INHOUDSTAFEL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
CLASS 1 : CONCEPT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
1. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS……………………………………………………….…….1
1.1 COMMON CHARACTERISTICS……………………………………………………………….1
.
1.1.1 PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUALS AGAINST ABUSE OF AUTHORITY……………………………1
1.1.2 HUMAN DIGNITY……………………………………………………………………………………….....3
1.2 CATEGORIES OF HUMAN RIGHTS……………………………………………………..……5
.
1.2.1 INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS……………………………………………………………....5
1.2.2 COLLECTIVE RIGHTS (3RD GENERATION) : SOLIDARITY RIGHTS……………………………6
1.3 ARE ALL HUMAN RIGHTS ‘FUNDAMENTAL’ RIGHTS?..........................................7
.
1.4 HOLDERS OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS……………………………………………….......7
1.4.1 INDIVIDUALS…………………………………………………………………………………………..….7
1.4.2 PRIVATE ENTITIES.............................................................................................................8
1.4.3 COLLECTIVITIES……………………………………………………………………………………….…8
1.5 BEARERS OF DUTY TO RESPECT FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS…………………………..8
1.5.1 STATE…………………………………………………………………………………………………..……8
1.5.2 PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND PRIVATE ENTITIES…………………………………………………8
1.6 ARE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ABSOLUTE OR RELATIVE……………………...…….10
1.6.1 WAIVER OF RIGHTS………………………………………………………………………………….....10
1.6.2 CONFLICTS BETWEEN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS & OTHER INTERESTS, AND BETWEEN
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS THEMSELVES………………………………………………………...…..11
2. FUNDAMENTAL RESPONSIBILITIES...........................................................11
2.1 INDIVIDUALS........................................................................................................11
2.2 STATES..................................................................................................................11
CLASS 2 : HR IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS & INTERNATIONAL LAW
3. NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY AND INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION OF HR....14
.
3.1 IN GENERAL: THE PRINCIPLE OF NON-INTERFERENCE IN DOMESTIC MATTERS
(ART. 2, §7 UN CHARTER)......................................................................................14
3.2 ACTION IN RESPONSE TO SERIOUS VIOLATIONS OF HR......................................15
3.2.1 ECONOMIC MEASURES.....................................................................................................15
3.2.2 USE OF FORCE (MILITARY INTERVENTION).....................................................................16
4. UNIVERSALITY OF HR.................................................................................17
5. HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW.........18
5.1 QUESTION : WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HR LAW & INTERNATIONAL
HUMANITARIAN LAW?..........................................................................................18
5.2 QUESTION : TO THE EXTENT HR OBLIGATIONS CONTINUE TO APPLY, WHAT ARE
THE REMAINING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND
HUMANITARIAN LAW?..........................................................................................18
.
6. SOME PRINCIPLES OF INTERNATIONAL TREATY LAW..............................19
6.1 INTERPRETATION OF TREATIES...........................................................................19
,INHOUDSTAFEL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
6.2 DENUNCIATION OF A TREATY..............................................................................22
CLASS 3 + 4 : UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS SYSTEM
6.3 MAIN INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES.............................................27
6.4 REFORMING THE SYSTEM OF TREATY BODIES....................................................30
7. THE HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL (CHARTER-BASED MECHANISM FOR THE
PROTECTION OF HR)....................................................................................30
7.1 HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL : GENERALITIES.........................................................31
7.2 PROCEDURES, MECHANISMS & STRUCTURES......................................................31
.
