or limitations are fleshed out) in the case of the derogable rights; or they are intensified (they are shown to have no additional implications or limitations) in the case of non-derogable rights. Theinterplay of derogable and non-derogable rights should be considered at once as part and parcel of a strategy of accommodation and prohibition. Non-derogable rights are not a tertiary modification of these secondary rules but interpretative secondary rules that set the permissible incidence of derogation at zero. In some ways, the very practice of derogation guards the status and coherence of international law. However, one might appropriately ask whether the status and legitimacy of certain international rules gains at the high cost of their efficacy. In terms of status, derogation is one way that facts on the ground will not change normative and positive content of international law. The derogation system recontextualizes state behavior that is otherwise fundamentally at odds with international law into formally ―compliant behavior. Derogation system has some consistent characteristics. In every account of the derogation system, the threshold requirement is (1) that an exceptional threat to the life of the nation must exist. This is a determination made by the emergency government, but it can be verified and validated by international organizations. This requirement is followed by at least three procedural requirements, which are reminiscent of the republican tradition of emergency: (2) an official proclamation of a state of emergency must be made; (3) A notification to other states and/or relevant treaty-monitoring body of the measures taken; (4) the derogations must be temporary. Beyond these procedural requirements, there are also four relatively substantiverequirements: (1) A reasonable proportionality between the means employed and the end to be realized must exist; measures derogating from international standards must be limited to ―the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation. (2) Measures taken to derogate must not be discriminatory. (3) Certain standards remain non-derogable. A final substantive principle, that also aims at the , Dagnino, E. ( ) ‘Sociedade civil, espaços públicos e a construção democráticano Brasil: Limites e possibilidades’, in E. Dagnino, Sociedade Civil e Espaços Públicos no Brasil. São Paulo: Paz e Terra.Elster, J., ed., ( ) Deliberative Democracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Fung, A. ( ) Empowered Participation: Reinventing Urban Democracy. Princeton:Princeton University Press.Fung, A., and E.O. Wright ( ) ‘Thinking about empowered participatory governance’, in A. Fung and E.O. Wright, Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovation in Empowered Participatory Governance, London: Verso.
Subscribe to view the full document.
Goodman, L. ( ) ‘Snowball sampling’, Annals of Mathematical Statistics ( ).
As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.
Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern
I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.
University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern
The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.
Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern
Ask Expert Tutors
You can ask 0 bonus questions
You can ask 0 questions (0 expire soon)
You can ask 0 questions
(will expire )