Currently browsing posts by Silvia Dimitrova

Silvia Dimitrova is a first year McGill law student with a background in Political Science and French. Her interest in international law stems from past work with the Roma minority in Bulgaria, with a specific focus on the impact of the European Union legislation on Roma integration in EU member-states.

Hope still lingers as Canada ratifies the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Canada ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, on March 11th, one day before the official opening of the Paralympic Games in Vancouver. This long-awaited ratification made Canada the 78th nation to have adopted the Convention.[1] In addition to requiring provincial governments to update a number of laws, the document imposes a fundamental shift of the focus from institutionalization to integration of people with disabilities. Further, the convention will empower individuals to challenge laws and policies, deemed in conflict with the convention. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has important implications in Canadian immigration and refugee law. How far can its remedial stretch extend in offering hope to disabled immigrant and refugee applicants who seek permanent status or asylum in Canada?

The blatant exclusion of people of disabilities from immigration to Canada on the basis of disability stems back to the 1910 Immigration Act which altogether banned the immigration of people with mental disabilities. The 1927 Immigration Act expanded the basis for refusal to entry to Canada to physical disabilities as well. The subsequent amendment of the Act in 1976, introduced a less blatant discriminatory provision. Under this Act, people with disabilities could be excluded from immigration because they might place “excessive demands” on health or social services. This practice acquired a new dimension with the passing of the 1985 Immigration Act, which had s.…

Continue reading this entry ➔

 

How the Iranian government breaches its own constitution and still receives the praise of countries during the UN’s seventh Universal Periodic Review

The UN Human Rights Council carried out its seventh Universal Periodic Review on Iran, on February 15, 2010.[1] The UNHRC provided a world forum to country representatives, willing to express their official stand on Iran’s human rights profile and to make recommendations. A close analysis of the Draft Report of the Working Group on the Islamic Republic of Iran, where 53 delegations made statements, reveals certain patterns in the positions of some of the states that took part in the Working Group.[2] These particular states, as discussed below, did not acknowledge the latest human rights abuses in Iran. Just the contrary, they recognized progress on Iran’s human rights record. The failure to acknowledge the latest suspensions of human rights in the Islamic Republic demonstrates how states’ economic priorities of trading with the second biggest oil exporter in the world can effectively undermine the entire international human rights enforcement scheme.

Before discussing the states in question, it is worth mentioning two examples of the latest human rights violations in Iran. In the examples discussed below, the Iranian government suspends human rights by breaching provisions of the Iranian constitution. The use of judicial and military methods like prolonged imprisonment, forced confessions and the utility of legislative techniques aimed at reducing women’s civil rights, all contravene Iranian constitutional guarantees. According to unofficial statistics, there are more than 1000 political prisoners in Iran.[3] In contravention of article 37…

Continue reading this entry ➔

 

The individualized assessment: how the Hilewitz and De Jong cases played out in Abdelkader Belaouni’s struggles against immigration controls and ableism

Abdelkader Belaouni’s struggle for status in Canada lasted 3 years, 9 month and 22 days. This is the amount of time Belaouni spent at Montreal’s St Gabriel Church since January 1, 2006 until the long-awaited granting of his status in September, 2009. Prior to the legalization of his status, Belaouni found sanctuary in this Montreal Church as his only alternative to evading a deportation order. Having lost his vision earlier in life, Belaouni’s story has become a living example of a hero who not only won the victory against immigration controls, but also surmounted ableism within Canada’s immigration system.

Belaouni’s legal struggles showcase many of the obstacles that disabled applicants face in pursuit of legal status in Canada. What is the attitude of Canada’s immigration system towards disabled applicants? What does medical inadmissibility entail in the context of Canadian immigration law? In order to address these questions, it is important to describe Belaouni’s legal struggles in relation to two commonly cited cases on disability and immigration law in Canada, the Hilewitz and De Jong cases.[1]

The Algerian man who had lost his eyesight in his mid-twenties, fled to New York City in 1996 after a civil war unraveled in his country. Apprehensive about his future in the USA, a country where racial prejudice had spiked following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Belaouni sought refuge in Canada in March 2003. He was denied status on the…

Continue reading this entry ➔

 

November 26, 2009
BY Silvia Dimitrova

Silvia Dimitrova

0 Comments

FILED UNDER
Public International Law

Are New Economic Sanctions on Iran Foreseeable for Noncompliance with International Nuclear Obligations? The Combined Power of International Law with a Unified Action across World Powers.

US State Department spokesperson, Ian Kelly has said, in response to the latest report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on Iran’s nuclear program, that the report underscores Iran’s refusal to “comply fully with international nuclear obligations.” Kelly’s statement is a result of Iran’s latest skepticism to comply with an international agreement on the scrapping of its nuclear program. The latest Brussels meeting of UN Security Council members and Germany indicates a growing sense of despair by Western diplomats with Iran’s failure to give concessions on its nuclear proliferation program. The negotiations between the “Iran Six” (the US, Britain, China, France and Russia) as well as Germany is centered on a “freeze for freeze” agreement, according to which Iran would suspend its nuclear enrichment program in exchange for the UN Security Council weakening its economic sanctions. However, world powers are growing increasingly desperate with Iran’s failure to carry out its international legal obligations and might proceed to impose sanctions.

Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and as such is entitled to enrich uranium. The degree of enrichment is essential here. Low enriched uranium (LEO) is for use of fuel in an electricity generating plant. Medium enriched uranium is for production of medical isotopes, and more than 90 percent enrichment is for a bomb-grade fuel. Iran has so far manifested LEO at its Natanz nuclear plant. The latest…

Continue reading this entry ➔