Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Codification of Human Rights at National and International Levels

General Report

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Codification in International Perspective

Part of the book series: Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law ((GSCL,volume 1))

  • 864 Accesses

Abstract

The essay aims at discussing the classifications of rights with a view to clarify the meaning of the general categories used to identify contested concepts such as right/liberty/freedom/fundamental right. The Author analyses the national and the international dimension of the protection of rights with a view of underlining the tensions and the interplay between the two levels and their consequences for the theory of rights. He then argues that contemporary scholarship needs to search for points of intersection between domestic constitutional law and public international law. Finally the Author identifies at least four junction points: 1. the qualification of a right as fundamental; 2. The recognition of group rights; 3. The codification of rights at the infra-State level; 4. The treatment of international law and its different sources in the domestic legal system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Other definitions mention a European common constitutional space (P. Häberle, Gemeineuropäisches Verfassungsrecht, in EuGRZ, 1991, 261 ff.) or European inter-constitutional law (A. Ruggeri, Sovranità dello Stato e sovranità sovranazionale, attraverso i diritti umani, e prospettive di un diritto europeo “intercostituzionale”, in DPCE, 2001, 544).

  2. 2.

    In W.B. Gallie, Essentially Contested Concepts, in Proceeding of the Aristototelic society, 1955/56, 167 ff.

  3. 3.

    Philosophical Investigations, Oxford, Blackwell, 1953.

  4. 4.

    See Some fundamental legal conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning, in 23Yale L.J., 16 (1913).

  5. 5.

    S. Žižek, Against human rights, in New Left Review, 34, 2005.

  6. 6.

    H. Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, New York, Harcourt, 1951; G. Agamben, Homo Sacer, Torino, Einaudi, 1995.

  7. 7.

    R. Rorty, Truth and Progress, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998, 167.

  8. 8.

    M. Ignatieff, Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2001.

  9. 9.

    G. Peces-Barba Martinez, Teoría de los derechos fundamentales, Madrid, Eudema, 1991.

  10. 10.

    In the words of M.I. Finney, Democracy Ancient and Modern, London, Rutgers University Press, 1995.

  11. 11.

    De la liberté des anciens comparée à celle des modernes, Paris, 1819.

  12. 12.

    There is an extremely vast literature on this topic: J.N. Figgis, Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius: 1414–1625, New York, Harper, 1960; R. Tuck, Natural Rights Theories: Their Origin and Development, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1979; B. Tierney, The Idea of Natural Rights: Studies on Natural Rights, Natural Law and Church Law 1159–1625, Atlanta, Scholar Press of Emory University, 1997.

  13. 13.

    See L. Hunt, Inventing Human Rights: A History, New York, W. W. Norton & Company, 2007, and also G. Oestreich, Geschichte der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten im Umriss, Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 1978; A. Dershowitz, Rights from Wrongs. A Secular Theory of the Origins of Rights, New York, Basic Books, 2004; M. Flores, Storia dei diritti umani, Bologna, il Mulino, 2008.

  14. 14.

    1791.

  15. 15.

    The summary description exposed in the text is not contradicted neither by the use of the expression “human rights” by William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1765–1769, I, 121, nor by Jean-Jacques Burlamaqui, Principes du droit naturel, Genève, Barillot et fils, 1747, I, VII, 4.

  16. 16.

    L. Henkin, The Age of Rights, New York, Columbia University Press, 1990; T. Boergenthal, The Normative and Institutional Evolution of International Human Rights, in 19 Human Rights Quarterly, 1997, 703 ff.

  17. 17.

    See FRG, arts. 1–19 GG.

  18. 18.

    See CC dec. 22.1.1990, 13.8.1993, and 22.4.1997.

  19. 19.

    See art. 10.2 and Title I Spanish Const. and TC dec.14.7.1981, stating that fundamental rights have the double nature of guarantee of legal status and of essential elements of the legal system.

  20. 20.

    TC dec. 25/1981; 64/1988; 53/1995.

  21. 21.

    Italy, Court of cassation 22.6.1985, n. 3769; US Supreme Court inter alia Gitlow v. New York, 268 U.S. 652 (1925); Engblom v. Carey, 357 U.S 449 (1958); McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025 (2010); France: freedom of association, CE, 11.07.1956; dignity of human being, 2.7.1993; right of property, Civil Cassation 4.1.1995; droit au logement, Civil Cassation 10.3.1993.

  22. 22.

    France: l.22.6.1982 e 6.7.1989 on slum clearance and house sanitation and hygiene; l. 21.1.1995 on public security.

  23. 23.

    See National Report at 6-7.

  24. 24.

    France, l.30.6.2000, creating the procedure called référé-liberté, aiming at giving the administrative judge powers on an equal footing with the civil judge, including “all measures necessary and proper to safeguarding a fundamental liberty menaced or damaged by a public body or a private body encharged with public functions or services”: see L. Favoreu, La notion de liberté fondamentale devant le juge administratif des référés, Paris, Dalloz, 2001, Chronique, 1739.

  25. 25.

    Ercolano and Avico decisions, described in par.3 of the Country Report.

  26. 26.

    See, infra, par. 2.2.

  27. 27.

    Though the case law is quite tolerant toward administrative limitations: see National Report, par.1.

  28. 28.

    The federalist No. 84, by A. Hamilton.

  29. 29.

    Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S 319 (1937).

  30. 30.

    See H.J. Abraham, B.A. Perry, Freedom and the Court. Civil Rights and Liberties in the United States, New York, Oxford University Press, 1978.

  31. 31.

    Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 68 (1947).

  32. 32.

    CC 16.7.1971.

  33. 33.

    Art. 32 states: “The Republic safeguards health as a fundamental right of the individual and as a collective interest”.

  34. 34.

    M.S. Massó Garrote, I diritti fondamentali e le libertà pubbliche nella costituzione del 1978 e nella giurisprudenza costituzionale, in L. Pegoraro, A. Rinella, R. Scarciglia (Eds), I venti anni della Costituzione spagnola nella giurisprudenza del Tribunale costituzionale, Padova, CEDAM, 2000, 43 ff.

  35. 35.

    J. Jiménez Campo, Derechos fundamentales. Concepto y garantías, Madrid, Editorial Trotta, 1999.

  36. 36.

    L.M. Díez-Picazo, Los sistemas de derechos fundamentales, Madrid, Civitas, 2005.

  37. 37.

    J. de Esteban, Tratado de derecho constitucional español, Madrid, Servicio de Publicaciones de la Facultad de Derecho, UCM, 2001, 298 ss.

  38. 38.

    Thus requiring recognition through a “constitutional imprimatur”: using this argument, TC rejected the claim of Comunidades Autónomas for an independent catalogue of fundamental rights, see STC, dec. 31/2010, see also infra par. 5.

  39. 39.

    On this issue, see the national report.

  40. 40.

    For instance J. Miranda denies it (Manual de direito constitucional, Vol. IV, Coimbra, Editora Tema, 2008), while J.J. Gomes Canotilho admits it (Tomemos a sério os direitos económicos, sociais e culturais, in Estudos sobre direitos fundamentais, Coimbra, Editora Tema, 2004).

  41. 41.

    J. Laws, Is the High Court of Justice the Guardian of Fundamental Constitutional Rights?, in Pub. L., 1993, 59 ff.; T.R.S. Allan, Law, Liberty and Justice, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1993.

  42. 42.

    A. Burrows, D. Feldman (Eds.), English Public Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2009.

  43. 43.

    The UK has obtained an “opt-out” clause as far as the social chapter of the Lisbon Treaty is concerned.

  44. 44.

    Dec. 107/1998 and 124/1999.

  45. 45.

    N. Uyttendaele, Précis de droit constitutionnel belge, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2006; F. Delpérée, Ledroit constitutionnelde laBelgique, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2003. See also N. Bonbled, M. Verdussen, Le droits constitutionnels en Belgique, Vol. I, Bruxelles, Bruylant, 2011.

  46. 46.

    See infra, par. 2.2.

  47. 47.

    TC 18/1984, 47/1985, 1709/1987, 177/1988.

  48. 48.

    Civil rights cases, 109 U.S. 3 (1883).

  49. 49.

    Bell v. Maryland, 378 U.S. 226 (1964); DeShaney v. Winnebago County Dpt. of Social Services, 489 U.S. 189 (1989).

  50. 50.

    N. Vieira, Constitutional civil rights in a nutshell, St. Paul, West Publishing, 1998.

  51. 51.

    H. Wechsler, Toward Neutral Principles of Constitutional Law, in 73 Harv.L. Rev., 1, 31 (1959).

  52. 52.

    Smith v. Allright, 1944; Terry v. Adams, 1953.

  53. 53.

    Amalgamated Food Employees Union v. Logan Valley Plaza, 1968; later limited and almost overruled in Hudgens v. NLRB, 1976.

  54. 54.

    Shelley v. Kramer, 1948.

  55. 55.

    Reitman v. Mulkey, 387 U.S. 369 (1967).

  56. 56.

    Norwood v. Harrison, 413 U.S. 455 (1973).

  57. 57.

    No. 107 v. Irvis (1972).

  58. 58.

    U.S. v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299 (1941).

  59. 59.

    42 USCA § 2000.

  60. 60.

    42 USCA § 1973.

  61. 61.

    42 USCA § 3601.

  62. 62.

    Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 1971.

  63. 63.

    In the history of the US Supreme Court, there are plenty of examples of different opinions of judges as to the use of a natural law approach or alternatively the use of specific provisions of the Bill of rights. For instance, J. Hugo Black accused Frankfurter (see Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165 (1952)). of assuming too great an authority by adoption of a natural law approach. The natural law approach has been massively used in the years 1880–1937 to protect property, contract and economic rights from fed and State regulations in favour of workers, women, child labourers, and so on (substantive due process) After 1937 the Court decided to stop this approach and in 1938 the famous footnote 4 appended to the text of U.S. v. Carolene Products declared the intention of protecting civil and political rights in a special manner: “There may be narrower scope for operation of the presumption of constitutionality when legislation appears on its face to be within a specific prohibition of the constitution, such as those of the first ten amendments, which are deemed equally specific when held to be embraced within the Fourteenth. It is unnecessary to consider now whether legislation which restricts those political processes which can ordinarily be expected to bring about repeal of undesirable legislation is to be subjected to more exacting judicial scrutiny under the general prohibitions of the Fourteenth Amendment than are most other types of legislation. […] Nor need we enquire whether similar considerations enter into the review of statutes directed at particular religious, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U. S. 510, or national, Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U. S. 390; Bartels v. Iowa, 262 U. S. 404; Farrington v. Tokushige, 273 U.S. 284, or racial minorities, Nixon v. Herndon, supra: whether prejudice against discrete and insular minorities may be a special condition, which tends seriously to curtail the operation of those political processes ordinarily to be relied upon to protect minorities, and which may call for a correspondingly more searching judicial inquiry” (U.S. v. Carolene Products Co, 304 U.S. 144 (1938), ft. 4). Balancing gives structure to a mobile hierarchy of values, a flexible, soft order (weiche Ordnung). Even the principle of precaution, so important in EU law above all in the environmental sector, is drawn from the balancing process. Measuring the standard of acceptable risk to public health and hygiene, it derives from a balance of values. After 1938, the US SC has consistently enough followed the program described in Carolene Products, at least with the Warren Court (1953–1969) and the Burger Court (1969–1986). In 1961 the younger J. Harlan first advocated the protection of a right not formally included in the BoR, the right to privacy in the form of the right of married persons to use contraceptive devices (Poe. v. Ullman, 1962).

