http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
개별검색 DB통합검색이 안되는 DB는 DB아이콘을 클릭하여 이용하실 수 있습니다.
통계정보 및 조사
예술 / 패션
<해외전자자료 이용권한 안내>
- 이용 대상 : RISS의 모든 해외전자자료는 교수, 강사, 대학(원)생, 연구원, 대학직원에 한하여(로그인 필수) 이용 가능
- 구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색 및 등록된 대학IP 대역 내에서 24시간 무료 이용
- 미구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색을 통한 오후 4시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용
※ 단, EBSCO ASC/BSC(오후 5시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용)
Since its establishment in the year 2001, the National Human Rights Commission of Korea has assumed the role of primary governmental entity addressing human rightsissues in the country. In addition to investigating complaints of human rights violations and discrimination, the NHRCK has a policy advisory function, and engages in search, education, and publicizing of human rights issues. This article examines the role of the NHRCK, which came into being in part due to the advocacy of victim rights groups, in promoting and protecting victim rights. It addresses both the rights of crime victims and the rights of victims of human rights abuses. The article analyzes the different ways in which the NHRCK has addressed victim issues, while offering concluding observations as to how the NHRCK can more effectively promote and protect victim rights in the future.
In March 2014 the Myanmar Hluttaw, or Parliament, enacted the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission Law, which provided a statutory basis for a national human rights body in Myanmar. The Myanmar government declared to the United Nations Human Rights Council that the Enabling Law was compliant with the United Nations Paris Principles that set international standards for national human rights institutions. Despite the claims of the Myanmar government, however, critics charge the Enabling Law is insufficient, with detractors claiming the law leaves the MNHRC with anaemic powers incapable of advancing human rights. This paper responds to such issues by conducting an independent evaluation of the MNHRC Enabling Law under the Paris Principles. In doing so, the analysis treats the Enabling Law as a case study demonstrating how the Paris Principles can be exercised by third parties as the UN-supported international standards for national human rights institutions.
The development of the law of self-determination has been stagnant in terms of scope and content in its application in the postcolonial context. It requires a new paradigm to persuade the United Nations, its specialized agencies and affiliated organizations to address current phenomenon regarding normative, institutional and community awareness. This research has revealed that the essential meaning of self-determination is a remedial means for an oppressed person both in colonial and postcolonial context. While the colonial context has ended, postcolonial self-determination remains focussed on both repairing the historical wrongs of the colonial context, responding to the breakdown of a state, and recovering from persistent violations against anyone in the State. Accordingly, this paper will contribute to the development of guidelines for these applications: which primarily refer to some degree of internal self-determination (autonomy); and when this proves unsuccessful, external self-determination (independent) can be proposed as the last resort.
In a referendum held in 2016, Britain voted to leave the EU. Britain's membership of the EU has been a difficult one. Unlike the other leading Member States of the EU, Britain did not seem to have a firm conviction that “ever-closer union” of the peoples of Europe is essential to the peace and liberty of Europe. In the wake of increased immigration and the recent refugee crisis, the British people chose to leave the EU in order to have their sovereignty and independence re-affirmed. It remains to be seen what will be the economic consequences of this largely political decision.
The space environment is unique. Natural decay of debris therein is much slower than pollutants in other environments, so that removal is difficult and expensive. Despites the voluntary implementation of mitigation guidelines, the amount of debris has surged in the last two decades due to increase and diversification of space actors, and the continuing militarization of space. Active Debris Removal has thus become a promising responsive scenario. This article examines key legal barriers to the implementation of removal, such as the lack of legal definition of space debris, ambiguities surrounding the jurisdiction and control over space debris, liability for possible damages caused in removal, and implications for space arms control. It further proposes that more comprehensive registration of space objects, an international catalogue of space debris and an international fund for removal should be promoted. Also, international cooperation should be enhanced to cope with space debris, while space arms control should be strengthened.