term that has long been used in the UK and internationally to identify legislative practice of taking a piece of international law — in this case the UNCRC — and transposing it, or embedding it, directly into UK law using the verbatim language of the treaty, much like the Human Rights Act model did with the European Convention on Human Rights.

Indirect incorporation means that the treaty is either incorporated by another constitutional convention or that it is incorporated in some way that does not equate to direct incorporation. Piecemeal or Sectoral incorporation is the practice where different rights of the convention are incorporated into legislation that is sector specific, such as disabilities or criminal justice legislation.

Top Authors

Part I clarifies that the bill is about wholesale, direct incorporation. Notably, if the UK ratifies further optional protocols, these could be added by order of the Scottish Ministers. The draft bill clarifies the relevant duty-bearing authorities, including Scottish Parliament, Scottish Ministers, any authority exercising functions in areas of law or policy devolved to Scotland and all Scottish public authorities. Notably, it highlights the many sources of interpretation sources available to interpret the UNCRC that already exist. Part II delivers the real teeth of the bill, which makes it unlawful for relevant authorities to act incompatibly with the Convention or optional protocols.

This is the reactive section of the bill, which complements the proactive approach described below and follows the Human Rights Act model. It also includes enforcement through the legal system, including redress and remedies, and strike down powers for inconsistent legislation. Crucially, it recognises the standing of children and a range of further stakeholders in terms of judicial review, which is important in terms of public interest litigation that could aid in pre-empting harm. There is widespread acknowledgement that unless there is a remedy, there is no right. International practice has confirmed that simply because remedies exist, litigation floodgates will not be opened.

In line with the proactive and reactive strategy behind the draft bill, litigation is a last resort but is absolutely necessary to make rights real for children and young people. Simply because rights will be reinforced by the bill and remedies will now be clearly available, it does not mean that children will be lining up to litigate. The point of the combined proactive and reactive strategy is that all relevant government authorities will think through the impact on children before missteps are taken.

Part III is the proactive section of the draft bill. But as Welsh practice has demonstrated, due regard alone is not enough.

Global Justice and Due Process

It is simply one piece of the puzzle. The draft bill also requires reports on compliance with the due regard duty to be laid before the Scottish Parliament every three years and that reporting is delivered in an accessible, child-friendly version. Bryan Stevenson c Nick Frontiero Photography Stevenson works as a legal representative for disadvantaged and marginalised individuals, particularly young and poor people who are on death row or serving life sentences. He and his colleagues at the EJI have achieved the exoneration or release of over individuals on death row.

Firstly, he said, we must create justice by becoming proximate to those suffering inequality and injustice. Recounting his relationship with his grandmother, who wished that Stevenson would always be able to feel her embracing him, the skilful orator argued that we must know and seek to understand those who suffer injustice in order to affirm their humanity and dignity.

Global Justice and Due Process ebook | fymesolutiku.ga

Khalid Shaikh Mohammad, et. The right to privacy is fairly clear on this. However, in the largest criminal justice trial in US history, access to medical records is shrouded in secrecy and national security privilege is reinforced through redactions to files covering even the simplest of medical treatment, such as providing ibuprofen for pain relief.

As a result, it maintains full medical records on the 40 men still held in the detention facility. Government prosecutors also have copies of the full records. However, neither the defendants, nor their attorneys, are able to gather a full account of their medical information because full access is consistently rejected by the Government in the name of national security. The physical and psychological impact of the enhanced interrogation techniques on the men, as documented in the Senate Intelligence Committee Study on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program SSCI Summary Report further speaks to a range of issues that are highly relevant to the trial, not the least their ability to participate in their own defence and their competence to even be in the dock.

A primary point of contention comes in response to the public availability of the record of torture, inhuman and degrading treatment the defendants suffered on black sites. The CIA shredded all pretence in terms of legality with regard to the treatment of these five men and many others.

Constructing an understanding of their physical and mental states in the lead up to the FBI interrogations in January will shed light on whether those statements may be excluded as torture evidence, an issue that remains unclear at the close of the 35th round of pre-trial hearings. While there is a great amount of writing and authority on the issues of confidentiality, privacy and security of medical records, those discussions are predominantly focused on keeping personal records closed for the benefit of the patient.

As has often been raised in court, a number of the defendants suffer conditions akin to post-traumatic stress disorder and there have been suggestions of brain damage following MRI scans, all indicia of the ill-treatment they endured in CIA captivity. Trial counsel for the government has turned over