  64. 64.

    3 U.S. 386 (1798).

  65. 65.

    See National Report, par.3.

  66. 66.

    National Report, par.1.

  67. 67.

    See Y. Madiot, Droits de l’homme et libertés publiques, Paris, Masson, 1976; L. Richer, Les droits de l’homme et du citoyen, Paris, Economica, 1982; J. Morange, Droits de l’homme et libertés publiques, Paris, Robert Laffont, 1985; J.-J. Israel, Droit des libertés fondamentales, Pars, LGDJ, 1998; J. Duffar, J. Robert, Droits de l’homme et libertés fondamentales, Paris, Montchrestien, 2009.

  68. 68.

    See G. Burdeau, Les libertés publiques, Paris, LGDJ, 1972; C.-A. Colliard, Libertés publiques, Paris, Dalloz, 1989; J. Rivero, Les libertés publiques, Paris, PUF, 1996; D. Turpin, Libertés Publiques et Droits Fondamentaux, Paris, Ed. du Seuil, 2004.

  69. 69.

    J. Rivero, supra note 68; J. Robert, supra note 67.

  70. 70.

    See supra note 68.

  71. 71.

    See B. de Castro Cid, A. Fernández- Galiano, Lecciones de Teoría del Derecho y Derecho Natural, Madrid, Editorial Universitas, 1993, passim.

  72. 72.

    Übermass und Verfassungsrecht, Köln, Heymann, 1961.

  73. 73.

    M. Bolz, Das Verhaltnis von Schutzobjekt und Schranken der Grundrechte, Zürich, Schulthess, 1991.

  74. 74.

    BVerGE 32, 98, 107.

  75. 75.

    6.9.1978, Klass v. Germany; 21.2.1986, James.

  76. 76.

    R. Beddard, Human Rights and Europe, Cambridge, Grotius Publications, 1993.

  77. 77.

    Nold, 14.5.1974.

  78. 78.

    W. Brugger, Das andere Auge, in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Mar. 10, 2003; W. Hecker, Relativierung des Folterverbots in der BRD?, in Kritische Justiz, 2003, 210–218.

  79. 79.

    Art. 111 Italian Con.; art. 24 Spanish Con.; art. 6 ECHR; Amendments V and XIV US Con.

  80. 80.

    Lithgow, 8.8.1986.

  81. 81.

    BVerG 20, 1, 26.

  82. 82.

    BVerG 45, 187, 242.

  83. 83.

    249 U.S. 47 (1919).

  84. 84.

    See A. Pace, Problematica delle libertà costituzionali. Parte generale, Padova, CEDAM, 1992, 10 ff. and P. Barile, Diritti dell’uomo e libertà fondamentali, Bologna, il Mulino, 1984, 31 ff.

  85. 85.

    381 U.S. 479 (1965).

  86. 86.

    367 U.S. 497 (1961).

  87. 87.

    448 U.S. 555 (1980).

  88. 88.

    357 U.S. 449 (1958).

  89. 89.

    383 U.S. 663 (1966).

  90. 90.

    394 U.S. 618 (1969).

  91. 91.

    372 U.S. 353 (1963).

  92. 92.

    404 U.S. 189 (1971).

  93. 93.

    430 U.S. 817 (1977).

  94. 94.

    See dec. 29/1962. See also: 37/1969; 102/1975; 238/1975; 98/1979.

  95. 95.

    Dec. 561/1987.

  96. 96.

    Dec. 287/1992.

  97. 97.

    Dec. 383/1998.

  98. 98.

    STC, 158/1993.

  99. 99.

    Such as in Greenland with the Inuit or Eskimo people, or in the Nunavut Territory, created in Canada in 1999, or in Bolivia, where according to the 2001 census indigenous peoples amount to 49.95 % of the whole population.

  100. 100.

    But not necessarily, like in the case of the Islamic colonization in Ottoman North Africa.

  101. 101.

    For an exhaustive classification of the different models see F. Palermo, J. Woelk, Diritto costituzionale comparato dei gruppi e delle minoranze, Padova, CEDAM, 2011 and also S. Choudry, Constitutional Designs for Divided Society: Integration or Accommodation?, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008.

  102. 102.

    A comment in L. Swepton, A New Step in the International Law on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples: ILOConvention No.169 of 1989, in 15 Okla. C. Un. L. Rev., 677 (1990).

  103. 103.

    See S. Allen, A. Xanthaki (Eds.), Reflections on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2011.

  104. 104.

    See F. Duranti, Sulla via dell’indipendenza: il nuovo statuto di autonomia per la Groenlandia, in DPCE, 2010, 957.

  105. 105.

    See S. Lanni (Ed.), I diritti dei popoli indigeni in America Latina, Napoli, ESI, 2011.

  106. 106.

    S. Pierré-Caps, J. Poumareède, N. Rouland, Droit des minorités et des peuples autochtones, Paris, PUF, 1996.

  107. 107.

