Droit des enfants

Onglets principaux

Caselaw

The Center for Health Human Rights and Development & 4 others v. Nakaseke District Local Administration, Civil Suit No. 111 of 2012

On May 5, 2011, Irene Nanteza arrived at Nakaseke Hospital with her husband. Although a nurse confirmed the signs of obstructed labor and called the doctor on duty, the doctor did not arrive until Nanteza had been in labor for about 8 hours. The patient died of a hemorrhage and ruptured uterus. Despite the hospital administrator’s awareness of Nanteza’s condition and the doctor’s absence prior to her death, the Court noted that it was not shown that he made any effort to transfer her to another hospital.

Investigación del Comité para la Eliminación de la Discriminación contra la Mujer (CEDAW) sobre Filipinas (CEDAW/C/OP.8/PHL/1)

En 1991, las Filipinas delegaron la responsabilidad por “la salud y seguridad del pueblo” al nivel local. En ejercicio de estas facultades, en el año 2000 en Manila se pronunció el decreto 003 (“D 003”), en el cual se declaró que la ciudad adoptaría “una posición afirmativa respecto de los temas pro-vida”.

Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) Inquiry concerning the Philippines (CEDAW/C/OP.8/PHL/1)

In 1991, the Philippines delegated responsibility for “people’s health and safety” to the local level. In exercise of this power, an executive order 003 (“EO 003”) was issued in Manila, in 2000 which declared that the city would take an “affirmative stand on pro-life issues”. In response to a joint submission from NGOs in 2008, the UN Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women (Committee) conducted an inquiry into alleged human rights violations resulting from the enforcement of EO 003.

Settlement agreement between ACIJ and the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, concerning case 23360/0 of 2008

In 2006, Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia (ACIJ), an organization member of the ESCR-Net, filed an amparo action against the Government of the City of Buenos Aires. The purpose of the action was to have the Court order the Government to comply with its existing constitutional obligation to ensure and finance access to early education. The case centered on violations of the right to education and to equality, as well as the principle of personal autonomy.

Acuerdo entre ACIJ y Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, referente al expediente 23360/0 de 2008

En 2006, la Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia (ACIJ), organización miembro de la Red DESC, promovió una acción de amparo contra el Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. El objeto de la acción fue lograr que se ordenara al Gobierno cumplir con su obligación constitucional de asegurar y financiar el acceso a la educación inicial, al estar afectados el derecho a la educación y a la igualdad, y el principio de autonomía personal.

Case of the Indigenous Community Xákmok Kásek v. Paraguay

The Xákmok Kásek indigenous community, who has originally lived in the Paraguayan Chaco area, filed a petition before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights requesting acknowledgement of their traditional territory. Paraguay sold and split up the land without taking into consideration the indigenous population. The Salazar ranch was founded in the land that had been the home of the Xákmok Kásek community for years. The community’s ability to survive and to develop its way of life was restricted, and the State failed to fulfill its duty to guarantee the community’s territorial rights.

Caso Comunidad Indígena Xákmok Kásek. Vs. Paraguay

La Comunidad Indígena Xákmok Kásek, originariamente del área del Chaco Paraguayo, reclamó ante la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos el reconocimiento de su territorio tradicional. Paraguay vendió y dividió estas tierras sin consideración de las poblaciones indígenas. La Estancia Salazar se fundó en la tierra donde por años vivió la a Comunidad Xákmok Kásek y en esta Estancia, se limitó la capacidad de la comunidad a subsistir y desarrollar su modo de vida, además de la omisión del Estado en su deber de garantizar los derechos territoriales de la comunidad.

Acción de tutela instaurada por Orlando José Morales Ramos, contra la sociedad Drummond Ltda.

La Corte Constitucional de Colombia revisó el caso relativo a una acción de tutela (acción de protección de derechos constitucionales) en la cual se analizaba si las actividades de la empresa minera Drummond afectaban los derechos a la vida, al medio ambiente, a la intimidad y a la salud del peticionario y su familia. El peticionario y su familia viven cerca de la mina a cielo abierto Pribbenow ubicada en La Loma, municipio El Paso del departamento de Cesar, en el Norte de Colombia.

Tutela action filed by Orlando José Morales Ramos against Drummond Ltd.

Colombia's Constitutional Court reviewed a tutela action case (action seeking protection of constitutional rights) which looked into whether the mining operations of the company Drummond had violated the rights to life, to a healthy environment, to privacy and to health of a citizen and his family living near the Pribbenow open-pit mine, located in La Loma, municipality of El Paso, department of Cesar, in the North of Colombia. Based in the United States, Drummond develops and processes coal in both the US and Colombia.

Madzodzo et al v. Minister of Basic Education et al

This 2014 decision was handed down after three rounds of litigation. In 2012 applicants sought a court order directing the delivery of school furniture to three rural schools in dire need of furniture; a declaration that the State had violated children’s right to education by failing to provide “adequate, age and grade appropriate furniture” at Eastern Cape schools; and an order that the state complete a comprehensive audit of school furniture needs in the province.