7.2.1 UNIVERSAL PERIODIC REVIEW (UPR)..............................................................................31
7.2.2 SPECIAL PROCEDURES.....................................................................................................32
7.2.3 ADVISORY COMMITTEE...................................................................................................33
7.2.4 A CONFIDENTIAL COMPLAINTS PROCEDURE..................................................................33
7.3 REVIEW OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL BY BOTH THE COUNCIL ITSELF AND
THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY...............................................................................33
8. JUDICIAL TREATMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES, AT THE UNIVERSAL
LEVEL..........................................................................................................33
CLASS 5 + 6 : REGIONAL SYSTEMS OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION
8.1 COUNCIL OF EUROPE............................................................................................34
8.1.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................34
8.1.2 TREATIES.........................................................................................................................35
8.1.3 COMMISSIONER OF HR.....................................................................................................45
8.2 EUROPEAN UNION.................................................................................................45
8.2.1 RESPECT FOR HR..............................................................................................................45
8.2.2 HR POLICIES.....................................................................................................................47
8.3 ORGANISATIONS FOR SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE......................47
9. AMERICA.....................................................................................................48
10. AFRICA.........................................................................................................49
11. ASIA-PACIFIC REGION................................................................................49
12. MUSLIM WORLD..........................................................................................49
CLASS 7 : OBLIGATIONS IMPOSED ON STATES BY INTERNATIONAL HR
TREATIES
12.1 PRINCIPLE : TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION...........................................................50
12.2 EXCEPTION : EXTRA-TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION.............................................51
.
12.2.1 SCENARIO 1 : AUTHORITY & CONTROL OF STATE AGENTS OUTSIDE THE TERRITORY OF
THE STATE........................................................................................................................51
12.2.2 SCENARIO 2 : EFFECTIVE CONTROL OVER AN AREA OUTSIDE THE TERRITORY OF A
STATE, AS A RESULT OF MILITARY ACTION....................................................................52
.
13. NATURE OF STATE OBLIGATIONS AND INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF
STATE ACTION OR IN ACTIONS...................................................................53
13.1 NEGATIVE AND POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS.............................................................53
,INHOUDSTAFEL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
13.1.1 NEGATIVE OBLIGATIONS.................................................................................................53
13.1.2 POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS...................................................................................................57
13.2 NATIONAL MARGIN OF APPRECIATION...............................................................58
.
13.2.1 THE THEORY OF MARGIN OF APPRECIATION AS DEVELOPED BY THE EUROPEAN COURT
OF HR................................................................................................................................58
13.2.2 EXAMPLES........................................................................................................................60
14. OBLIGATIONS TO REDRESS HR VIOLATIONS.............................................60
CLASS 8 : INTERNATIONAL HR IN THE DOMESTIC LEGAL ORDER
14.1 IMPLEMENTATION OF AN INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATY IN THE
DOMESTIC LEGAL ORDER.....................................................................................61
14.2 RIGHT TO AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY IN CASE OF AN ALLEGED VIOLATION OF
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS............................................................62
15. EFFECTS OF THE DETERMINATION OF A VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
BY AN INTERNATIONAL MONITORING BODY............................................63
15.1 EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS................................................................63
15.1.1 EXECUTION OF EUROPEAN COURT JUDGMENTS (ART. 46 ECHR)....................................63
15.1.2 AUTHORITY OF THE EUROPEAN COURT’S INTERPRETATION OF THE ECHR (‘RES
INTERPRETATA’)..............................................................................................................68
15.2 INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HR..........................................................................68
15.3 HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE................................................................................68
CLASS 9 : RIGHT TO LIFE (ART. 2 ECHR + ART. 6 CCPR)
16. SCOPE OF APPLICATION : PROTECTION OF THE LIFE OF INDIVIDUALS....69
17. SCOPE OF PROTECTION...............................................................................70
17.1 NEGATIVE OBLIGATION : PROHIBITION OF ARBITRARY INTERFERENCE WITH A
PERSON’S LIFE......................................................................................................70
17.2 POSITIVE OBLIGATION.........................................................................................73
CLASS 10 : PROHIBITION OF TORTURE (ART. 3 ECHR + ART. 7 CCPR)
17.3 CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT.....................79
17.4 TORTURE...............................................................................................................79