    Commission Africaine des Droits de l’Homme et des Peuples, Peuples autochtones d’Afrique: les peuples oubliés? Banjul, CADHP, 2006.

  108. 108.

    Spheres of Justice, A Defense of Pluralism and Equality, New York, Basic Books, 1983.

  109. 109.

    The Moral Commonwealth. Social Theory and the Promise of Community, Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1992.

  110. 110.

    Rights and the Common Good: The Communitarian Perspective, New York, St. Martin’s Press, 1995.

  111. 111.

    The Law of Peoples, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1999.

  112. 112.

    Liberalism, Community and Culture, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1991, and Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995.

  113. 113.

    A. Honneth, Kampf an Anerkennung. Zur moralishen Grammatik der sozialer Kämpfe, Frankfurt a. Main, Suhrkamp, 1992.

  114. 114.

    See L.M. Díez Picazo, ¿Pueden los estatutos de Autonomía declarar derechos, deberes y principios?, in Revista española de derecho constitucional, 2006, 63; J.V. Martín Oviedo, Artículo 147, Estatutos de Autonomía, su contenido y reforma, in O. Alzaga Villaamil (Eds.), Comentarios a la Constitución española de 1978, Madrid, Edersa, 1978, 127.

  115. 115.

    See F. Caamaño, Sí, pueden. (Declaraciones de derecho y Estatutos de Autonomía), in Revista española de derecho constitucional, 2007, 33; M. Carrillo, Los derechos, un contenido constitucional de los Estatutos de Autonomía, in Revista española de derecho constitucional, 2007, 49.

  116. 116.

    See STC, dec. 31/2010.

  117. 117.

    See M. Mazza, Decentramento e riforma delle autonomie territoriali in Francia, Torino, Giappichelli, 2004.

  118. 118.

    See National Report, par. 2.1.2.

  119. 119.

    To use the words of S. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, New York, Simon & Schuster, 1996.

  120. 120.

    See e.g. D. Little, J.Kelsay, A.A.Sachedina (Eds.), Human Rights and the Conflict of Cultures: Western and Islamic Perspectives on Religious Liberty, Columbia, University of South Carolina Press, 1988; A. Sen, Freedom as Development, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999; S. Bessis, L’Occident et les autres. Histoire d’une suprématie, Paris, La Découverte, 2002. A shorthand of Chinese, Muslim and Hindu theories was already in Unesco, Human Rights. Comments and Interpretations. A Symposium, London, A. Wingate, 1949.

  121. 121.

    See e.g. D. Held, A. McGrew, Globalization/Anti-Globalization, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2002.

  122. 122.

    According to the terminology of G. Peces-Barba Martínez, Teoría de los derechos fundamentales, supra note 9 and N. Bobbio, L’età dei diritti, Torino, Einaudi, 1997.

  123. 123.

    S.C. Breau, Humanitarian Intervention: the United Nations and Collective Responsibility, London, Cameron May, 2005.

  124. 124.

    See M. Sterio, The Evolution of International Law, in 31 B.C. Int’l & Comp. L. Rev., 213 (2008).

  125. 125.

    See J. Habermas, The Constitutionalization of International Law and the Legitimation Problems of a constitution for World Society, in 15 Constellations, 444 (2008); J. Klabbers, A. Peters, G. Ulfstein, The Constitutionalization of International Law, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2009.

  126. 126.

    See J. Habermas, Faktizität und Geltung, Frankfurt a. Main, Suhrkamp, 1992.

  127. 127.

    Starting with Nold (C-4/73) and Stauder (C-29/69).

  128. 128.

    See in particular B. Markesinis, Comparative Law in Courtroom and Classroom, The Story of the Last Thirty-five Years, Oxford-Portland, Hart Publishing, 2003; M. Andenas, G. Canivet, D. Fairgrieve (Eds.), Comparative Law before the Courts, London, BIICL, 2004; B. Markesinis, J. Fedtke, Judicial Recourse to Foreign Law, A New Source of Inspiration?, London, Routledge-Cavendish, 2006; G.F. Ferrari, A. Gambaro (Eds.), Corti nazionali e comparazione giuridica, Napoli, ESI, 2006.

  129. 129.

    G.F. Ferrari, La comparazione giuridica nella giurisprudenza della Corte suprema degli Stati Uniti d’America, in G.F. Ferrari, A. Gambaro, Corti nazionali, supra note 128, 307 ff.

  130. 130.

    Like the U.S. Supreme Court in Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78, 113 (1908).

  131. 131.

    Like Justice Felix Frankfurter in Adamson v. California, 332 U.S. 46 (1947) or in Stein v. New York, 346 U.S. 156, 199 (1953).

  132. 132.

    Like again Justice Frankfurter in Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165, 169 (1952).

  133. 133.

    As suggested by V. Jackson, Narratives of Federalism: Of Continuities and Comparative Constitutional Experience, in 51 Duke L. J., 223 (2001), 247 ff.

  134. 134.

    See infra, par. 6.6.

  135. 135.

    BVerfGE 37, 271 Solange-I-Beschluss (1974); BVerfGE 73, 339, Solange-II-Beschluss (1986); BVerfGE 89, 155 Maastricht-Beschluss (1993); BVerfGE Az 2 BvL 1/97, Bananenmarkt-Entscheidung (2000); BVerfGE 123, 267, Lissabon-Urteil (2009).

  136. 136.

    Cons. Const., dec. 2004-496 DC; 2004-505 DC; 2006-540 DC.

  137. 137.

