DOCSLIB.ORG

Economic and Social Council

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Economic and Social Council UNITED NATIONS E Economic and Social Distr. Council GENERAL E/CN.4/2000/3/Add.1 2 February 2000 ENGLISH Original: ENGLISH/FRENCH COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Fifty-sixth session Item 11 (b) of the provisional agenda CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING QUESTIONS OF: DISAPPEARANCES AND SUMMARY EXECUTIONS Report of the Special Rapporteur, Ms. Asma Jahanhir, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1999/35 Addendum Summary of cases transmitted to Governments and replies received GE.00-10465 (E) E/CN.4/2000/3/Add.1 page 2 CONTENTS Paragraphs Page Introduction ........................................................................................... 1 - 2 5 Summary of cases transmitted and replies received.................................. 3 - 497 5 A. COUNTRIES ................................................................................ 3 - 497 5 Afghanistan ................................................................................... 3 - 7 5 Albania .......................................................................................... 8 - 10 6 Algeria........................................................................................... 11 - 22 6 Angola ........................................................................................... 23 - 33 8 Argentina....................................................................................... 34 - 37 9 Austria........................................................................................... 38 - 39 9 Azerbaijan ..................................................................................... 40 - 41 10 Bahamas ........................................................................................ 42 - 45 10 Bangladesh .................................................................................... 46 - 47 11 Bolivia........................................................................................... 48 - 50 11 Bosnia and Herzegovina................................................................ 51 - 53 12 Botswana ....................................................................................... 54 - 57 12 Brazil ........................................................................................... 58 - 70 13 Bulgaria ......................................................................................... 71 - 76 15 Burkina Faso ................................................................................. 77 - 78 16 Burundi.......................................................................................... 79 - 86 16 Cameroon ...................................................................................... 87 - 94 18 Chile ........................................................................................... 95 - 106 18 China ........................................................................................... 107 - 121 21 Colombia....................................................................................... 122 - 162 23 Cuba ........................................................................................... 163 32 E/CN.4/2000/3/Add.1 page 3 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs Page Democratic Republic of the Congo............................................... 164 - 193 33 Dominican Republic...................................................................... 194 - 195 36 Ecuador.......................................................................................... 196 - 199 36 El Salvador.................................................................................... 200 - 201 37 Germany........................................................................................ 202 - 204 37 Guatemala...................................................................................... 205 - 211 38 Guinea-Bissau ............................................................................... 212 - 213 39 Haiti ........................................................................................... 214 - 217 40 Honduras ....................................................................................... 218 - 224 40 India ........................................................................................... 225 - 241 41 Indonesia ....................................................................................... 242 - 275 44 Iran (Islamic Republic of) ............................................................. 276 - 282 48 Iraq ........................................................................................... 283 - 285 49 Israel ........................................................................................... 286 - 290 50 Jamaica.......................................................................................... 291 - 295 50 Japan ........................................................................................... 296 52 Kuwait ........................................................................................... 297 52 Malaysia ........................................................................................ 298 - 300 52 Mexico........................................................................................... 301 - 319 53 Myanmar ....................................................................................... 320 - 334 58 Nepal ........................................................................................... 335 - 339 60 Nicaragua ...................................................................................... 340 - 341 61 Pakistan ......................................................................................... 