Which of the following are principles of good object-oriente…
Which of the following are principles of good object-oriented design? (Select all that apply)
Which of the following are principles of good object-oriente…
Questions
Which оf the fоllоwing аre principles of good object-oriented design? (Select аll thаt apply)
3. Cоmpаre аnd cоntrаst what Sоurce C and Source D tell us about the role of international human rights bodies in bringing about justice. [6] Source C: Extract from news article ‘Netherlands and Canada bring torture case against Syria at UN’s top court’ by Molly Quell, June 2023. *Note: this is before the fall of Assad* THE HAGUE — The Netherlands and Canada jointly filed a complaint against Syria on Monday before the United Nations’ highest judicial body, alleging the regime of Bashar Al Assad has tortured thousands of civilians, in violation of a U.N. convention. The pair say Syria has “committed countless violations of international law” and want the International Court of Justice to issue provisional measures ordering [Assad’s government based in] Damascus to halt an alleged widespread torture program against anyone opposed to the government during the country’s long-running civil war. The Dutch first announced three years ago a plan to hold Syria accountable for what it called “horrific crimes,” asking Assad’s government via diplomatic note to enter into negotiations under the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Canada joined the process in 2021. The Netherlands and Canada say there is ample evidence that the regime has engaged in systemic gross human rights violations against its own people since 2011. “Syrian civilians have been tortured, murdered, disappeared, attacked with poison gas or lost everything when they fled for their lives,” Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Wayne Hoekstra said in a statement. The complaint cites the findings of the International Impartial and Independent Mechanism on Syria, the United Nations body tasked with investigating crimes during the conflict. Attempts to create a special tribunal to prosecute those crimes, however, have been blocked by Russia. President Vladimir Putin has backed Assad during more than a decade of violence and Russian mercenaries have been accused of indiscriminately bombing civilians. “We’ve been looking creatively at ways to bring justice to the victims,” Toby Cadman, an international human rights lawyer who is working on the case for the Netherlands, told The Associated Press. While international efforts have so far been unsuccessful, national courts have convicted a number of [Assad’s] regime officials in their own courts. Invoking the principle of universal jurisdiction, Germany has convicted several former regime officials for torture, crimes against humanity and war crimes. All of the men had applied for asylum in Germany. Source D: Excerpt from “From Commission to Council: Has the United Nations succeeded in creating a credible human rights body?” published in the International Journal on Human Rights by Katherine Short, 2011. * Note the United Nations Human Rights Council replaced the Commission on Human Rights in 2006. The Council’s ability to act effectively and quickly is clearly still overly dependent on the political will of its members. The Council’s credibility is also being undermined by those states that have chosen not to join the body, as they are succeeding in undermining the Council’s legitimacy. One of the greatest criticisms of the Commission [the body that preceded the Council] was that throughout its years, it became a highly politicised body, dependent upon the political will of its members to act. The Council has been faced with the difficult challenge of attempting to gain the cooperation and membership of the world’s greatest powers whilst remaining impartial and free from political influence. The United States was one of the four states, alongside Israel, the Marshall Islands, and Palau, that voted against the creation of the Council and it has not yet chosen to seek a seat on the Council, despite almost continually holding a seat on the Commission. It publicly shunned the body in favour of a unilateral approach to human rights, arguing that it could further human rights better from the outside while pledging financial support to the institution to enable it to carry out its mandate efficiently. They argued that there is a lack of sufficient safeguards to prevent it from suffering from the same deficiencies as the Commission. Critics of the American decision suggest that this stems from fear of criticism under the review system, as a result of the high-profile negative publicity surrounding the treatment of suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay and the Abu Ghraib prison, made in part by the [independent experts] earlier scathing report. It was also reluctant to get involved without being able to guarantee its ability to exert a dominating influence, thus avoiding having its power and decisions undermined, not having the veto power it commands on the Security Council. The US is preoccupied with the maintenance of its leading world power status and is reluctant to submit to universal principles that might put it in jeopardy.
