Lecture Discussion Notes from August 10, 2007:
Additional Reading Assignments/Recitation
Oxford Amnestry Lectures, 1993:
Rawls, John "The Law of Peoples"
MacKinnon, Catherine, "Crimes of War, Crimes of Peace"
1. Basic contributions of CEDAW/Key Principles (Introduction)
-Expansion of State Accountability Concept
Enabling Conditions++ protection and promotion of rights
Examples: "Property Rights" (marital laws; citizenship laws)
-Equality Framework: Substantive/Transformative
-Non-Discrimination Framework (VAW, GR 19)
2. Feminist Critiques of HR (Introduction)
-Public/Private Sphere (Review: Taub/Schneider)
-Equality (Sameness/Difference Debate/Dominance) by MacKinnon
-Language of Rights (evasive of power relationship; geopolitical inequality issues) Finley
-Vrey important to note the language of HR documents at the time of adoption: level of consensus and ideas; CEDAW ++ its General Recommendations
Examples of Law's limited articulation:
3. Vaw, gr 19 as example of changes or updating CEDAW interpretation; new concepts integrated into "frame" (1992); Rape as war crime ICC recognition came also after several years of engagement by women's movements (note MacKinnon article)
1. Why wasn't VAW in the original CEDAW?
-Its time hadn't come yet; not yet articulated in the frame which then was simply "non-discrimination/equality"
-defintiion would later be adopted as a form of discrimination against women; worsens inequality; or barriers to equality
Note even rape as political act/ in war had to be lobbied for...
2. Rawls example of a non-liberal well ordered heirarchy open to HR? Bhutan monarchy is a common example. (Current issues with transition to liberal democratic rule) Point by Rawls was to ilustrate that to him, HR is not necesarrily exlusively "liberal" ideology; possibility of creating culture around HR across political/cultural traditions ; his minimum requirements address the basic premises : "common good" and legitimacy or rule (state)
**Further discussion required? Notable difference in tradition by Rawls (purposively obejective/without specificities or context in discussion; for the sake of universalism); and feminist purposive in subjective/specificity; contextual?