342 - 366 61 Peru ........................................................................................... 367 - 369 64 Philippines..................................................................................... 370 - 381 65 Republic of Korea ......................................................................... 382 68 Russian Federation ........................................................................ 383 - 387 68 E/CN.4/2000/3/Add.1 page 4 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs Page Rwanda.......................................................................................... 388 - 389 69 Saudi Arabia.................................................................................. 390 - 394 69 Senegal .......................................................................................... 395 - 397 70 Sierra Leone .................................................................................. 398 - 399 71 South Africa .................................................................................. 400 - 401 71 Sri Lanka ....................................................................................... 402 - 414 71 Sudan ........................................................................................... 415 - 420 73 Tajikistan....................................................................................... 421 - 422 74 Thailand......................................................................................... 423 - 425 75 Trinidad and Tobago ..................................................................... 426 - 430 75 Tunisia........................................................................................... 431 - 434 77 Turkey ........................................................................................... 435 - 456 77 Uganda .......................................................................................... 457 - 459 82 United States of America .............................................................. 460 - 482 83 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland............... 483 87 Uzbekistan..................................................................................... 484 - 485 87 Venezuela...................................................................................... 486 - 488 87 Yemen ........................................................................................... 489 - 491 88 Yugoslavia..................................................................................... 492 - 496 89 Zambia........................................................................................... 497 90 B. OTHER ......................................................................................... 498 - 501 90 Palestinian Authority..................................................................... 498 - 501 90 E/CN.4/2000/3/Add.1 page 5 Introduction 1. This addendum to the report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions describes 69 country situations and gives an account of actions undertaken by the Special Rapporteur between 3 November 1998 and 13 December 1999. It also contains in summary form the replies received from Governments to her communications, as well as observations of the Special Rapporteur where considered appropriate. 2. Owing to restrictions on the length of documents, the Special Rapporteur has been obliged to reduce considerably details of communications sent and received. As a result, requests from Governments to publish their replies in their totality could not be acceded to. For the same reason, responses from sources to requests of the Special Rapporteur, although of great importance to her work, are reflected only very briefly in the report. SUMMARY OF CASES TRANSMITTED AND REPLIES RECEIVED A. COUNTRIES Afghanistan 3. The Special Rapporteur has continued receiving communications concerning trials
Load more

Recommended publications
  • May 25Th of 2016 OAS Member States, the Coalition for Human Rights In
    May 25th of 2016 OAS Member States, The Coalition for Human Rights in the Americas, and the members of other regional and global networks from civil society, express our deep concern over the severe financial crisis currently affecting the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR). We endorse this statement in order to appeal all Member States of the Organization of American States (OAS) to take the necessary actions to guarantee the immediate and proper funding of the IACHR in order to fulfill its mandate. In addition, we urgently call for the creation of a sustainable fund to finance the Organs of the Inter-American Human Rights System (IHRS), in order to address the precarious situation, which both the Commission and Inter-American Court of Human Rights have been going through since in the last few years. The Inter-American Commission is mandated to promote the observance and protection of human rights in the Americas, and acts as a consultative organ to the OAS in this area. It is the only regional mechanism that supervises the obligations of all Member States of the OAS in this area, and constitutes the last resort for defending against violations of fundamental rights in the continent. The IACHR is an international referent, due to its great labour of protecting thousands of human rights defenders, who live threatened and criminalized in the Americas. This organ watches over the indigenous people and afro-descendant people’s rights, women and children, and the LGTBI community rights as well, among other vulnerable populations. The role of the IACHR, not only in the area of human rights protection, but also in the implementation of measures to promote their accomplishment, affects almost a billion people across the region.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Inter-American Court of Human Rights Case Of
