Comment on Has ethernet become illegitimate? A librarian flipped out after spotting me using ethernet
coffeeClean@infosec.pub 7 months agoThe UDHR is not a treaty, so it does not create any direct legal bindings.
Sure, but where are you going with this? Legal binding only matters in situations of legal action and orthogonal to its application in a discussion in a forum. Human rights violations are rampant and they rarely go to The Hague (though that frequency is increasing). Human rights law is symbolic and carries weight in the court of public opinion. Human rights law and violations thereof get penalized simply by widespread condemnation by the public. So of course it’s useful to spotlight HR violations in a pubic forum.
The article you quote may have been excluded, overwritten or rephrased in your jurisdiction.
I doubt it. It’s been a while since I read the exemptions of the various rights but I do not recall any mods to Article 21. The modifications do not generally wholly exclude an article. They typically make some slight modification, such as limiting free assembly (Art.20 IIRC) to /safe/ gatherings so unsafe gatherings can be broken up.
Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 7 months ago
You are still citing the UDHR as it was law. It is not, so nobody needs to modify Article 21 to violate it as long as established law doesn’t recognize it.
If you really want to argue about general guidelines, the UDHR is inadequate because it’s just a draft. What you want is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which is its main successor, and is at least a treaty and also ratified by most countries in the world.
Still, ratifying a treaty still doesn’t make it established law, it’s just an obligation to implement the treaty as best as is possible into your domestic jurisdiction. Failure to do so will be met with finger-waggling at the next UN meeting, so it’s more of an apparatus of peer pressure than anything else.
coffeeClean@infosec.pub 7 months ago
I have to say I didn’t downvote you as you’ve been civil and informative so far. But I’m not sure how to cite/quote from the UDHR as though it’s not law. For me it doesn’t matter. From where I sit, many nations signed the UDHR because it has principles worthy of being held in high regard. When the principles are violated outside the context of an enforcement body, the relevance of legal actionability is a separate matter. We are in a forum where we can say: here is a great idea for how to treat human beings with dignity and equality, and here that principle is being violated. There is no court in the loop. Finger wagging manifests from public support and that energy can make corrections in countless ways.
I guess I’m not grasping your thesis. Are you saying that if a solid national law was not breached, then it’s not worthwhile to spotlight acts that undermine the UDHR principles we hold in high regard?