DESC (en general)

Solapas principales

Caselaw

La comunidad Sawhoyamaxa ha vivido históricamente en el Chaco paraguayo. En 1991, la comunidad inició ante el Estado un proceso reclamando las tierras al haberse visto obligada a abandonarlas. El 15 de mayo de 2001 Tierraviva, organización miembro de la Red-DESC, presentó una petición a la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. La Comisión remitió el caso a la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos el 3 de febrero de 2005.

The Sawhoyamaxa Community has historically lived in the Paraguayan Chaco. In 1991, the Community started a domestic claim to regain its lands after being forced to leave them. On May 15th, 2001, ESCR-Net Member, Tierraviva, submitted a petition to the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights. The Commission referred the case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on February 3rd, 2005.

En una decisión unánime la Corte Suprema Federal de Brasil decidió confirmar la constitucionalidad de las cuotas raciales en procesos de admisión universitaria a fin de crear un entorno académico diverso, superar la historia de discriminación racial de Brasil y promover el principio de la igualdad de facto según se aplica a la discriminación racial en la educación. Asimismo, la Corte se refirió a temas de proporcionalidad y razonabilidad como criterios para evaluar la constitucionalidad de políticas destinadas a lograr la igualdad racial.

The Brazilian Federal Supreme Court unanimously decided to uphold the constitutionality of racial quotas in University admission processes, in order to create a diverse academic environment, to overcome a history of racial discrimination in Brazil, and to promote the principle of de facto equality as applied to racial discrimination in education.  In addition, the Court addressed issues of proportionality and reasonability as criteria to assess the constitutionality of policies aimed at achieving racial equality.

En septiembre de 2011, los residentes del Asentamiento Informal Langaville (compuesto por más de mil quinientas familias y cuatro mil seiscientos residentes) representados por el Socio-Economic Rights Institute (SERI), pidieron una orden, que requiriera a la Municipalidad Metropolitana Ekurhelini proporcionar acceso suficiente al agua y servicios de saneamiento básico.

Este caso del Tribunal Supremo fue iniciado con el apoyo de Hakijamii, una organización de derechos humanos con sede en Nairobi que es miembro de la Red-DESC desde 2005. El caso surgió de un pedido de más de mil personas desalojadas de sus hogares ubicados en seis comunidades conocidas comúnmente como Medina, municipalidad de Garissa.

In September 2011, the residents of Langaville Informal Settlement (comprised of more than one thousand and five hundred households and four thousand and six hundred residents) represented by the Socio-Economic Rights Institute of South Africa (SERI), requested an order directing the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality to provide sufficient access to water and basic sanitation recognized in the Constitution of South Africa, through the Water Services Act, Regulation 3 of the Regulations Relating to Compulsory National Standards and Measures to Conserve Water (GN R509 in GG 22355 of 8 June

The claimants in this joined action were asylum-seekers who had sought asylum after their initial entry to the UK. The defendant, Secretary of State for the Home Department, refused support under Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration, and Asylum Act 2002 ("the Act") with regard to accommodation. Section 55 allowed refusal of support to asylum seekers who failed to make their claim as soon as reasonably practicable.

This High Court case was brought with the support of Hakijamii, a human rights organization based in Nairobi that has been a member of ESCR-Net since 2005; and stemmed from the request of more than 1,000 individuals, evicted from their homes located in six communities commonly known as the Medina Location of Garissa municipality.

The South African Constitutional Court was asked to decide whether tenants of a block of flats were entitled to notice before the municipal electricity utility, City Power, disconnected their supply. The tenants paid for their electricity to the owner of the property, and despite their regular payment, the owner allowed substantial arrears to run up on the account, and City Power disconnected the property, giving the owner, but not the tenants, notice.