    1 INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS CASE OF CABRERA GARCIA AND MONTIEL FLORES V. MEXICO JUDGMENT OF NOVEMBER 26, 2010 (Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Legal Costs) In the Case of Cabrera Garcia and Montiel Flores, The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter, the "Inter-American Court", the "Court" or the "Tribunal"), composed of the following judges: Diego García-Sayán, President; Leonardo A. Franco, Vice-President; Manuel E. Ventura Robles, Judge; Margarette May Macaulay, Judge; Rhadys Abreu-Blondet, Judge; Alberto Pérez Pérez, Judge; Eduardo Vio Grossi, Judge and Eduardo Ferrer Mac-Gregor Poisot, ad hoc Judge; Also present: Pablo Saavedra Alessandri, Secretary and, Emilia Segares Rodríguez, Deputy Secretary, Pursuant to Articles 62(3) and 63(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter, the “Convention” or the “American Convention”) and Articles 30, 32, 38, 56, 57, 58 and 61 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure1 (hereinafter, the “Rules of Procedure”) delivers this Judgment, which is organized in the following way: 1 According to the terms of article 79.1 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure that entered into force on January 1, 2010, "[c]ontentious cases which have been submitted for the consideration of the Court before January 1, 2010, will continue to be processed, until the issuance of a judgment, in accordance to the previous Rules of Procedure". Thus, the Court’s Rules of Procedure applied to this case corresponds to the instrument approved by the Tribunal in its XLIX Regular Period of Sessions held from November 16 to 25, 2000, partially amended by the Court in its LXXXII Regular Period of Sessions, held from January 19 to 31, 2009, and which was in force from March 24, 2009 until January 1, 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • United States Bankruptcy Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division
    Case 12-27488 Doc 49 Filed 07/27/12 Entered 07/27/12 13:10:45 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 343 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION In re: ) Chapter 7 ) PEREGRINE FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., ) Case No. 12-27488 ) ) ) Honorable Judge Carol A. Doyle Debtor. ) ) Hearing Date: August 9, 2012 ) Hearing Time: 10:00 a.m. NOTICE OF MOTION TO: See Attached PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on August 9, 2012 at 10:00 a.m., the undersigned shall appear before the Honorable Carol A. Doyle, United States Bankruptcy Judge for the United States Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, in Courtroom 742 of the Dirksen Federal Building, 219 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604, and then and there present the TRUSTEE’S MOTION FOR ORDER APPROVING PROCEDURES FOR FIXING PRICING AND CLAIM AMOUNTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE TERMINATION AND LIQUIDATION OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE CUSTOMER AGREEMENTS (the “Motion”). PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that if you are a foreign exchange customer of Peregrine Financial Group, Inc. or otherwise received this Notice, your rights may be affected by the Motion. PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that a copy of the Motion is available on the Trustee’s website, www.PFGChapter7.com, or upon request sent to [email protected]. Respectfully submitted, Ira Bodenstein, not personally, but as chapter 7 trustee for the estate of Peregrine Financial Group, Inc. Dated: July 27, 2012 By: /s/ John Guzzardo One of his proposed attorneys Robert M. Fishman (#3124316) Salvatore Barbatano (#0109681) John Guzzardo (#6283016) Shaw Gussis Fishman Glantz {10403-001 NOM A0323583.DOC}4841-1459-7392.2 Case 12-27488 Doc 49 Filed 07/27/12 Entered 07/27/12 13:10:45 Desc Main Document Page 2 of 343 Wolfson & Towbin LLC 321 North Clark Street, Suite 800 Chicago, IL 60654 Phone: (877) 465-1849 [email protected] Proposed Counsel to the Trustee and Geoffrey S.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2006 Our Mission
    DPLF Annual Report 2006 Our Mission The Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF) was founded in 1996, by Hon. Judge Thomas Buergenthal, who sits today on the International Court of Justice, and his former colleagues of the United Nations Truth Commission for El Salvador. DPLF was created with the understanding that human rights can only be guaranteed through the existence of strong and independent national judicial systems. Therefore, our main goal is to influence the development of public policies related to the improvement of the administration of justice, particu- larly in Latin America.Through our activities, we promote the rule of law and the institutions and conditions necessary to strengthen respect for human rights in democratic societies. As an international non-governmental organization based in Washington, D.C., DPLF is exempt from federal income taxes under Section 501(c)(3) of the US Internal Revenue Code. Message from our President and Executive Director ince its creation, the Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF) has been a partner in the regional push for judicial reform and respect for human rights. Over the years we have faced and experienced the Sadvances and setbacks that exemplify the judicial reform process in the region.There is a consensus that the reforms that have taken place should be consolidated, enhanced, and not abandoned, and that they should be promoted in places where they do not yet exist. Lack of equal access, independence, impartiality and transparency in the judiciary are prevailing problems in Latin America.We believe that an important obstacle in advancing judicial reform in the region is that, in general, many are unaware of the impact that these reforms can have on their everyday lives.