    In the meaning made famous by T.H. Marshall, Sociology at the Crossroad, London, Heinemann, 1950.

  138. 138.

    Identity and Violence, The Illusion of Destiny, New York, W. W. Norton & Company, 2006.

  139. 139.

    A synthesis in R.B. Reich, Supercapitalism. The Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life, New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 2007.

  140. 140.

    G. Teubner, Societal Constitutionalism, Alternative to State-Centered Constitutional Theory?, in C. Joerges, I.J. Sand, G. Teubner (Eds.), Transnational Governance and Constitutionalism, Oxford-Portland, Hart Publishing, 2003.

  141. 141.

    As suggested by A. Ong, Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logic of Transnationality, Durham, Duke University Press, 1999.

  142. 142.

    See e.g. J.H. Jackson, Sovereignty-Modern: A New Approach to an Outdated Concept, in 92 Am.J.Int’l L., 782–802; S. Tierney, Reframing Sovereignty? Sub-State National Societies and Contemporary Challenges to the Nation-State, in 54 Int. & Comp. Legal Q., 161–83 (2008).

  143. 143.

    This is a shorthand summary of the persuading theory of S. Benhabib, The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2002, and The Rights of Other. Aliens, Residents and Citizens, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004. The idea of democratic iteration is also in J. Derrida, Signature, événement, contexte, in Marges de la philosophie, Paris, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1972.

  144. 144.

    See art. II, (Sect. 3 l).

  145. 145.

    Besides the National Report, see A. Pace, La garanzia dei diritti fondamentali nell’ordinamento costituzionale italiano: il ruolo del legislatore e dei giudici “comuni”, in RTDPC, 1989, 685 ff.; Id., Dai diritti del cittadino ai diritti fondamentali dell’uomo, in www.rivistaic.it, 2010.

  146. 146.

    Chinese Exclusion Case, 130 U.S. 581 (1889).

  147. 147.

    See e.g. Graham v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 365 (1971), Toll. V. Moreno, 458 U.S. 1 (1982), Bernal v. Fainter, 467 U.S. 216 (1984).

  148. 148.

    Besides the National Report, see L. Michael, M. Morlok, Grundrechte, Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 2009, 226.

  149. 149.

    Sent. 23-11-1984, n. 107.

  150. 150.

    Sent. 30-9-1985, n. 99 and 7-11-2007, n. 48.

  151. 151.

    Sent. 11-9-1995, m. 130. A complete review of several legal systems in G.F. Ferrari, Relazione conclusiva, in Lo statuto costituzionale del non cittadino, Atti del XXIV Convegno annuale, Cagliari, 16–17 ottobre 2009, Associazione italiana dei costituzionalisti, Padova, CEDAM, 2010, 516 ff.

  152. 152.

    National Report, par. 2.

  153. 153.

    Besides the National Report, see P.P.T. Bovend’Eert, C.A.J.M. Kortmann, Dutch Constitutional Law, The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2000.

  154. 154.

    Since the Paquete Habana case, 175 U.S. 677 (1900).

  155. 155.

    Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, 542 U.S. 692 (2004) and Medellin v. Texas, 552 U.S. 491 (2008).

  156. 156.

    S.M. Lipset, American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword, New York, N.Y., 1996; M. Ignatieff, Introduction: American Exceptionalism and Human Rights, in Id. (Ed.), American Exceptionalism and Human Rights, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2003.

  157. 157.

    In the words of Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man, New York, Free Press, 1992.

  158. 158.

    See the National Report and in details G. Van Ert, Using International Law in Canadian Courts, Toronto, Irwin Law, 2nd ed., 2008.

  159. 159.

    See art. 50 Const.

  160. 160.

    See National Report, par. 4.

  161. 161.

    See e.g. E. Ellis, Sources of Law and the Hierarchy of Norms, in A. Burrows, D. Feldman (Eds.), English Public Law, supra note 42, 63 ff.

  162. 162.

    De Wutz v Hendricks (1824) 2 Bing 314.

  163. 163.

    R v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p Thakrar [1974QB 684.]

  164. 164.

    Trendtex Trading v Bank of Nigeria [1977] 1 QB 529.

  165. 165.

    A. Saiz Arnaiz, La apertura al derecho internacional y europeo de los derechos humanos. El artículo 10.2 de la Constitución, Madrid, Consejo General del Poder Judicial, 1999.

  166. 166.

    Art. 16, assuming as parameter only the Universal Declaration.

  167. 167.

    Art. 10.

  168. 168.

    HCJ 11437/05 Kav Laoved v. Interior Ministry (2011).

  169. 169.

    See art. 55 Const.

  170. 170.

    See S. Carmeli, La difficile cohabitation tra diritto interno e diritto internazionale: la Corte di cassazione si allea al Consiglio di Stato per difendere la sovranità nazionale, in DPCE, 2000, 1978.

  171. 171.

    See E. Alimehmeti, E. Met-Hasani Çani, Albania, in F. Emmert, L.Hammer, The European Convention on Human Rights in Central and Eastern Europe, The Hague, Eleven International Publishing, 2012, 39 ff.

  172. 172.

    J. Gavirov, Azerbaijan, in F. Emmert, L.Hammer, The ECHR in Central and Eastern Europe, supra note 171, 75 ff.

  173. 173.

    S. Rodin, Croatia, in ibidem, 138 ff.

  174. 174.

    C. Ginter, R. Värk, Estonia, in ibidem, 183 ff.

  175. 175.

    E. Lomtatidze, B. Pataraia, Georgia, in ibidem, 197 ff.

  176. 176.

