...
首页> 外文期刊>Georgetown Journal of International Law >SECURITY COUNCIL TARGETED SANCTIONS, DUE PROCESS AND THE 1267 OMBUDSPERSON
【24h】

SECURITY COUNCIL TARGETED SANCTIONS, DUE PROCESS AND THE 1267 OMBUDSPERSON

机译:安全委员会针对性制裁,适当程序和1267申诉专员

获取原文
           

摘要

Since its inception, the Security Council's 1267 sanctions regime has come under fire from U.N. member states, listed individuals and entities, domestic and international courts and tribunals, human rights NGOs, and even other organs of the U.N., that all claim the 1267 sanctions regime does not secure targeted individuals' procedural due process rights, particularly the right to an effective remedy. For instance, in June 2009 a Canadian Federal Court Judge noted that the 1267 sanctions regime creates a situation for the listed individual that is "not unlike that of Josef K. in Kafka's The Trial, who awakens one morning, and for reasons never revealed to him or the reader, is arrested and prosecuted for an unspecified crime. "Now some courts and governments of U.N. member states have decided that they will not comply with the UNSC sanctions regime, which was adopted under Chapter VII, because it does not comply with procedural due process rights of targeted individuals. Such actions threaten to undermine the Security Council's ability to secure international peace and security through its sanctions power. Thus, this Article raises the question of whether, given the Security Council's exceptional status in international law, there are any legal bases for a Security Council obligation to ensure that rights of procedural due process are made available to individuals directly targeted with sanctions under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter. After an in depth discussion of this question, it is contended that the Security Council does have a legal obligation to render the listing and delisting procedures of the 1267 sanctions regime consistent with fundamental norms of procedural due process. Finally, the functions, powers, and independence of 1267 Ombudsperson, which was created by a December 2009 Security Council resolution, is analyzed to determine whether it's establishment has rectified the 1267 sanctions regime deficiencies.
机译:自成立以来,安理会的1267制裁制度遭到了联合国会员国,被列入名单的个人和实体,国内外法院和法庭,人权非政府组织甚至是联合国其他机构的抨击,它们都主张1267制裁制度不能确保目标个人的程序性正当程序权利,尤其是获得有效补救的权利。例如,2009年6月,加拿大联邦法院的一位法官指出,1267年的制裁制度为被列入名单的个人创造了一种情况,“与卡夫卡的《审判》中的约瑟夫·K。情况不一样,他一天早晨醒来,出于某种原因,他从未透露他或他的读者因涉嫌不明罪行而被逮捕和起诉。“现在,联合国成员国的一些法院和政府已决定,他们将不遵守根据第七章通过的联合国安理会制裁制度,因为它不遵守目标个人的程序性正当程序权利。这些行动有可能破坏安全理事会通过其制裁权力确保国际和平与安全的能力。因此,本条提出了一个问题,即鉴于安全理事会在国际法中的特殊地位,是否有任何法律依据规定安全理事会有义务确保将程序性正当程序权提供给根据第七章直接受到制裁的个人联合国宪章》。在对该问题进行深入讨论之后,认为安全理事会确实有法律义务使1267制裁制度的列入名单和除名程序符合程序上正当程序的基本规范。最后,分析了根据2009年12月安理会决议建立的1267监察员的职能,权力和独立性,以确定其成立是否纠正了1267制裁制度的缺陷。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号