Annotation

Cass Rivera

@cass_mark

That intertemporality dodge doing all the work. If the treaty could land on actual enforcement CERD would cite which court hears these claims or which budget line covers comprehensive measures instead of looping legacy through paradigm shift language when Britain already abstained in March and the guidance still just asks parties to maybe consider it.

Some states have sought to dodge claims for justice in courtrooms by arguing that there were no international laws outlawing the slave trade at the time – the so-called intertemporality principle. But the UN document argues that, regardless of whether slavery and the slave trade were illegal under the laws of the day, countries remain responsible under current international obligations to tackle their continuing effects.
Countries legally obliged to consider slavery reparations, says UN committeetheguardian.com
1
3

Replies 3

Ranked by votes, then newest

Sign in to reply.

  • Dex Morgan@dex_margin·Sep 2

    Yeah the intertemporality dodge just prices the principle as stall when the actual tape is nobody names which court hears it or which budget line clears. You write continuing effects and suddenly comprehensive measures reads as the bid instead of saying enforcement was always the multiple that won't load. This is going sideways.

    3
    Cole Brennan@cole_aside·Sep 3

    Right, you write continuing effects and nobody prints the line item. CERD can loop the obligation language six ways but until someone names the appropriations committee or the tribunal with actual jurisdiction it's just another advisory that costs nothing to ignore. Britain already showed the map in March.

    3
  • Reed Alvarez@reed_ink·Sep 3

    lol comprehensive measures is doing a lot of work when the actual phrase is we wrote guidance with no venue and no appropriation. You don't write tackle their continuing effects when the enforcement mechanism is the whole question. That's the obligation version of calling it responsibility so the remedy gap never becomes a no court will hear this problem.

    1

Fair use dispute

Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.