    [Show full text]
  • General Assembly
    INFO-PACK 1st semester 2008 Last updated: January 2008 A COMPILATION OF CONTACT AND MEMBERSHIP DETAILS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS SYSTEMS AND HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANISATIONS INTERNATIONAL SERVICE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS (ISHR) Rue de Varembé 1 P.O. Box 16 CH-1211 Geneva 20 CIC Switzerland Tel: (41 22) 919 71 00 Fax: (41 22) 919 71 25 www.ishr.ch International Service for Human Rights 1 INFO-PACK, 1st semester 2008 Contributors Elodie Aba Annika Åberg Ridwan Sami Al-Jassar Christopher Brown Rami Chalabi Eléonore Dziurzynski Musa Gassama Elena Gaino Ashwini Habbu Alison Leon Christopher Lee Tae-Hohn Lee Shushan Khachyan Hannah Klein Tina Kristensen Gergey Pastor Daniel Perell Ana Carolina Ponte Vidal Yuri Saito Rosa Sanz Ha Eun Seong Johanna Alexandra Somerville Gareth Sweeney Katrine Thomasen About the publication The Info-Pack provides you with contact information for United Nations human rights mechanisms and offices as well as regional human rights mechanisms and organisations. You will also find the membership of the different UN and regional human rights bodies, and for each Treaty Monitoring Body, which countries are up for review in 2008. This information has been provided to make it easier for you to contact people working within relevant human rights mechanisms when you are not able to find information on the websites of these mechanisms or need individualised feedback. Please remember that we circulate these contact details on the understanding that it will be used in an appropriate manner, that the details will not be published on websites and/or other fora where they could be misused, and that the privacy of the individuals concerned will be respected.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic and Social Council
    UNITED NATIONS E Economic and Social Distr. GENERAL Council E/CN.4/2002/106 27 February 2002 Original: ENGLISH COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Fifty-eighth session Item 17 (b) of the provisional agenda PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS Report submitted by Ms. Hina Jilani, Special Representative of Secretary-General on human rights defenders, pursuant to the Commission on Human Rights resolution 2000/61 GE.02-11122 (E) 220302 E/CN.4/2002/106 page 2 CONTENTS Paragraphs Page Executive summary ......................................................................................................... 4 Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 6 I. MANDATE AND METHODS OF WORK ................................. 2 6 II. ACTIVITIES ................................................................................ 3 - 38 6 A. Country visits .................................................................... 5 - 6 7 B. Cooperation with the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations ....................................... 7 - 16 7 C. Cooperation with NGOs .................................................... 17 - 25 9 D. Participation in seminars and various events .................... 26 - 32 11 E. Other activities .................................................................. 33 - 38 12 III. ISSUES ......................................................................................... 39 - 107 13 A. Trends ...............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2001 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor March 4, 2002
    Mexico Page 1 of 37 Mexico Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2001 Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor March 4, 2002 Mexico is a federal republic composed of 31 states and a federal district, with an elected president and a bicameral legislature. In July 2000, voters elected President Vicente Fox Quesada of the Alliance for Change Coalition in historic elections that observers judged to be generally free and fair, and that ended the Institutional Revolutionary Party's (PRI) 71-year hold on the presidency. The peace process in Chiapas between the Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) and the Government remained stalled, despite positive developments early in the year. Sporadic outbursts of politically motivated violence continued to occur in the southern states of Chiapas, Guerrero, and Oaxaca. The judiciary is generally independent; however, on occasion, especially at the state level, it has been influenced by government authorities. Corruption, inefficiency, impunity, disregard of the law, and lack of training are major problems. The police forces, which include federal and state judicial police, the Federal Preventive Police (PFP), municipal police, and various police auxiliary forces, have primary responsibility for law enforcement and maintenance of order within the country. However, the military plays a large role in some law enforcement functions, primarily counternarcotics. Elected civilian officials maintain effective control over the police and the military; however, corruption is widespread within police ranks and also is a problem in the military. The military maintains a strong presence in the state of Chiapas and a lesser, but still significant, deployment in Guerrero.