    A. Repšs, L. Rugāte, I. Stankevičs, Latvia, in ibidem, 279 ff.

  177. 177.

    R. Beržanskiené, Lithuania, in ibidem, 293 ff.

  178. 178.

    M. Chicu, V. Gribincea, N. Hriptievschi, Moldova, in ibidem, 311 ff.

  179. 179.

    See P. Korzec, Poland, in ibidem, 356 ff.

  180. 180.

    A. Khvorostyankina, A. Meleshevich, Ukraine, in ibidem, 560 ff.

  181. 181.

    See CC dec. 348 and 349/2007. On these issues see A. Ruggeri, La CEDU nelle sentenze 348 e 349 della Corte costituzionale, in DPCE, 2008, 171 ss.

  182. 182.

    Par. 4 and 5.

  183. 183.

    See the National Report.

  184. 184.

    Like J.H.H. Weiler, Eurocracy and Distrust, in 61 Wash. L. Rev. (1986), 1103, re-elaborated in Fundamental rights and fundamental boundaries: on standards and values in the protection of human rights, in N.A. Neuwahl, A. Rosas, The European Union and Human Rights, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1995, 51 ff.

  185. 185.

    Like R. Lawson, Confusion and conflict? Diverging interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights Law among Europe’s regional courts, in M. De Blois, R. Lawson (Eds.), The Dynamics of the Protection of Human Rights in Europe, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1994, 253 ff.

  186. 186.

    L.F.M. Besselink, Entrapped by the maximum standard: on fundamental rights, pluralism and subsidiarity in the European Union, in 35 C. Mkt.L.Rev., 629 (1998).

  187. 187.

    In L.F.M. Besselink, Entrapped by the maximum standard, supra note 186.

References

Books and chapters

  • Abraham, H.J. & B.A. Perry (1978) Freedom and the Court. Civil Rights and Liberties in the United States. New York, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agamben, G. (1995) Homo Sacer. Torino, Einaudi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allan, T.R.S. (1993) Law, Liberty and Justice. Oxford, Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, S. & A. Xanthaki (eds.). (2011) Reflections on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Oxford, Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andenas, M., G. Canivet & D. Fairgrieve (eds.). (2004) Comparative Law before the Courts. London, BIICL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, H. (1951) The origins of totalitarianism. New York, Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnaiz, A. Saiz (1999) La apertura al derecho internacional y europeo de los derechos humanos. El artículo 10.2 de la Constitución. Madrid, Consejo General del Poder Judicial.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barile, P. (1984) Diritti dell’uomo e libertà fondamentali. Bologna, il Mulino, 31 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beddard, R. (1993) Human Rights and Europe. Cambridge, Grotius Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benhabib, S. (2002) The Claims of Culture: Equality and Diversity in the Global Era. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benhabib, S. (2004) The Rights of Other. Aliens, Residents and Citizens. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bessis, S. (2002) L’Occident et les autres. Histoire d’une suprématie. Paris, La Découverte.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackstone, W. (1765–1769) Commentaries on the Laws of England. Oxford, Clarendon Press, I, 121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bobbio, N. (1997) L’età dei diritti, (1997) Torino, Einaudi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolz, M. (1991) Das Verhaltnis von Schutzobjekt und Schranken der Grundrechte Zürich, Schulthess.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonbled, N. & M. Verdussen (2011) Le droits constitutionnels en Belgique. Vol. I. Bruxelles, Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bovend’Eert, P.P.T. & C.A.J.M. Kortmann (2000) Dutch Constitutional Law. The Hague, Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breau, S.C. (2005) Humanitarian Intervention: the United Nations and Collective Responsibility. London, Cameron May.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burdea, G. (1972) Les libertés publiques. Paris, LGDJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burlamaqui, Jean-Jacques (1747) Principes du droit naturel. Genève, Barillot et fils, I, VII, 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrows, A. (2009) D. Feldman (ed.). English Public Law. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caamaño, F. (2007) Sí, pueden. (Declaraciones de derecho y Estatutos de Autonomía). In Revista española de derecho constitucional, 33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campo, J. Jiménez (1999) Derechos fundamentales. Concepto y garantías. Madrid, Editorial Trotta.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Castro Cid, B. & A. Fernández-Galiano (1993) Lecciones de Teoría del Derecho y Derecho Natural. Madrid, Editorial Universitas, passim.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrillo, M. (2007) Los derechos, un contenido constitucional de los Estatutos de Autonomía. In: Revista española de derecho constitucional 49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choudry, S. (2008) Constitutional Designs for Divided Society: Integration or Accommodation? Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colliard, C.-A. (1989) Libertés publiques. Paris, Dalloz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission Africaine des Droits de l’Homme et des Peuples (2006) Peuples autochtones d’Afrique: les peuples oubliés? Banjul, CADHP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Constant, B. (1819) De la liberté des anciens comparée à celle des modernes. Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delpérée, F. (2003) Ledroit constitutionnelde laBelgique. Bruxelles, Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. (1972) Signature, événement, contexte, in Marges de la philosophie. Paris, Les Éditions de Minuit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dershowitz, A. (2004) Rights from Wrongs. A Secular Theory of the Origins of Rights. New York, Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Díez-Picazo, L.M. (2005) Los sistemas de derechos fundamentales. Madrid, Civitas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Díez-Picazo, L.M. (2006) ¿Pueden los estatutos de Autonomía declarar derechos, deberes y principios?, Revista española de derecho constitucional. 63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duffar, J. & J. Robert (2009) Droits de l’homme et libertés fondamentales. Paris, Montchrestien.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emmert, F. & L. Hammer (2012) The European Convention on Human Rights in Central and Eastern Europe. The Hague, Eleven International Publishing, 39 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Esteban, J. (2001) Tratado de derecho constitucional español. Madrid, Servicio de Publicaciones de la Facultad de Derecho, UCM, 298 ss.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzioni, Amidai (1995) Rights and the Common Good: The Communitarian Perspective. New York, St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Favoreu, L. (2001) La notion de liberté fondamentale devant le juge administratif des référés. Paris, Dalloz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari, G. F. (2010) Relazione conclusiva,. Lo statuto costituzionale del non cittadino. Atti del XXIV Convegno annuale, Cagliari, 16–17 ottobre 2009, Associazione italiana dei costituzionalisti, Padova, CEDAM 516 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari, G.F. & A. Gambaro (eds.). (2006) Corti nazionali e comparazione giuridica, Napoli, ESI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Figgis, J.N. (1960) Political Thought from Gerson to Grotius: 1414–1625. New York, Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finney, M.I. (1995) Democracy Ancient and Modern. London, Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flores, M. (2008) Storia dei diritti umani. Bologna, il Mulino.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (1992) The End of History and the Last Man. New York, Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallie, W.B. Essentially Contested Concepts. In Proceeding of the Aristototelic society, 1955/56 167 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomes Canotilho, J.J. (2004) Tomemos a sério os direitos económicos, sociais e culturais, Estudos sobre direitos fundamentais. Coimbra, Editora Tema.

