The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights guarantees transparency from member states, which are asked to outline how they preserve such rights within their nations.
10 results found
This Contingency Planning Memorandum explains how violence can lead to the further curtailment of democracy in the country. Provides insight, recommendations, implications and warning indicators.
This publication reflects the interest of DPLF to analyze and share within Latin America the Peruvian experience in the design and management of the judicial disciplinary proceedings by a National Judicial Council, and thus contributes to improving the quality of other national efforts regarding judicial disciplinary systems that are still in early stages. Furthermore, this research developed recommendations for improvement that we envision as useful tools for members of the Peruvian National Council of Justice as well as other sectors of the judicial system and civil society interested in strengthening this institution.
Esta investigación, coordinada desde DPLF, comprende informes por cada país elaborados por organizaciones nacionales, de larga trayectoria y experticia en la materia a estudiar: el Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS) en Argentina, el Centro de Estudios de Derecho, Justicia y Sociedad (DeJusticia) en Colombia, el Centro sobre Derecho y Sociedad (CIDES) en Ecuador y el Instituto de Defensa Legal (IDL) en Perú, y un análisis comparativo, a cargo del reconocido consultor Luis Pásara, que condensa las tendencias comunes y formula propuestas para responder institucionalmente al problema en la región.
This is an investigative research and news analysis website reporting on issues pertaining to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and its impact on Colombia.
The report summarized below was drafted on the basis of documentary analysis and fieldwork conducted in La Paz and Sucre in June 2014 regarding the judicial election process.
The report examines 12 cases of social or political relevance, which elicited major media attention because they involved the government’s intent to penalize social protests or acts of political dissidence, thereby violating fundamental rights.