Explore the vast range of titles available.

A Most Uncertain Crusad e traces and analyzes the emergence of human rights as both an international concern and as a controversial domestic issue for US policy makers during and after World War II. Rowland Brucken focuses on officials in the State Department, at the United Nations, and within certain domestic non-governmental organizations, and explains why, after issuing wartime declarations that called for the definition and enforcement of international human rights standards, the US government refused to ratify the first UN treaties that fulfilled those twin purposes. The Truman and Eisenhower administrations worked to weaken the scope and enforcement mechanisms of early human rights agreements, and gradually withdrew support for Senate ratification. A small but influential group of isolationist-oriented senators, led by John Bricker (R-OH), warned that the treaties would bring about socialism, destroy white supremacy, and eviscerate the Bill of Rights. At the UN, a growing bloc of developing nations demanded the inclusion of economic guarantees, support for decolonization, and strong enforcement measures, all of which Washington opposed. Prior to World War II, international law considered the protection of individual rights to fall largely under the jurisdiction of national governments. Alarmed by fascist tyranny and guided by a Wilsonian vision of global cooperation in pursuit of human rights, President Roosevelt issued the Four Freedoms and the Atlantic Charter. Behind the scenes, the State Department planners carefully considered how an international organization could best protect those guarantees. Their work paid off at the 1945 San Francisco Conference, which vested the UN with an unprecedented opportunity to define and protect the human rights of individuals. After two years of negotiations, the UN General Assembly unanimously approved its first human rights treaty, the Genocide Convention. The UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR), led by Eleanor Roosevelt, drafted the nonbinding Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. Subsequent efforts to craft an enforceable covenant of individual rights, though, bogged down quickly. A deadlock occurred as western nations, communist states, and developing countries disagreed on the inclusion of economic and social guarantees, the right of self-determination, and plans for implementation. Meanwhile, a coalition of groups within the United States doubted the wisdom of American accession to any human rights treaties. Led by the American Bar Association and Senator Bricker, opponents proclaimed that ratification would lead to a U.N. led tyrannical world socialistic government. The backlash caused President Eisenhower to withdraw from the covenant drafting process. Brucken shows how the American human rights policy had come full circle: Eisenhower, like Roosevelt, issued statements that merely celebrated western values of freedom and democracy, criticized human rights records of other countries while at the same time postponed efforts to have the UN codify and enforce a list of binding rights due in part to America's own human rights violations.

\"The European Court of Human Rights has been a vital part of European democratic consolidation and integration for over half a century, setting meaningful standards and offering legal remedies to the individually repressed, the politically vulnerable, and the socially excluded. After their emancipation from Soviet influence in the 1990s, and with membership of the European Union in mind for many, the new democracies of Central and Eastern Europe flocked to the Convention system. However, now the \"gold rush\" is over, the court's position in the \"New Europe\" is under threat. Its ability to decide cases promptly is almost fatally compromised, and the reform of its institutional architecture is effectively blocked by Russia. The time is right to take stock, to benefit from hindsight, and to consider how the court can respond to the situation. This book examines the case law of the European Court of Human Rights with particular reference to democratic transitions in Europe and the consequent enlargement of the European Convention system. Focusing firmly on the substantive jurisprudence of the court, the book analyses how it has responded to the difficult and distinct circumstances presented by the new contracting parties. Faced with different stages of, and commitments to, democratic transition, how has the court reacted to such diversity whilst maintaining the universality of human rights, and how is this reflected in its judgments? The book tackles this question by matching rigorous doctrinal analysis of the case law with new developments in critical thinking. The cases are viewed through the prism of jurisprudence and political philosophy, with links made to European political integration and other international human rights systems. The book offers an original explanation of the court's predicament by drawing upon \"thick\" and \"thin\" notions of morality and tying this to notions of essential contestability.\"- Provided by publisher.

The American attitude toward human rights is deemed inconsistent, even hypocritical: while the United States is characterized (or self-characterized) as a global leader in promoting human rights, the nation has consistently restrained broader interpretations of human rights and held international enforcement mechanisms at arm's length.Human Rights and the Negotiation of American Powerexamines the causes, consequences, and tensions of America's growth as the leading world power after World War II alongside the flowering of the human rights movement. Through careful archival research, Glenn Mitoma reveals how the U.S. government, key civil society groups, Cold War politics, and specific individuals contributed to America's emergence as an ambivalent yet central player in establishing an international rights ethic. Mitoma focuses on the work of three American civil society organizations: the Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and the American Bar Association-and their influence on U.S. human rights policy from the late 1930s through the 1950s. He demonstrates that the burgeoning transnational language of human rights provided two prominent United Nations diplomats and charter members of the Commission on Human Rights-Charles Malik and Carlos Romulo-with fresh and essential opportunities for influencing the position of the United States, most particularly with respect to developing nations. Looking at the critical contributions made by these two men, Mitoma uncovers the unique causes, tensions, and consequences of American exceptionalism.

The human rights enunciated in Articles 23 and 24 of the UDHR concern aspects of rights related to work. This part of international human rights law is often neglected in human rights textbooks and teaching, and indeed is often omitted from the work done by national human rights institutes and by NGOs concerned with human rights, as though it were a separate discipline that did not fall properly into the human rights field. This volume addresses this commonly held, but erroneous, misconception.

The purpose of my contribution is to provide a general overview of the issue at stake when today over the world people debate human rights. In order to do so I will rely on and both differentiate and associate philosophical, anthropological, ethnological, historical, sociological, political, and psychological approaches. Let me stress that this is not at all to contribute to a muddled understanding of the issue of human rights that necessarily has to be perceived differently depending on the field of research. On the contrary, it is in fact to articulate that the issue of human rights can only be understood from a transdisciplinary perspective; and that cross-cultural communication is required to approach the question of ‘values’ and ‘rights’ in our globalized world.

Selected by Choice magazine as an Outstanding Academic Book for 1999 Born of a shared revulsion against the horrors of the Holocaust, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has become the single most important statement of international ethics. It was inspired by and reflects the full scope of President Franklin Roosevelt's famous four freedoms: the freedom of speech and expression, the freedom of worship, the freedom from want, and the freedom from fear. Written by a UN commission led by Eleanor Roosevelt and adopted in 1948, the Declaration has become the moral backbone of more than two hundred human rights instruments that are now a part of our world. The result of a truly international negotiating process, the document has been a source of hope and inspiration to thousands of groups and millions of oppressed individuals.

Charles Malik was the youngest founding member of the UN Human Rights Commission (HRC), which produced the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). While a representative of a small state, Malik's influence is demonstrable in the wording of the Preamble to the UDHR; in the expansion of Article 18, concerning religious freedom; and in Article 16. This article expands upon existing work on the influence of Malik's biography on his contributions to the UDHR. In particular, it is concerned with analyzing the influence of Malik's background on his insistence on the importance of religious liberty as a fundamental human right.