    Google Scholar 

  • Häberle, P. (1991) Gemeineuropäisches Verfassungsrecht. In EuGRZ 261 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1992) Faktizität und Geltung. Frankfurt a. Main, Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, A. The federalist No. 84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hecker, W. (2003) Relativierung des Folterverbots in der BRD?. In Kritische Justiz 210–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Held, D. & A. McGrew (2002) Globalization/Anti-Globalization. Cambridge, Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henkin, L. (1990) The Age of Rights. New York, Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honneth, A. (1992) Kampf an Anerkennung. Zur moralishen Grammatik der sozialer Kämpfe. Frankfurt a. Main, Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, L. (2007) Inventing Human Rights: A History. New York, W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huntington, S. (1996) The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. New York, Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ignatieff, M. (2001) Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ignatieff, M. (2003) Introduction: American Exceptionalism and Human Rights. In Id. (Ed.) . American Exceptionalism and Human Rights. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Israel, J.-J. (1998) Droit des libertés fondamentales. Pars, LGDJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klabbers, J. & A. Peters, G. Ulfstein (2009) The Constitutionalization of International Law. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kymlika, W. (1991) Liberalism, Community and Culture. Oxford, Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kymlika, W. (1995) Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanni, S. (2011) (ed.). I diritti dei popoli indigeni in America Latina. Napoli, ESI (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • Laws, J. (1993) Is the High Court of Justice the Guardian of Fundamental Constitutional Rights? Pub. L., 59 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, R. (1994) Confusion and conflict? Diverging interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights Law among Europe’s regional courts. In M. De Blois, R. Lawson (eds.). The Dynamics of the Protection of Human Rights in Europe. The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 253 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerche, Peter (1961) Übermass und Verfassungsrecht. Köln, Heymann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, S.M. (1996) American Exceptionalism: A Double-Edged Sword. New York, N.Y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, D., J. Kelsay & A.A. Sachedina (eds.). (1988) Human Rights and the Conflict of Cultures: Western and Islamic Perspectives on Religious Liberty. Columbia, University of South Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madiot, Y. (1976) Droits de l’homme et libertés publiques. Paris, Masson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markesinis, B. (2003) Comparative Law in Courtroom and Classroom, The Story of the Last Thirty-five Years. Oxford-Portland, Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markesinis, B. & J. Fedtke (2006) Judicial Recourse to Foreign Law, A New Source of Inspiration? London, Routledge-Cavendish.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, T.H. (1950) Sociology at the Crossroad. London, Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martín Oviedo, J.V. (1978) Artículo 147, Estatutos de Autonomía, su contenido y reforma. In O. Alzaga Villaamil (ed.). Comentarios a la Constitución española de (1978) Madrid, Edersa, 127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peces-Barba Martinez, G. (1991) Teoría de los derechos fundamentales. Madrid, Eudema.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massó Garrote, M.S. (2000) I diritti fondamentali e le libertà pubbliche nella costituzione del 1978 e nella giurisprudenza costituzionale. In L. Pegoraro, A. Rinella, R. Scarciglia (eds.). I venti anni della Costituzione spagnola nella giurisprudenza del Tribunale costituzionale. Padova, CEDAM 43 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazza, M. (2004) Decentramento e riforma delle autonomie territoriali in Francia. Torino, Giappichelli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michael, L. & M. Morlok (2009) Grundrechte. Berlin, Duncker & Humblot, 226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miranda, J. (2008) Manual de direito constitucional Vol. IV. Coimbra, Editora Tema.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morange, J. (1985) Droits de l’homme et libertés publiques. Paris, Robert Laffont.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oestreich, G. (1978) Geschichte der Menschenrechte und Grundfreiheiten im Umriss. Berlin, Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ong, A. (1999) Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logic of Transnationality. Durham, Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pace, A. (1992) Problematica delle libertà costituzionali. Parte generale. Padova, CEDAM, 10 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palermo, F. & J. Woelk (2011) Diritto costituzionale comparato dei gruppi e delle minoranze. Padova, CEDAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierré-Caps, S., J. Poumareède & N. Rouland (1996) Droit des minorités et des peuples autochtones. Paris, PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1999) The Law of Peoples. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, R.B. (2007) Supercapitalism. The Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life. New York, Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richer, L. (1982) Les droits de l’homme et du citoyen. Paris, Economica.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivero, J. (1996) Les libertés publiques. Paris, PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rorty, R. (1998) Truth and progress. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosas, A. (1995) The European Union and Human Rights. The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 51 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1992) The Moral Commonwealth. Social Theory and the Promise of Community. Los Angeles, University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1999) Freedom as Development. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (2006) Identity and Violence, The Illusion of Destiny. New York, W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teubner, G. (2003) Societal Constitutionalism, Alternative to State-Centered Constitutional Theory? In C. Joerges, I.J. Sand, G. Teubner (eds.). Transnational Governance and Constitutionalism, Oxford-Portland, Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, B. (1997) The Idea of Natural Rights: Studies on Natural Rights, Natural Law and Church Law (1159–1625). Atlanta, Scholar Press of Emory University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuck, R. (1979) Natural Rights Theories: Their Origin and Development. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turpin, D. (2004) Libertés Publiques et Droits Fondamentaux. Paris, Ed. du Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unesco (1949) Human Rights. Comments and Interpretations. A Symposium. London, A. Wingate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uyttendaele, N. (2006) Précis de droit constitutionnel belge. Bruxelles, Bruylant.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Ert, G. (2008) Using International Law in Canadian Courts. Toronto, Irwin Law, 2nd ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vieira, N. (1998) Constitutional civil rights in a nutshell. St. Paul, West Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walzer, M. (1983) Spheres of Justice, A Defense of Pluralism and Equality. New York, Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein (1953) Philosophical Investigations. Oxford, Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