18. SCOPE OF PROTECTION...............................................................................80
18.1 NEGATIVE PROHIBITION......................................................................................80
18.1.1 ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION.................................................................................................80
18.1.2 STATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR ILL-TREATMENT................................................................80
18.1.3 EXAMPLES OF ILL-TREATMENT.......................................................................................80
18.2 POSITIVE OBLIGATION.........................................................................................84
18.2.1 SUBSTANTIVE OBLIGATION : PREVENTIVE MEASURES..................................................84
18.2.2 PROCEDURAL OBLIGATION : EFFECTIVE INVESTIGATION (SEE ART. 2 ABOVE).............84
19. PREVENTION...............................................................................................85
,INHOUDSTAFEL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
19.1 EUROPEAN CONVENTION FOR THE PREVENTION OF TORTURE AND INHUMAN
OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT (1987).........................................85
19.2 OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO UN CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE (2002)..............85
CLASS 11 : FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION (ART. 10 + 19 CCPR)
19.3 IMPORTANCE OF THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION FOR A DEMOCRATIC
SOCIETY................................................................................................................86
19.4 SCOPE OF APPLICATION OF THE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION...............................87
19.4.1 ‘RATIONE PERSONAE’......................................................................................................87
19.4.2 ‘RATIONE MATERIAE’......................................................................................................88
19.5 OBLIGATIONS OF THE STATE...............................................................................88
19.5.1 NEGATIVE OBLIGATIONS.................................................................................................88
19.5.2 POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS...................................................................................................89
20. APPLICATIONS............................................................................................90
20.1 NEGATIVE OBLIGATIONS.....................................................................................90
20.1.1 WITH RESPECT TO THE FREEDOM TO HOLD OPINIONS & TO DISSEMINATE
INFORMATION & IDEAS....................................................................................................90
20.1.2 WITH RESPECT TO THE RIGHT TO RECEIVE INFORMATION AND IDEAS..........................98
20.2 POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS.......................................................................................98
20.2.1 ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT INFORMATION.......................................................................98
20.2.2 PROTECTION OF THE MEDIA............................................................................................99
20.2.3 PLURALISM IN THE MEDIA...............................................................................................99
20.2.4 REGULATION OF ‘FORA’ FOR EXERCISE OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION..........................99
20.2.5 PROTECTION OF EMPLOYEES AGAINST ACTIONS BY EMPLOYERS.................................99
CLASS 12 : RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR PRIVATE LIFE, FAMILY LIFE, HOME
AND CORRESPONDENCE (ART. 8 ECHR + ART. 17 CCPR)
20.3 NOTION OF PRIVATE LIFE...................................................................................100
20.4 APPLICATIONS....................................................................................................101
CLASS 13 : RIGHT OF PROPERTY (ART. 1 PROTOCOL NO. 1 TO THE ECHR)
21. SCOPE OF APPLICATION............................................................................108
21.1 OBJECT OF ART. 1 OF PROTOCOL NO. 1 : RIGHT OF PROPERTY..........................108
21.2 NOTION OF ‘POSSESSIONS’.................................................................................108
22. OBLIGATIONS OF THE STATE....................................................................109
22.1 NEGATIVE OBLIGATIONS....................................................................................109
22.1.1 DEPRIVATION OF POSSESSIONS (FIRST PARAGRAPH, SECOND SENTENCE)..................109
22.1.2 CONTROL OF THE USE OF PROPERTY : TAXES, OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS AND PENALTIES
(SECOND PARAGRAPH)...................................................................................................111
22.1.3 OTHER INTERFERENCES WITH THE RIGHT OF PROPERTY (FIRST PARAGRAPH, FIRST
SENTENCE).....................................................................................................................113
,INHOUDSTAFEL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
22.2 POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS.....................................................................................114
.
CLASS 14 + 15 : RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL (ART. 6 ECHR)
22.3 CIVIL MATTERS...................................................................................................115
22.3.1 DISPUTE OVER RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS...................................................................115
22.3.2 CIVIL CHARACTER OF THE RIGHTS OR OBLIGATIONS AT ISSUE...................................116
22.4 CRIMINAL MATTERS...........................................................................................118
22.4.1 CRIMINAL CHARGE........................................................................................................118
22.4.2 STAGES OF THE PROCEEDINGS......................................................................................119
23. RIGHT TO A COURT....................................................................................120
23.1 PRINCIPLE OF THE RULE OF LAW.......................................................................120
.
23.2 RIGHT OF ACCESS TO A COURT...........................................................................120
23.2.1 PRINCIPLE......................................................................................................................120
23.2.2 LIMITATIONS..................................................................................................................121
23.3 RIGHT TO A JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF THE DISPUTE.................................122
23.3.1 POWER OF DECISION......................................................................................................122
23.3.2 ADJUDICATION BY NON-JUDICIAL ORGANS : SUBSEQUENT REVIEW BY A COURT (FULL
JURISDICTION ; REVIEW OF LEGALITY).........................................................................122
23.4 RESPECT FOR A COURT’S FINAL DETERMINATION............................................122
23 .4.1 IMMUTABILITY OF DECISIONS.......................................................................................122
23 . 4.2 EXECUTION OF JUDGMENTS...........................................................................................123
24. STRUCTURAL AND PROCEDURAL GUARANTEES.....................................123
24.1 TRIBUNAL ESTABLISHED BY LAW......................................................................123
24.2 INDEPENDENCE AND IMPARTIALITY.................................................................123
24.2.1 INDEPENDENCE..............................................................................................................123
24.2.2 IMPARTIALITY................................................................................................................124
24.3 PUBLIC HEARING AND PUBLIC JUDGMENT........................................................125
24.4 FAIR HEARING.....................................................................................................125
24.4.1 IN GENERAL....................................................................................................................125
24.4.2 SPECIFIC GUARANTEES IN CRIMINAL CASES.................................................................127
24.5 REASONABLE TIME.............................................................................................128
24.5.1 PERIOD TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT...........................................................................128
24.5.2 ASSESSMENT OF THE REASONABLENESS OF THE LENGTH OF THE PROCEEDINGS.......129
24.5.3 CONSEQUENCES OF AN UNDUE DELAY..........................................................................129
24.5.4 REMEDIES AGAINST AN UNDUE DELAY.........................................................................129
CLASS 16 : ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS
25. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CIVIL & POLITICAL AND SOCIAL / ECONOMIC /
CULTURAL RIGHTS....................................................................................131
,INHOUDSTAFEL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
26. OBLIGATIONS OF STATES WITH RESPECT TO ECONOMIC, SOCIAL &
CULTURAL RIGHTS....................................................................................133
26.1 GENERALITIES....................................................................................................133
26.2 TYPOLOGY OF OBLIGATIONS.............................................................................134
26.2.1 NEGATIVE OBLIGATION (OBLIGATION TO ‘RESPECT’)..................................................134
26.2.2 POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS.................................................................................................134
26.2.3 PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION..................................................134
27. APPLICATIONS...........................................................................................135
,INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN HUMAN RIGHTS
LAW
CLASS 1 : CONCEPT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
1. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
what are human rights?
1. a set of rights that we have because we are human beings
2. rooted in human dignity
3. protection against a state authority
on an abstract level these criteria are correct, but on a more practical level it doesn’t add that much
⇨ first problem : we give high priority to fundamental rights, we see them as supreme rights (at the
top of the legal system), while at the same time it is very difficult to use those criteria in order to
understand whether a right is a FR or an ordinary right
⇨ ‘status : complicated’
there isn’t a comprehensive theory yet, because the problem with the existing theories in practice is either
that they :
⇨ under protect some situations
⇨ overprotect some situations
there might be an intuitive feeling of what human rights could be but it can be misunderstood because there
are several interpretations :
⇨ DEFINITION OF THE TEXTBOOKS : ‘the right that everyone is entitled to because of being a person.’
o can be criticized, because it doesn’t say anything about the kind of rights
o it’s hard to talk about HR in abstract terms → discussion on the crossroads of philosophy & law
o Is freedom of speech a HR? Right not to be tortured? Right to paid holidays? Questionable!
⇨ DEFINITION OF LAWYERS : lawyers typically say : ‘HR are the rights you would find in human rights
treaties.’
o the legal answer to the question is thus : something is a human right because the legal text claims
it, but how did they get in those treaties?
o they are the basis of the legal system, but explain which ones are Human Rights?
= It is really difficult and we have to go back on the Treaties
the lists of human rights = result of historical evolutions
1.1 COMMON CHARACTERISTICS
1.1.1 PROTECTION OF INDIVIDUALS AGAINST ABUSE OF AUTORITY
the human rights are based on the idea that the citizens should be protected against the authorities, human
rights are those rights that protect individuals against arbitrary interferences by public authorities → related
to the rule of law and not the rule of men (limits state power)
we see HR come up in the modern times, they are considered the by-product of the modern states and they
are rooted in medieval documents
1
,Magna Carta (1215) : it is (according to the Brits) the oldest <known> text in England on basic rights that
needs to protect citizens against authorities interfering with their fundamental rights
all over Europe there were tendencies whereby it was felt that the central power couldn’t have absolute
rights to do whatever they want
⇨ e.g. rights for the people living in the city, mostly in the sphere of taxes → these rights could be
revoked at all times
⇨ e.g. the charters in Liège : ‘Le pauvre homme est roi dans sa maison’ → no matter how poor you
are, you are the king in your own home, you are entitled to the same type of tranquillity in your
home as the Windsor family in their castle
these charters didn’t systematically protect HR, they protected some people’s HR (often : HR of specific
categories of persons) e.g. rights for widows, orphans …
⇨ the main feature of these charters : rights are given by the authorities and can be taken back by them
end of the 18th century : the concept of HR comes up in France and America at the same time
⇨ in both countries there was a revolution, these revolutions can be seen as the starting point of HR
o the French revolution ended in 1789 with the ‘declaration des droits de l’homme et du citoyen’
= ‘all people are born free and are equal before the law’
o the American revolution ended in 1791 with the drafting of the American constitution and the
Bill of Rights
⇨ first time there was a general catalogue of rights
o HR were the rights given to you because you are a human being and a member of a political
society
o discussion about democracy and the limit of the use of the state’s power
in the 19th century : it becomes quite common for states to have a list of FR in their constitution
⇨ 1831 : the BE constitution of classical liberalism
o was a leading model containing these constitutional values
in the last quarter of the 19th century : criticism coming from communist, social democrats and
enlightened liberal thinkers and politics ; their arguments :
⇨ you have rights, which you call fundamental and then you tell the state to stay away
o Markx : aren’t you protecting bourgeoisie rights?
▪ what does it mean to protect the freedom of expression if people can’t write or read?
→ than it remains void
▪ if you struggle every day to survive, than the protected rights seem to be a kind of luxurious
good that have no meaning at all
▪ you have to consider the material circumstances in which people live
→ maybe there is the right to education, maybe there are efforts to be done concerning
housing, health care
what we see coming up is the second generation of rights, these rights are ofc framed in a slightly different
way ; whereas the first generation of rights aimed at keeping the government away, the second generation
rights formulate duties for the government (oblige them to act / do things)
2
,⇨ the second generation rights are a reflection on the first generation rights
⇨ they have a budgetary impact (←→ the first gen) : impact on social welfare
o you need some time as a state to accomplish this
- you can’t build 5000 houses in one night
- the key is to achieve the goals gradually
⇨ the second generation is a matter of means (←→ the first gen is a matter of result)
o for judges it is uncomfortable / harder : “did the government do enough?” = political question
this idea of considering states as ‘the big enemy of HR’ is a little bit outdated nowadays because we tend
to see the state both as a threat and as a party
comparison with the Belgian student : on Sunday evening they leave home with food made by their mother
and money to survive the week → during the week they want their parents to stay away so they can be
independent, but at the end of the week their money is gone, they have dirty clothes and their Tupperware
is empty ⇒ they need their parents to survive the next week and so on / in the end they still need protection
⇨ in HR law, it is the same, as states not only have a duty to refrain from acting, but also a duty to act for
the benefit of citizens
after WWII : the idea of protecting human rights at a more regional or international level emerges. It is
taught that it is not enough to have national human rights, because when we rely on the state for FR, we
are saying that we hope states protect the FR of their citizens → but what if those states do not comply
with their human rights?
⇨ you need something more ; you need a place where you can complain when a state does not comply
with FR
⇨ that is why since WW2, international HR have been developed, rights previously protected only by
states are now also protected by international texts
o International treaties create norms + places where people can complain at regional or
international level
1.1.2 HUMAN DIGNITY
H.R. Committee, 15 July 2002, WACKENHEIM V. FRANCE, no. 854/1999 : DWARF-TOSSING CASE
this is a case about an activity where people made dwarfs wear protective gear & then threw the dwarfs at
fairs : whoever threw the furthest won the game. Criticism arose that this activity violated human dignity.
Mr Wackenheim had a genetic disease and was a dwarf.
a permit was needed to organise these fairs, but in one municipality the mayor refused to give one. The
reason given was that throwing dwarfs was in a way equivalent to mocking little people (see: human zoo)
and that is a violation of human dignity
in France, the local authorities can use public order, public safety or hygienic reasons to refuse a permit,
there is no such thing as moral reasons for refusing → the mayor probably knew this, arguing along the
lines of human dignity was already a way to implicitly say ‘I don’t have strong legal arguments, but I have
very strong moral objections’
there was an appeal from the company, but also from the dwarf himself (Mr Wackenheim). Mr Wackenheim
stands up and says 'who are you to judge whether this is a violation of my human dignity' → he claims that
he has the fundamental right to live his life the way he wants and to choose the job he wants, even if he
wants to choose to be professionally thrown during this dwarf throw
3
, the case was brought before the French Council of State and Mr Wackenheim lost. This even though the
mayor had no legal ground to refuse a permit, as he could legally only do so if the permit endangered public
safety (not merely 'going against human dignity') → this created a lot of confusion and discussion.
Wackenheim appealed to the ECHR, but he had a bad lawyer and the case was rejected. From there, he
went to the UN Human Rights Commission, which ruled that France and the mayor could decide not to
allow such activities
the point is : this case shows the intrinsic problem with human dignity, namely whose human dignity are
we protecting?
⇨ isn't there a risk that if HR are focused on protecting the individual from the government, human
dignity becomes a very weak concept?
o human dignity would allow precisely that majorities use it against minorities and that’s what
happened in Wackenheim, the mayor expressed a common view of what HD is
there are many cases where human dignity causes similar conflicts :
⇨ e.g. the whole discussion about sex workers → some countries ban sex work, others allow it
o if someone decides to become a professional sex worker (of their own free will, not forced), that
might be an expression of human dignity, even if the moral majority thinks otherwise
o the moral majority would say that sex work is a violation of women's dignity
⇨ e.g. Temptation Island : Pommeline Tillière was the face of a commercial for a casino, she wore a bikini
and had champagne in her hands
o the advertising ethics committee found it sexist because it featured a woman in a bikini and had
nothing to do with a casino
- they felt it was a violation of her dignity, but Pommeline does not get to choose which
portrayal she uses as her brand
- the whole influencer world can decide its own image
conclusion : there are those who are in favour of the concept of human dignity and there are those who
are against it
Paul Martens (formal president of the Belgian Constitutional Court & law professor) said :
"As a scholar, I am opposed to HD because it is such an open concept, it’s too vague and easy to abuse
(e.g. against individuals). But as a judge, I'm in favour of HD, because sometimes you feel that
something is wrong and you don't have the very hard legal arguments, then the constitutional judge is
happy that people can invoke human dignity as an ultimum remedium."
sometimes human dignity is the ultimum remedium to shut down the whole system
⇨ human dignity became popular and prevalent after WWII (it was in the German constitution in Art 1)
because many of the crimes committed were lawful under the laws of the time, but they violated
human dignity
o e.g. the Nazi era : many of the crimes committed were lawful under the law of the time (Nazi law),
but they violated human dignity, so the rule of law becomes problematic → the positive approach
has gaps, so then we point to human dignity
⇨ in Belgian law, it only comes up in 1993-94, which is quite late
o before 1994, you don't really find anything related to human dignity → there are only a few cases
and one law that refer to it
o but as soon as human dignity enters our legal system, there is an explosion of references to
human dignity
4