Pаper 1: Rights аnd Justice Reаd all the sоurces carefully and type: I have read the sоurces. Sоurce A: United Nations Office of the High Commissioner, Status of Ratification of 18 International Human Rights Treaties, 2020 Source B: Excerpt of Unilateral Sanctions in International Law and the Enforcement of Human Rights (Published Book), Chapter 3: The International Enforcement of Human Rights, by Iryna Bogdanova, 2022. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is one of the core international human rights treaties, which was adopted along with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in 1966. These covenants were a sequel to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the adoption of which represented a starting point for the human rights movement. The adoption of two covenants instead of one became a symbol of lingering tensions between Western ideology that glorified individual and political freedoms and the philosophy of the communist-bloc states, which praised economic and social benefits over political freedoms. Sarah Joseph describes the decision to adopt two independent covenants as follows: “Cold War politics, as well as perceptions over fundamental differences between civil and political rights on the one hand, and economic, social and cultural rights on the other, led to a decision to split the rights into two Covenants.” Source C: Extract from news article ‘Netherlands and Canada bring torture case against Syria at UN’s top court’ by Molly Quell, June 2023. *Note: this is before the fall of Assad* THE HAGUE — The Netherlands and Canada jointly filed a complaint against Syria on Monday before the United Nations’ highest judicial body, alleging the regime of Bashar Al Assad has tortured thousands of civilians, in violation of a U.N. convention. The pair say Syria has “committed countless violations of international law” and want the International Court of Justice to issue provisional measures ordering [Assad’s government based in] Damascus to halt an alleged widespread torture program against anyone opposed to the government during the country’s long-running civil war. The Dutch first announced three years ago a plan to hold Syria accountable for what it called “horrific crimes,” asking Assad’s government via diplomatic note to enter into negotiations under the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Canada joined the process in 2021. The Netherlands and Canada say there is ample evidence that the regime has engaged in systemic gross human rights violations against its own people since 2011. “Syrian civilians have been tortured, murdered, disappeared, attacked with poison gas or lost everything when they fled for their lives,” Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Wayne Hoekstra said in a statement. The complaint cites the findings of the International Impartial and Independent Mechanism on Syria, the United Nations body tasked with investigating crimes during the conflict. Attempts to create a special tribunal to prosecute those crimes, however, have been blocked by Russia. President Vladimir Putin has backed Assad during more than a decade of violence and Russian mercenaries have been accused of indiscriminately bombing civilians. “We’ve been looking creatively at ways to bring justice to the victims,” Toby Cadman, an international human rights lawyer who is working on the case for the Netherlands, told The Associated Press. While international efforts have so far been unsuccessful, national courts have convicted a number of [Assad’s] regime officials in their own courts. Invoking the principle of universal jurisdiction, Germany has convicted several former regime officials for torture, crimes against humanity and war crimes. All of the men had applied for asylum in Germany. Source D: Excerpt from “From Commission to Council: Has the United Nations succeeded in creating a credible human rights body?” published in the International Journal on Human Rights by Katherine Short, 2011. * Note the United Nations Human Rights Council replaced the Commission on Human Rights in 2006. The Council’s ability to act effectively and quickly is clearly still overly dependent on the political will of its members. The Council’s credibility is also being undermined by those states that have chosen not to join the body, as they are succeeding in undermining the Council’s legitimacy. One of the greatest criticisms of the Commission [the body that preceded the Council] was that throughout its years, it became a highly politicised body, dependent upon the political will of its members to act. The Council has been faced with the difficult challenge of attempting to gain the cooperation and membership of the world’s greatest powers whilst remaining impartial and free from political influence. The United States was one of the four states, alongside Israel, the Marshall Islands, and Palau, that voted against the creation of the Council and it has not yet chosen to seek a seat on the Council, despite almost continually holding a seat on the Commission. It publicly shunned the body in favour of a unilateral approach to human rights, arguing that it could further human rights better from the outside while pledging financial support to the institution to enable it to carry out its mandate efficiently. They argued that there is a lack of sufficient safeguards to prevent it from suffering from the same deficiencies as the Commission. Critics of the American decision suggest that this stems from fear of criticism under the review system, as a result of the high-profile negative publicity surrounding the treatment of suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay and the Abu Ghraib prison, made in part by the [independent experts] earlier scathing report. It was also reluctant to get involved without being able to guarantee its ability to exert a dominating influence, thus avoiding having its power and decisions undermined, not having the veto power it commands on the Security Council. The US is preoccupied with the maintenance of its leading world power status and is reluctant to submit to universal principles that might put it in jeopardy.