Thu, Apr 15

POL 309-800, International Law
SUNY Oswego | Spring 2021
Dr. Craig Warkentin

  • Ch. 8, Human Rights (437-455)

  • Describe and evaluate the inter-American human rights system.
  • Explain and take a position on Attala Riffo and Daughters v. Chile.
  • Contrast the inter-American rights system to the European system.

  • ex post facto (438)
  • restitutio in integrum (453)

Questions

P. 455

  1. In the Sahin v. Turkey case, pp. 410-431 supra, the European Court of Human Rights deferred to Turkey's stated need to promote secularism to allow it to ban the wearing of head scarves in universities. This deference is known as allowing the State a "margin of appreciation." Do you think that the Inter-American Court should have deferred to Chile's preference for the "traditional family" and the rights of child custody that go along with it?
  2. In paragraph 55 above the Court refers to Chile's Civil Code, article 225, which provides that "when parents are living separately the personal care of the children falls to the mother," although this is not an absolute rule. Do you think that generally preferring maternal care for children, rather than paternal care, when the parents are separate is an acceptable form of gender based discrimination?
  3. Why did the Court rule that the daughters could not be removed from their mother's custody on the basis of her living openly with her same-sex partner in the household with the children?
  4. Should courts be ruling on issues where there is still a great deal of controversy on the issue within society?
  5. If you answered "No" to question 4, do you think the U.S. Supreme Court was wrong to ban racial segregation in public schools in 1954 when the issue was still volatile in the U.S.? Brown, et. al. v. Board of Education of Topeka, et al., 348 U.S. 866 (1954).

Resources