You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items

  • Author or Editor: George Andreopoulos x
Clear All Modify Search
You do not have access to this content

George Andreopoulos

What are the UNSC's prospects for a counter-terrorist discourse and corresponding policies consistent with international human rights norms and standards? What is the responsibility of the UNSC and what is the responsibility of member states? What are the existing accountability gaps and how can they be addressed? In examining these issues, this chapter critically discusses the ongoing interplay between the legal regimes governing the maintenance of international peace and security and human rights and assesses the shifting dynamics between the hierarchical and participatory facets of the international legal process, as manifested through the UNSC’s “legislative activism” since the adoption of UNSCR 1373. By employing content analysis, process tracing and the main approaches to treaty interpretation, it examines member states’ country reports submitted under the 1373 process and explores the factors that have enabled, as well as constrained, the progressive ‘humanization’ of the UNSC's counter-terrorist discourse.

You do not have access to this content

George Andreopoulos

This chapter takes a critical look at the evolving responsibility of international organizations (IOs) and the challenges facing efforts to hold them accountable for human rights violations. The main argument advanced here is that while IO responsibility, especially when contrasted with state responsibility, is considerably less developed, it offers a promising pathway to rights promotion and protection especially in light of the density of rule-based transnational interactions and the growth of institutional mechanisms and fora for advocacy and accountability. More specifically, IO practice has opened up several pathways to the pursuit of responsibility, with the most promising one being situations where IOs exercise sovereign state-type functions (administration of territories). However, whether examining IO activity in peace and security or in economic assistance, it is important to stress that none of the areas of IO activity are or can be perceived as strictly compartmentalized spaces. Rather, they are terrains on which the dynamic interplay between ongoing legal developments, reforms in response to internal and external pressures and the proliferation of monitoring platforms generate entry points for coordinated action to advance human rights claims.