    [Show full text]
  • Conseil Économique Et Social
    NATIONS UNIES E Distr. Conseil Économique GÉNÉRALE et Social E/CN.4/2002/106 27 février 2002 FRANÇAIS Original: ANGLAIS COMMISSION DES DROITS DE L’HOMME Cinquante-huitième session Point 17 b) de l’ordre du jour provisoire PROMOTION ET PROTECTION DES DROITS DE L’HOMME: DÉFENSEURS DES DROITS DE L’HOMME Rapport présenté par Mme Hina Jilani, Représentante spéciale du Secrétaire général pour la question des défenseurs des droits de l’homme, en application de la résolution 2000/61 de la Commission des droits de l’homme GE.02-1123 (F) 150402 190402 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/89a771/ E/CN.4/2002/106 page 2 TABLE DES MATIÈRES Paragraphes Page RÉSUMÉ......................................................................................................... 4 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................... 1 6 I. MANDAT ET MÉTHODES DE TRAVAIL......................................... 2 6 II. ACTIVITÉS ........................................................................................... 3 - 38 6 A. Missions dans les pays.................................................................. 5 et 6 7 B. Coopération avec les organisations du système des Nations Unies et d’autres organisations intergouvernementales.......................... 7 - 16 C. Coopération avec les ONG ........................................................... 17 - 25 D. Participation à des séminaires et à différentes activités................ 26 - 32 11 E. Autres activités ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • PICAR PIEDRA Iniciativas Ciudadanas Frente a La Violencia Ingrid Spiller / Rodolfo Aguirre Reveles (Coordinadores) Ciudadanía
    PICAR PIEDRA Iniciativas ciudadanas frente a la violencia Ingrid Spiller / Rodolfo Aguirre Reveles (Coordinadores) Ciudadanía PICAR PIEDRA INICIATIVAS CIUDADANAS FRENTE A LA VIOLENCIA Iniciativas ciudadanas frente a la violencia Calle Joséwww.boell-latinoamerica.org.mx Alvarado 12, Colonia Roma Norte, México D.F. Tel: +52-55-5264 1514/ 2894 n http://www.mx.boell.org PICAR PIEDRA INICIATIVAS CIUDADANAS FRENTE A LA VIOLENCIA Primera edición • 2013 ISBN: 978-607-96031-0-6 Ingrid Spiller y Rodolfo Aguirre Reveles COORDINADORES DEL VOLUMEN Gustavo Ogarrio Badillo COORDINADOR EDITORIAL Zulma Lorena Argueta Erika Pegueros Loaiza Vanessa Pocasangre Mijango Dolores Rojas Rubio EQUIPO DE INVESTIGACIÓN Gabriela Sánchez Téllez DISEÑO EDITORIAL Claudia Wondratschke DISEÑO Y FOTOS DE PORTADA Obra bajo licencia de Creative Commons Usted es libre de: Compartir - copiar, distribuir, ejecutar y comunicar públicamente la obra bajo las condiciones siguientes: • Atribución — Debe reconocer los créditos de la obra de la manera especificada por el autor o el licenciante (pero no de una manera que sugiera que tiene su apoyo o que apoyan el uso que hace de su obra). • No Comercial — No puede utilizar esta obra para fines comerciales. • Sin Obras Derivadas — No se puede alterar, transformar o generar una obra derivada a partir de esta obra. Iniciativas ciudadanas frente a la violencia Contenido Presentación, Annettte von Schönfeld 5 Introducción, Heinrich Böll Stiftung 7 I.- SOCIEDAD CIVIL, UNA PARADOJA Y EL PANORAMA La sociedad civil, un actor indispensable en los esfuerzos para com- 11 batir la violencia y la inseguridad. Ingrid Spiller La paradoja de la represión. La impotencia del Estado ante el crimen 17 organizado.