Cases

Journals and articles

  • A. Ruggeri La CEDU nelle sentenze 348 e 349 della Corte costituzionale. DPCE, 2008, 171 ss.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duranti, F. (2010) Sulla via dell’indipendenza: il nuovo statuto di autonomia per la Groenlandia. DPCE, 957.

    Google Scholar 

  • H. Wechsler Toward Neutral Principles of Constitutional Law. 73 Harv. L. Rev., 19591, 31.

    Google Scholar 

  • J.H.H. Weiler Eurocracy and Distrust. 61 Wash. L. Rev (1986), 1103.

    Google Scholar 

  • J.H. Jackson Sovereignty-Modern: A New Approach to an Outdated Concept. 92 Am. J. Int’l L., 782–802.

    Google Scholar 

  • J. Habermas The Constitutionalization of International Law and the Legitimation Problems of a constitution for World Society. 15 Constellations, 444 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • L.F.M Besselink.Entrapped by the maximum standard: on fundamental rights, pluralism and subsidiarity in the European Union. 35 C. Mkt. L. Rev., 629 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • L. Swepton A New Step in the International Law on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples: ILO Convention No.169 of 1989.15 Okla. C. Un. L. Rev., 677 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  • M. Sterio The Evolution of International Law. 31 B.C. Int’l & Comp. L. Rev., 213 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pace, A. (1989) La garanzia dei diritti fondamentali nell’ordinamento costituzionale italiano: il ruolo del legislatore e dei giudici “comuni”. In RTDPC (1989) 685 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Carmeli La difficile cohabitation tra diritto interno e diritto internazionale: la Corte di cassazione si allea al Consiglio di Stato per difendere la sovranità nazionale. DPCE, 2000, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Tierney Reframing Sovereignty? Sub-State National Societies and Contemporary Challenges to the Nation-State. 54 Int. & Comp. Legal Q. 161–83 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • S. Žižek Against human rights. New Left Review, 34, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • T. BoergenthalThe Normative and Institutional Evolution of International Human Rights. In 19 Human Rights Quarterly (1997), 703 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • V. Jackson Narratives of Federalism: Of Continuities and Comparative Constitutional Experience. 51 Duke L. J., 223 (2001), 247 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • W.N. Hohfeld Some fundamental legal conceptions as applied in judicial reasoning. 23 Yale L.J., 16 (1913).

    Google Scholar 

Online database

  • A. Pace. Dai diritti del cittadino ai diritti fondamentali dell’uomo. In www.rivistaic.it, 2010.

Paper presented at a conference

  • Akiko Ejima. A Possibility of Multi-layered Human Rights Implementation System of Underpinned by the Simultaneous Codification of the Constitution of Japan and the International Human Rights Treaty.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argentine National Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Canada National Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chien-liang Lee. Rule of Law in Taiwan: Transplantation and Codification.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greek National Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ida Lintel, Marthe Lot Vermeulen. Codification and Implementation of Human Rights in the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Italy National Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leila Nadya Sadat, Henry H. Oberschelp. The United States and Human Rights: Paradoxes and Challenges.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luísa Neto. Portuguese National Report on the The national and international codification of human rightspresented to the Thematic Congress of the International Academy of Comparative Law.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomer Broude, Yonatan Weisbrod. The Codification of Human Rights at the National and International Levels.

    Google Scholar 

Press

  • W. Brugger, Das andere Auge.In Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung , Mar. 10, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

Statutes

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bocconi University, via Roentgen, 1-20136, Milano, Italy

    Prof. Giuseppe Franco Ferrari

Authors
  1. Prof. Giuseppe Franco Ferrari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giuseppe Franco Ferrari .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Law, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan

    Wen-Yeu Wang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ferrari, G. (2014). The Codification of Human Rights at National and International Levels. In: Wang, WY. (eds) Codification in International Perspective. Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law, vol 1. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-03455-3_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation