Search result: 26 articles

x
Case Law

Access_open 2021/1 EELC’s review of the year 2020

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 1 2021
Authors Ruben Houweling, Daiva Petrylaitė, Marianne Hrdlicka e.a.
Abstract

    Various of our academic board analysed employment law cases from last year. However, first, we start with some general remarks.


Ruben Houweling

Daiva Petrylaitė

Marianne Hrdlicka

Attila Kun

Luca Calcaterra

Francesca Maffei

Jean-Philippe Lhernould

Niklas Bruun

Jan-Pieter Vos

Luca Ratti

Andrej Poruban

Anthony Kerr

Filip Dorssemont
Rulings

ECJ 18 November 2020, Case C-463/19 (Syndicat CFTC), Gender Discrimination

Syndicat CFTC du personnel de la Caisse primaire d’assurance maladie de la Moselle – v – Caisse primaire d’assurance maladie de la Moselle, French case

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 4 2020
Keywords Gender Discrimination
Abstract

    A national collective agreement may reserve to mothers alone an additional maternity leave, as long as it seeks to protect them from the effects of pregnancy and motherhood.

Human Rights Literature Review

Belarus

Journal East European Yearbook on Human Rights, Issue 1 2020
Authors E. Konnova and P. Marshyn
Author's information

E. Konnova
Head of the Chair of International Law of Belarusian State University, Director of Human Rights Center based at the Faculty of International Relations of Belarusian State University, PhD (international law).

P. Marshyn
PhD student at the Chair of International Law of Belarusian State University, LLM (law). Justice of Belarus, available at: https://justbel.info/pages/about-us (last accessed 26 July 2020).
Pending Cases

Case C-105/20, Gender Discrimination, Part Time Work

UF – v – Union Nationale des Mutualités Libres (Partenamut) (UNMLibres), reference lodged by the Tribunal du travail de Nivelles (Belgium) on 27 February 2020

Journal European Employment Law Cases, Issue 2 2020
Keywords Gender Discrimination, Part Time Work

    The Brussels Labour Court of Appeal, in a judgment of 10 September 2019, has ruled that the notion of ‘maternity’ contained in the Belgian Gender Act does not go as far as protecting mothers against discrimination with regards to childcare, since this would confirm a patriarchal role pattern. However, a recent legislative change introducing ‘paternity’ as a protected ground might cast doubt on the relevance of this ruling for the future.


Gautier Busschaert
Gautier Busschaert is an attorney-at-law at Van Olmen & Wynant, Brussels.

    This article engages in a comparison of the regulation of PR in the Netherlands and the UK (specifically England and Wales). The latter is a good comparator as it operates a similar regulatory approach to the Netherlands, that of conditional acceptance of PR, the condition being (prior) consent. Furthermore, the UK boasts a more detailed and mature legal framework that continues to be tested through caselaw, and thus offers insight into how a regulatory approach conditional upon the (prior) consent of the deceased can fare.
    The article starts with a brief exposition of the new Dutch guidelines and the current legislative position in the Netherlands vis-à-vis posthumous reproduction (part II). Likewise, the relevant UK guidelines and legislative position are summarized (part III). This article draws out the similarities and differences between the two regimes, as well as engaging in a critical analysis of the regulations themselves. It then looks at how the UK regime has been challenged in recent years through caselaw in anticipation of the issues that might confront the Netherlands in future (part IV). The article concludes (part V) that the key lesson to be drawn from the UK experience is that clarity and consistency is crucial in navigating this ethically, emotionally, and time sensitive area. Further, that both the UK and the Netherlands can expect demand for more detailed and precise regulatory guidance as requests for the procedure increase, and within evermore novel circumstances.

    ---

    Dit artikel vergelijkt de regulering van postume reproductie (PR) in Nederland en het Verenigd Koninkrijk (in het bijzonder Engeland en Wales). Laatstgenoemde is daarvoor zeer geschikt, aangezien het VK een vergelijkbare reguleringsbenadering heeft als Nederland, namelijk de voorwaardelijke acceptatie van PR, waarbij (voorafgaande) toestemming de voorwaarde is. Bovendien beschikt het VK over een gedetailleerder en volwassener juridisch kader dat continu wordt getoetst door middel van rechtspraak. Dit kader biedt daarmee inzicht in hoe een regulerende benadering met als voorwaarde (voorafgaande) toestemming van de overledene kan verlopen.
    Het artikel vangt aan met een korte uiteenzetting van de nieuwe Nederlandse richtlijnen en de huidige positie van de Nederlandse wetgever ten opzichte van postume reproductie (deel II). De relevante Britse richtlijnen en het wetgevende standpunt worden eveneens samengevat (deel III). Vervolgens worden de overeenkomsten en verschillen tussen de twee regimes naar voren gebracht, met daarbij een kritische analyse van de regelgeving. Hierop volgt een beschrijving van hoe het VK de afgelopen jaren is uitgedaagd in de rechtspraak, daarmee anticiperend op vraagstukken waarmee Nederland in de toekomst te maken kan krijgen (deel IV). Tot slot volgt een conclusie (deel V) waarin wordt aangetoond dat de belangrijkste les die uit de Britse ervaring kan worden getrokken, is dat duidelijkheid en consistentie cruciaal zijn bij het navigeren door dit ethische, emotionele en tijdgevoelige gebied. En daarnaast, at zowel het VK als Nederland een vraag naar meer gedetailleerde en precieze regelgeving kunnen verwachten naarmate verzoeken om deze procedure toenemen, met daarbij steeds weer nieuwe omstandigheden.


Dr. N. Hyder-Rahman
Nishat Hyder-Rahman is a Post-doctoral Researcher at the Utrecht Centre for European Research into Family Law, Molengraaff Institute for Private Law, Utrecht University.
Article

ECtHR Advisory Opinion and Response to Formal Requests Given by the Jurisconsult

Journal Hungarian Yearbook of International Law and European Law, Issue 1 2019
Keywords ECtHR advisory opinion, Protocol No. 16 ECHR, Superior Courts Network, Article 47 ECHR, interaction between courts
Authors Tamás Tóth
AbstractAuthor's information

    The aim of this article is to present the role of the Superior Courts Network (SCN) launched by the ECtHR in preparation of national request for an advisory opinion issued by the ECtHR. The actuality of the topic is given by Protocol No. 16 of the ECHR that entered into force on 1 August 2018 and the issuance of the first advisory opinion published on 10 April 2019. Hungary has not acceded to Protocol No. 16, so this option is currently not available for the Hungarian courts. Actually, there is another way to assist the domestic courts in understanding the principles of the ECtHR’s case-law that are relevant to the case pending before them. This option is the so-called formal request for case-law information that could be submitted by a national court to the Directorate of Jurisconsult of the Registry of ECtHR with the help of SCN. Later, after acceding to Protocol No. 16, this channel of information could be helpful in preparation of request for advisory opinion.


Tamás Tóth
Chief counselor, Constitutional Court of Hungary; National Focal Point of the Superior Courts Network.
Article

Access_open The challenges for good practice in police-facilitated restorative justice for female offenders

Journal The International Journal of Restorative Justice, Issue 1 2018
Keywords Restorative justice, police, female offenders
Authors Birgit Larsson, Gillian Schofield and Laura Biggart
AbstractAuthor's information

    This article reports on the uses of police-led restorative justice (RJ) for female offenders by one constabulary in England from 2007 to 2012. The study consisted of (1) quantitative analysis of administrative police data on 17,486 participants, including 2,586 female offenders, and (2) qualitative analysis of twelve narrative interviews with female offenders sampled from the database. Quantitative data demonstrated that the majority of female offenders committed low-level offences and that the majority of participants experienced street RJ. Female offenders reported mixed experiences with RJ in qualitative interviews. On the whole, women did not understand what RJ was, leading to complications as many felt their victims were mutually culpable. Some felt that the police forced them to apologise and treated them like criminals while others felt the police gave them a second chance. The study raises questions about what the police can bring to RJ in relation to vulnerable women.


Birgit Larsson
Birgit Larsson is a lecturer at the School of Social Work, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK. Contact author: b.larsson@uea.ac.uk.

Gillian Schofield
Gillian Schofield is a Professor at the School of Social Work, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

Laura Biggart
Laura Biggart is lecturer at the School of Psychology, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

    Medical and societal developments have led to a new family form involving more than two persons who make the conscious decision to have and raise a child together. Before the conception of the child, co-parenting arrangements are made covering the role of each parent in the child’s life and the division of care and financial obligations. These intentional multi-parent families pose new challenges to family law. Both in Belgium and the Netherlands, as in most other legal systems, the number of legal parents vested with custody of the child is limited to two. This two-parent model does not protect the relationship between the child and each of its parents in a multi-parent family. The question arises whether the law should be adjusted to accommodate multi-parent families, and if so, how. The Belgian Senate recently accepted that this question should be subjected to parliamentary debate. In 2014 the Netherlands tasked the Government Committee on the Reassessment of Parenthood with evaluating whether the law should allow more than two persons to be a child's legal parents and share parental responsibilities. In its recently published report, the Government Committee advises legal multi-parenthood be statutorily regulated, subject to certain conditions.The present contribution addresses two questions. The first one concerns the legal position of persons who have entered into multi-parenting arrangements. We answer this question by examining the Belgian rules on legal parentage and parental responsibilities. Second, we explore how family law might accommodate intentional multi-parent families. For this question, we focus on the recommendations the Dutch Government Committee formulated on legal multi-parenthood.
    ---
    Medische en maatschappelijke ontwikkelingen hebben geleid tot het ontstaan van een nieuwe gezinsvorm, waarbij meer dan twee personen bewust ervoor kiezen om samen een kind te krijgen en het op te voeden. Voor de verwekking maken ze afspraken over de rol van elk van hen in het leven van het kind en over de verdeling van zorgtaken en financiële verplichtingen. Deze intentionele meeroudergezinnen vormen een nieuwe uitdaging voor het familierecht. Zoals in de meeste rechtsstelsels, is in België en Nederland het aantal juridische ouders beperkt tot twee. Dit twee-oudermodel verleent geen bescherming aan de relatie tussen het kind en elk van zijn ouders in een meeroudergezin. De vraag rijst of het familierecht deze nieuwe gezinsvorm tegemoet moet komen, en zo ja, hoe. De Belgische Senaat heeft eind 2015 aanvaard dat deze vraag het voorwerp moet uitmaken van toekomstig parlementair debat. De Nederlands regering gaf in 2014 aan de “Staatscommissie Herijking Ouderschap” de opdracht te onderzoeken of de wet het mogelijk moet maken dat meer dan twee personen de juridische ouders kunnen zijn van een kind en het ouderlijk gezag kunnen delen. In haar recent gepubliceerde rapport beveelt deze commissie aan om juridisch meerouderschap wettelijk te regelen.  Deze bijdrage onderzoekt twee vragen. De eerste vraag is wat de rechtspositie is van de personen die betrokken zijn in meerouderschapsafspraken. We beantwoorden deze vraag aan de hand van de Belgische regels over afstamming en ouderlijk gezag. De tweede vraag is hoe het recht aan intentionele meeroudergezinnen kan tegemoetkomen. De aanbevelingen van de Nederlandse Staatscommissie Herijking Ouderschap staan hierbij centraal.


Prof. dr. Ingrid Boone
Ingrid Boone is an associate professor of Family Law at KU Leuven. She is a member of the Scientific Research Network of the Research Foundation Flanders (2015-2020) RETHINKIN - Rethinking legal kinship and family studies in the Low Countries.
Article

Prohibition of Discrimination: Citizenship as a Possible Discrimination Basis

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 3 2016
Keywords anti-discrimination law, Serbian Law, harmonization, right to a personal name, European Court of Justice
Authors Olga Jović-Prlainović and Jelena Belović
AbstractAuthor's information

    In modern society, the right to equality is not just a universal moral obligation; it is rather an expression of a generally accepted rule in international law that all people have equal rights, independently of differences based on innate or acquired personal characteristics. Prohibition of discrimination is a civilization heritage, and it is determined by systematically overcoming prejudices and stereotypes as key factors of discrimination, where educational institutions, media, public authority, and non-governmental organizations all have a vital role. Tackling with discrimination is not just the application of rules regulated by law and taking necessary measures towards social groups which are in an unequal position, but it is also a continuous development of tolerance when it comes to ethnicity, religion, gender, minorities, as well as acceptance of the existing interpersonal differences. It is well known that the area of West Balkans is often a breeding ground where stereotypes and prejudices thrive for decades. The strategic aim of the Republic of Serbia is membership in the European Union, and so nation-wide law regulation concerning this matter is directed at complying with the European Union Law since the prohibition of discrimination is one of the pillars of the European Union Law. In this article, the influence of the European Union Law and practical measures taken by the European Court of Human Rights in order to prohibit discrimination in a specific international and private domain are analyzed.


Olga Jović-Prlainović
Olga Jović-Prlainović is Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Pristina, Kosovska Mitrovica.

Jelena Belović
Jelena Belović is Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Pristina, Kosovska Mitrovica.
Article

The Incorporation of Intentional Parentage by Female Same-Sex Couples into National Parentage Laws

A Comparison between Danish and Dutch Law

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 2 2015
Keywords same-sex parentage, family law, comparative law
Authors professor Christina G. Jeppesen de Boer and professor Annette Kronborg
AbstractAuthor's information

    The incorporation of intentional parentage by female same-sex couples in Danish and Dutch law in 2013 has taken place on the premises of the existing parentage law. In Dutch law, the second mother may automatically become the legal parent (formal relationship – anonymous donor) or she may become the legal parent in all other situations by recognition with consent of the mother. In Danish law, the second mother’s parentage may be established in a simple registration procedure, if she has consented to the act of assisted reproduction prior to treatment. When use has been made of a known donor there is no direct presumption favouring the known donor or the second mother in either country. Danish law provides a contractual understanding to be made prior to treatment while Dutch law depends upon the initiative of the parties and to whom the mother gives consent to recognition – with subsequent discretionary power of the court to modify the result. The main difference we associate with a systemized specific legislative approach (Denmark) and discretionary powers of the court to correct the outcome (the Netherlands).


professor Christina G. Jeppesen de Boer
C.G. Jeppesen de Boer is a legal researcher and assistant professor at the University of Utrecht, Molengraaff Institute for Private Law associated with UCERF (Utrecht Centre for European Research into Family Law).

professor Annette Kronborg
A. Kronborg is a legal researcher and associate professor at the University of Copenhagen associated with the Centre for Studies in Legal Culture.
Article

To Recognize or Not to Recognize? That Is the Question!

Motherhood in Cross-Border Surrogacy Cases

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 2 2015
Keywords cross-border surrogacy, motherhood, private international law, ordre public, European Human Right Convention
Authors Stefanie Sucker PhD
AbstractAuthor's information

    This article describes the status quo in cross-border surrogacy cases, more specifically how national courts deal with the recognition of parenthood validly established abroad. As the recognition of motherhood is deemed to violate the national ordre public, the solutions so far, i.e. recognition of fatherhood and adoption, will be examined. Moreover, the arguments for an alleged ordre public-violation concerning motherhood will be presented. Finally, the question whether the European Human Right Convention has an impact on the interpretation of the best interest of the child will be answered.


Stefanie Sucker PhD
The author is currently writing a (German) PhD on the topic of cross-border surrogacy. She analyses private international and procedural law questions of German, Dutch, French and Austrian law. Thus, reference as examples will be made to these legal systems.
Article

Legal Motherhood and Parental Responsibility

A Comparative Study on the Tensions between Scientific Knowledge, Social Reality and Personal Identity

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 2 2015
Keywords motherhood, child’s right to identity, baby-box, secret birth, confidential birth
Authors Prof. dr. Christine Budzikiewicz and Dr. Machteld Vonk
AbstractAuthor's information

    For the past 15 to 20 years there has been intense discussion in many European countries how mothers in a crisis situation can be prevented from abandoning or even killing their new born babies. Baby-boxes have been installed in a number of countries and/or possibilities for anonymous birth have been discussed or introduced. The Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed concern over these developments and stated that both developments infringe on the child’s right to know its origins. Both Germany and the Netherlands have taken steps to protect new mothers and their babies in crisis situations by introducing a form of secrecy surrounding the mother’s identity. In Germany this has taken the form of a recently introduced law that keeps the birth and the identity of the mother confidential, in the Netherlands this has taken the form of a protocol drawn up by professionals which aims to keep the birth and the mother’s identity secret. This article will compare and critically discuss these developments in Germany and the Netherlands.


Prof. dr. Christine Budzikiewicz
Prof. dr. Christine Budzikiewicz is professor of law at the Institute of Comparative Law of Marburg University in Germany, <www.uni-marburg.de/fb01/lehrstuehle/zivilrecht/budzikiewicz>.

Dr. Machteld Vonk
Dr. Machteld Vonk is assistant professor of child and family law at the Child Law Department of Leiden University Law School in The Netherlands, <http://law.leiden.edu/organisation/private-law/child-law/staff/mjvonk.html>.
Article

Care in Family Relations

The Case of Surrogacy Leave

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 2 2015
Keywords EU law, case law, surrogacy, leaves, reconciliation of work
Authors Dr. Susanne Burri
AbstractAuthor's information

    The advance of reproductive technologies, like surrogacy arrangements, confronts courts with new demands and dilemmas. This contribution analyses the potential of EU law towards a better and more balanced reconciliation of work, private and family life when no national law applies. In two recent cases of the Court of Justice of the EU on leave for surrogacy mothers, the Advocates General Kokott and Wahl published diverging opinions on similar prejudicial questions of national courts. These opinions illustrate some difficulties in applying the EU concept of equality and interpreting the scope of relevant EU law on leaves. The Court followed a cautious approach, which is not surprising given the lack of consensus on surrogacy arrangements in the member states and their legal implications. Developments in society and technologies in relation to motherhood, fatherhood and parenthood give rise to new legal questions. However, the existing EU legal instruments in this field were not designed to address questions such as for example surrogacy leave for commissioning mothers and fathers. A modernisation of the EU instruments in the light of societal, technological and legal developments in the member states would provide an opportunity to remedy some gaps in the existing EU legal framework on reconciliation issues. In a society where participation in the labour market of both women and men is increasing and getting more balanced, the need to address care of children, older people and disabled people becomes more urgent.


Dr. Susanne Burri
Dr. Susanne Burri is Associate Professor at the School of Law of Utrecht University and specialist co-ordinator for gender equality law of the European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination.
Article

Out of the Box? Domestic and Private International Law Aspects of Gender Registration

A Comparative Analysis of Germany and the Netherlands

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 2 2015
Keywords gender identity, sex registration, intersex, transgender, private international law
Authors Dr. Marjolein van den Brink, Dr. iur. Philipp Reuß and Dr. Jet Tigchelaar
AbstractAuthor's information

    The legal regulation of gender identity seems to be in a state of flux. This paper compares the German and Dutch legal systems with regard to the registration of a person’s sex, focusing on the possibility in both countries not to register a baby’s sex until it can be clearly determined. In both systems, it has thus become possible that a person has no specified gender for a considerable period of time. These persons may encounter various kinds of legal problems, since the two jurisdictions have not been adapted to accommodate them. In addition, two potential problems regarding private international law issues are discussed.


Dr. Marjolein van den Brink
Dr. Marjolein van den Brink is assistant professor at the Netherlands institute for human rights (SIM), Utrecht University. She participates in the research programme of the Utrecht centre for European research into family law.

Dr. iur. Philipp Reuß
Philipp Reuß, Dr. iur., MJur (Oxford) is research assistant at LMU Munich’s Institute of international law –comparative law.

Dr. Jet Tigchelaar
Dr. Jet Tigchelaar is assistant professor at the Institute of jurisprudence, constitutional and administrative law, Utrecht University. She participates as researcher at the Utrecht centre for European research into family law.

    Zowel in België als in Nederland komt draagmoederschap voor. Deze bijdrage heeft tot doel om de houding van de twee buurlanden ten aanzien van dit controversiële fenomeen te onderzoeken en te vergelijken.
    De wensouders en draagmoeders ervaren meerdere juridische obstakels. Zo blijkt in beide landen de draagmoederschapsovereenkomst niet geldig en evenmin afdwingbaar te zijn. Hoewel in Nederland de mogelijkheid bestaat om het ouderlijk gezag over te dragen van draagmoeder naar wensouders, is het ook daar, net zoals in België, allesbehalve evident om de band tussen kind en wensouders juridisch te verwezenlijken. Noch de oorspronkelijke, noch de adoptieve afstamming is aan het fenomeen aangepast. Vooral voor Nederland is dit vreemd aangezien de Nederlandse wetgeving uitdrukkelijk bepaalt onder welke voorwaarden medisch begeleid draagmoederschap toegelaten is. De wet schept met andere woorden een gezondheidsrechtelijk kader, maar regelt niet de gevolgen van het draagmoederschap. In België is er daarentegen geen enkele wetgeving betreffende draagmoederschap. Dit betekent dat de onaangepaste wetgeving betreffende medisch begeleide voortplanting van toepassing is op draagmoederschap. Over deze toepassing en de gevolgen ervan bestaat evenwel onduidelijkheid. Commercialisering van draagmoederschap leidt ook tot problemen. In Nederland is professionele bemiddeling en het openbaar maken van vraag en aanbod met betrekking tot draagmoederschap strafbaar gesteld. Daarnaast kunnen de omstandigheden van een zaak waarin het kind als het ware verkocht wordt aan de wensouders zowel in België als in Nederland leiden tot andere misdrijven. Gelet op dit alles begeven sommige wensouders zich naar het buitenland om daar beroep te doen op draagmoederschap. Wensen zij terug te keren met het kind naar het land van herkomst, dan leidt dit in beide buurlanden tot internationaalprivaatrechtelijke problemen.
    Door het gebrek aan een algemeen wettelijk kader, is het draagmoederschapsproces in beide landen vaak een calvarietocht. Dit leidt tot rechtsonzekerheid. Oproepen tot een wettelijk ingrijpen bleven tot nu toe echter onbeantwoord.
    Surrogacy is practiced in Belgium and the Netherlands. The aim of this contribution is to compare the many legal aspects of the phenomenon. In both countries legal problems surround surrogacy: the surrogacy contract is unenforceable; it is difficult for the intended parents to become the legal parents; commercial surrogacy can result in criminal sanctions and cross-border surrogacy leads to limping legal relations. The main differences between the two legal systems are that in Belgium there is no regulation at all, while in the Netherlands, professional mediation and advertising in surrogacy are explicitly forbidden and Dutch law provides a limited health law regulation. In both countries scholars have pressed the need for legal change.


Dr. Liesbet Pluym Ph.D.

Laura Carballo Piñeiro
Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Santiago de Compostela.

Xandra Kramer
Professor at Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus University Rotterdam, visiting scholar at Stanford Law School.
Article

Medically Assisted Reproduction in Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates

Sunni and Shia Legal Debates

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 2 2014
Keywords medically assisted reproduction, Islam, Middle East, family formation, law
Authors Andrea Büchler and Eveline Schneider Kayasseh
AbstractAuthor's information

    Since the mid-1980s, biotechnologies have been widely used to assist human conception around the world, and especially in the Middle East. In this article, our main focus is the United Arab Emirates (UAE), as well as Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and Saudi-Arabia. In these Muslim-majority countries, an ever rising demand for fertility treatments runs parallel to far-reaching demographic and social changes. While assisted reproductive technologies offer various methods to pursue the desire to have biological children, they do also underscore religious and cultural sensibilities about traditional male-female relationships and family formation.
    In order to outline contemporary opinions and state laws and regulations in the countries mentioned in the outset, core notions and concepts of the Islamic family that are relevant for understanding attitudes regarding reproductive medicine and that have influence on couples seeking fertility treatment are outlined. It is also shown how ethical-juridical considerations have shaped the scholarly discourse about assisted reproduction. In this context, assisted reproductive techniques that include eggs, sperm, embryos, or wombs from third parties have been particularly contentious. In fact, there remain different views among Islamic jurists and senior clerics in Shia Islam regarding ethically controversial issues such as egg and sperm donation, as well as surrogate motherhood. While the number of IVF-clinics is on the rise in all countries discussed in this article, only in the UAE are clinics operating with rather comprehensive legislative oversight.


Andrea Büchler
University of Zurich, Switzerland.

Eveline Schneider Kayasseh
University of Zurich, Switzerland.
Article

Human Rights in Islamic Law, Specifically the Guarantee of Procedural Justice

Journal European Journal of Law Reform, Issue 2 2014
Keywords Islamic law, procedural justice, human rights, rules of evidence, Cairo Declaration of Human Rights
Authors Mohamed Y. Mattar
AbstractAuthor's information

    International law guarantees several fundamental principles of procedural justice, such as presumption of innocence, the right against self-incrimination, the right to be tried without undue delay, the right to examine witnesses, and the right to legal assistance. In this article I examine whether Islamic law guarantees similar procedural protections and demonstrate how Islamic law provides for basic human rights as well as general principles that may serve as guidelines in procedural justice. These include the principle of non-retroactivity, the principle of personal accountability, the principle of no crime or punishment without law, the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, and the right to defence. The article also identifies rules of evidence provided by Islamic law which are designed to protect the accused.


Mohamed Y. Mattar
Mohamed Y. Mattar is a Senior Research Professor of International Law and the Executive Director of The Protection Project at The Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS).

    Legal position of a known donor constitutes an ongoing challenge. Known donors are often willing to play a role in the child’s life. Their wishes range from scarce involvement to aspiring legal parentage. Therefore three persons may wish for parental role. This is not catered for in the current laws allowing only for two legal parents. Several studies show how lesbian mothers and a donor ’devise new definitions of parenthood’ extending ’beyond the existing normative framework’. However, the diversity in the roles of the donors suggests a split of parental rights between three persons rather than three traditional legal parents. In this article I will discuss three jurisdictions (Quebec, Sweden and the Netherlands), allowing co-mother to become legal parent other than by a step-parent adoption. I will examine whether these jurisdictions attempt to accommodate specific needs of lesbian families by splitting up parentage ’package’ between the duo-mothers and the donor.


Prof. mr. Masha Antokolskaia Ph.D.
Masha Antokolskaia is professor of Private Law (in particular, Personal Status and Family Law) at the VU University Amsterdam. She is a member of the Commission on European Family Law (CEFL) and a board member of the International Society of Family Law. She is author of a diverse range of monographs and articles written in Dutch, English and Russian. Her main research areas are: European comparative Family Law and Dutch Family Law, with particular regard to the law relating to relationships, parentage and divorce.
Showing 1 - 20 of 26 results
« 1
You can search full text for articles by entering your search term in the search field. If you click the search button the search results will be shown on a fresh page where the search results can be narrowed down by category or year.