Courts and Consociations: Human Rights versus Power-Sharing

OUP Oxford
Free sample

Consociations are power-sharing arrangements, increasingly used to manage ethno-nationalist, ethno-linguistic, and ethno-religious conflicts. Current examples include Belgium, Bosnia, Northern Ireland, Burundi, and Iraq. Despite their growing popularity, they have begun to be challenged before human rights courts as being incompatible with human rights norms, particularly equality and non-discrimination. Courts and Consociations examines the use of power-sharing agreements, their legitimacy, and their compatibility with human rights law. Key questions include to what extent, if any, consociations conflict with the liberal individualist preferences of international human rights institutions, and to what extent consociational power-sharing may be justified to preserve peace and the integrity of political settlements. In three critical cases, the European Court of Human Rights has considered equality challenges to important consociational practices, twice in Belgium and then in Sejdic and Finci v Bosnia regarding the constitution established for Bosnia Herzegovina under the Dayton Agreement. The Court's decision in Sejdic and Finci has significantly altered the approach it previously took to judicial review of consociational arrangements in Belgium. This book accounts for this change and assess its implications. The problematic aspects of the current state of law are demonstrated. Future negotiators in places riven by potential or actual bloody ethnic conflicts may now have less flexibility in reaching a workable settlement, which may unintentionally contribute to sustaining such conflicts and make it more likely that negotiators will consider excluding regional and international courts from reviewing these political settlements. Providing a clear, accessible introduction to both the political use of power-sharing settlements and the human rights law on the issue, this book is an invaluable guide to all academics, students, and professionals engaged with transitional justice, peace agreements, and contemporary human rights law.
Read more

About the author

Christopher McCrudden FBA is Professor of Human Rights and Equality Law at Queen's University, Belfast; Leverhulme Major Research Fellow (2011-14), and William W Cook Global Professor of Law at the University of Michigan Law School. A Fellow of the British Academy, he is the author of numerous titles, including Buying Social Justice (OUP, 2007). Brendan O'Leary is the Lauder Professor of Political Science, University of Pennsylvania, Professor of Political Science, Queen's University Belfast, and former Senior Advisor on Power-sharing in the Standby Team of the Mediation Support Unit of the United Nations.
Read more

Reviews

Loading...

Additional Information

Publisher
OUP Oxford
Read more
Published on
Feb 21, 2013
Read more
Pages
216
Read more
ISBN
9780191665370
Read more
Read more
Best For
Read more
Language
English
Read more
Genres
Law / Civil Rights
Law / Constitutional
Law / General
Political Science / Human Rights
Read more
Content Protection
This content is DRM protected.
Read more
Eligible for Family Library

Reading information

Smartphones and Tablets

Install the Google Play Books app for Android and iPad/iPhone. It syncs automatically with your account and allows you to read online or offline wherever you are.

Laptops and Computers

You can read books purchased on Google Play using your computer's web browser.

eReaders and other devices

To read on e-ink devices like the Sony eReader or Barnes & Noble Nook, you'll need to download a file and transfer it to your device. Please follow the detailed Help center instructions to transfer the files to supported eReaders.
Brendan O'Leary
"There is no reason why America's withdrawal from Iraq should be as dishonest as its intervention has been judged to be."—Brendan O'Leary, from the Preface

Both the American people and Arab Iraqis have voiced their overwhelming desire to see U.S. troops removed from the country. How to Get Out of Iraq with Integrity argues that the U.S. military intervention in Iraq must come to an end. But it must come to an end in a judicious, pragmatic, and orderly fashion. In this book, Brendan O'Leary spells out why that withdrawal can begin to occur now, why it is in the best interests of the United States and the Iraqis that withdrawal occur, and why Iraq can function as a federation once the U.S. military has left the country.

How to Get Out of Iraq with Integrity provides an in-depth analysis of the new Iraqi constitution, an evaluation of the political goals and powers of the major ethnic and religious groups that will constitute the new Iraqi state, and an assessment of the regional realities of a Saddam-less Iraq. With a viable constitution and other institutional structures already in place, Iraq is poised for a future as a sovereign state. If U.S. leaders facilitate the remaking of Iraq as a federation with four or more regions instead of a recentralized state, the United States can begin successfully to remove its forces.

Propelled by this incisive and bold argument, How to Get Out of Iraq with Integrity provides the foundation for the incoming presidential administration to do just that, without betraying U.S. commitments to Arabs, Kurds, or democracy. To make his case, O'Leary draws on his extensive background as constitutional advisor to the Kurdistan Regional Government, the European Union, and the United Nations, along with expertise in constitutional design and ethnic reconciliation in Northern Ireland and South Africa.
Christopher McCrudden
Consociations are power-sharing arrangements, increasingly used to manage ethno-nationalist, ethno-linguistic, and ethno-religious conflicts. Current examples include Belgium, Bosnia, Northern Ireland, Burundi, and Iraq. Despite their growing popularity, they have begun to be challenged before human rights courts as being incompatible with human rights norms, particularly equality and non-discrimination. Courts and Consociations examines the use of power-sharing agreements, their legitimacy, and their compatibility with human rights law. Key questions include to what extent, if any, consociations conflict with the liberal individualist preferences of international human rights institutions, and to what extent consociational power-sharing may be justified to preserve peace and the integrity of political settlements. In three critical cases, the European Court of Human Rights has considered equality challenges to important consociational practices, twice in Belgium and then in Sejdic and Finci v Bosnia regarding the constitution established for Bosnia Herzegovina under the Dayton Agreement. The Court's decision in Sejdic and Finci has significantly altered the approach it previously took to judicial review of consociational arrangements in Belgium. This book accounts for this change and assess its implications. The problematic aspects of the current state of law are demonstrated. Future negotiators in places riven by potential or actual bloody ethnic conflicts may now have less flexibility in reaching a workable settlement, which may unintentionally contribute to sustaining such conflicts and make it more likely that negotiators will consider excluding regional and international courts from reviewing these political settlements. Providing a clear, accessible introduction to both the political use of power-sharing settlements and the human rights law on the issue, this book is an invaluable guide to all academics, students, and professionals engaged with transitional justice, peace agreements, and contemporary human rights law.
©2017 GoogleSite Terms of ServicePrivacyDevelopersArtistsAbout Google
By purchasing this item, you are transacting with Google Payments and agreeing to the Google Payments Terms of Service and Privacy Notice.