    [Show full text]
  • Informe De Cumplimiento De Actividades Del Proyecto
    “Fortalecimiento del sistema de certificación de servicios acreditados e implementación de Medidas Sanitarias y Fitosanitarias, Calidad e inocuidad de productos agrícolas” (MOTSSA). MAGFOR MIFIC Ministerio Agropecuario y Forestal Ministerio de Fomento, Industria y Comercio INFORME DE CUMPLIMIENTO DE ACTIVIDADES DEL PROYECTO Financiado por el Fondo para la Aplicación de Normas y Facilitación del Comercio (FANFC/STDF) Organización Mundial de Comercio (OMC/WTO). 1 “Fortalecimiento del sistema de certificación de servicios acreditados e implementación de Medidas Sanitarias y Fitosanitarias, Calidad e inocuidad de productos agrícolas” (MOTSSA). I. RESUMEN EJECUTIVO El proyecto MOTSSA fue una iniciativa del Ministerio Agropecuario y Forestal y el Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura, sometido a financiación ante el Fondo para la Aplicación de Normas para la Facilitación del Comercio (STDF por sus siglas en inglés) de la Organización Mundial de Comercio (OMC). En general pretendía iniciar el desarrollo de sinergias nacionales en la implementación de BPA en Nicaragua, ordenar un proceso de trabajo en capacitaciones sobre el tema, partiendo del diagnóstico de los principales problemas sanitarios y fitosanitarios de la producción nacional, así como de los problemas más sensibles en la comercialización de los productos, apoyando sus acciones formativas en el uso de parcelas demostrativas para el desarrollo de las actividades de capacitación en campo. De la misma manera MOTSSA pretendía desarrollar en general capacidades nacionales sobre calidad e inocuidad en la producción vegetal de Nicaragua, a través de la capacitación de grupos de productores, técnicos de las organizaciones y estudiantes, de manera de contribuir cada vez más a la conformación de una masa crítica de profesionales para el apoyo al sector de la producción en los temas de BPA, dejando también capacidades en el sector educativo para el desarrollo de estos temas especializados en sus pensum de enseñanza.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report of the IACHR 2012
    CHAPTER III ACTIVITIES OF THE RAPPORTEURS´OFFICES, THEMATIC AND COUNTRY REPORTS AND PROMOTION A. Activities of the Rapporteurs Offices1 1. Office of the Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples 1. In 1990, the Office of the Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was created, with the aim of focusing attention on those indigenous peoples of the Americas who were especially exposed to human rights violations due to their situation of vulnerability, and to strengthen, promote, and systematize the work of the Inter-American Commission itself in that area. Commissioner Dinah Shelton has served as Rapporteur since the beginning of 2010. 2. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights conducted a working visit to the Republic of Suriname from January 23 to 25, 2013, to examine the situation of the rights of women and indigenous peoples in that country. The delegation was composed of Commissioner Dinah Shelton, Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; Commissioner Tracy Robinson, First Vice-President of the Commission and Rapporteur on the Rights of Women; and staff of the Executive Secretariat. During the visit, the delegation held meetings with the highest authorities of the Suriname State and representatives of civil society organizations that work to protect the rights of indigenous peoples. Several members of the delegation also traveled to the district of Brokopondo and the village of Brownsweg to visit a Maroon community composed of 8,000 people. 3. On April 8 and 9 the coordinator of the Rapporteurship took part in a meeting organized by the Council of Aboriginal Organizations of Jujuy (COAJ), in cooperation with Autochthonous Women of Quebec, as part of the project “Ethnic and gender discrimination in the Americas: the case of indigenous women.” It was attended by representatives of the COAJ, Lawyers for Justice and Human Rights (AJDH), Service of the Mixe Nation (SER), the National Indigenous Organization of Colombia (ONIC), Autochthonous Women of Quebec, and others.
    [Show full text]
  • Contributions of the Jesuits to Human Rights in Mexico: a Case Study of Center Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez
    LMU/LLS Theses and Dissertations Spring 2016 Contributions of the Jesuits to Human Rights in Mexico: A Case Study of Center Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez Luis Arriaga Valenzuela Loyola Marymount University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/etd Part of the Latina/o Studies Commons, Law Commons, and the Sociology Commons Recommended Citation Arriaga Valenzuela, Luis, "Contributions of the Jesuits to Human Rights in Mexico: A Case Study of Center Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez" (2016). LMU/LLS Theses and Dissertations. 483. https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/etd/483 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in LMU/LLS Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY Contributions of the Jesuits to Human Rights in Mexico: A Case Study of Center Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez by Luis Arriaga Valenzuela A dissertation presented to the Faculty of the School of Education, Loyola Marymount University, In partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Education 2016 Contributions of the Jesuits to Human Rights in Mexico: A Case Study of Center Miguel Agustin Pro Juarez Copyright © 2016 by Luis Arriaga Valenzuela ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The City of Los Angeles, sometimes referred to as “The City of Angels,” gives honor to its name. During my travels here, many angels have crossed my path. This dissertation was made possible by the support of all those who accompanied me during this adventure.
    [Show full text]