A Digest of Case Law on the Human Rights of Women - Asia Pacific ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Imelda Romualdez-Marcos v Commission on Elections and Cirilo Roy Montejo (Philippines) Justice Romero also referred to the Women in Development and Nation Building Act 1992, which gives married women rights to act in contracts on an equal basis to that <strong>of</strong> men. She referred to the Fourth World Conference <strong>of</strong> Women in Beijing and its objectives, which included the removal <strong>of</strong> “all obstacles to women’s full participation in decision making at all levels, including the family”. Justice Romero beseeched the Supreme Court to be the first to respond to the Fourth World Conference on Women and its clarion call “Women’s Rights are Human Rights”. Commentary This case is positive for women. The rights <strong>of</strong> women are categorically mentioned and explicitly recognised. The decision recognises the rights <strong>of</strong> women to choose their own place <strong>of</strong> domicile and not to be given the domicile <strong>of</strong> their husband upon marriage. The judgment <strong>of</strong> Justice Romero is particularly positive as it discusses at length the many restrictions on the personal freedoms <strong>of</strong> Philippines women, which have since been removed in response to international norms and conventions. More significantly, Justice Romero focuses on CEDAW as a framework for the articulation <strong>of</strong> women’s rights. The recognition <strong>of</strong> CEDAW as a binding treaty and a source <strong>of</strong> State obligation gives emphasis to the fact that it is not only “part <strong>of</strong> the law <strong>of</strong> the land” (section 2, Article II <strong>of</strong> the Philippines Constitution), but part <strong>of</strong> Philippine case law. This gives CEDAW the potential to be used as a legal basis in future cases that involve discrimination against women, without an additional requirement to cite a specific national law that further articulates a provision in CEDAW. The Philippines Supreme Court does not always cite international treaties or conventions in support <strong>of</strong> its decisions so this case signifies a positive development. 8
Article 9 Nationality and Citizenship Sayeeda Rahman Malkani and others (Petitioners) v The Secretary, Ministry <strong>of</strong> Home Affairs, Government <strong>of</strong> the People's Republic <strong>of</strong> Bangladesh and others (Respondents) Supreme Court, High Court Division, Dhaka 1 September 1997 Md. Mozammel Hoque and Md. Hassan Ameen JJ <strong>Law</strong>s and International Instruments Considered Bangladesh Citizenship (Temporary Provisions) Order <strong>of</strong> 1972, Article 2; CEDAW 1979; Citizenship zenship Act 1951, Sections 3, 5,11; Constitution <strong>of</strong> the People’s Republic <strong>of</strong> Bangladesh 1972, Articles 1, 27, 28, 29; General Clauses Act 1897, Section 13, 15; P.O. 149 <strong>of</strong> 1972, Article 2. This case considers whether Bangladesh law, which limits the rights <strong>of</strong> its female citizens married to foreign nationals who wish to raise their children as Bangladesh citizens, constitutes sex discrimination. The Court considered whether the law breached the Constitution <strong>of</strong> the People’s Republic <strong>of</strong> Bangladesh 1972 [“the Constitution”] and international conventions that protect the rights <strong>of</strong> women such as CEDAW. The first petitioner, Sayeeda Rahman Malkani, a citizen <strong>of</strong> Bangladesh married Rabinder Malkani, an Indian national, in 1984, while pursuing her postgraduate studies in Paris. The couple had two sons, Sanjay Rahman Malkani and Ihsan Rahman Malkani (the second and third petitioners), who were registered in the Bangladesh Embassy in Paris as Bangladeshi citizens. The minors’ names were endorsed in their mother’s passport mother and they both visited Bangladesh regularly with her. On 11 August 1992, an <strong>of</strong>ficial at the Bangladesh Embassy in Paris cancelled the endorsement <strong>of</strong> the names <strong>of</strong> Sayeeda Malkani’s two sons from her passport, alleging that the earlier endorsements had been mistakenly entered. She was informed that as she had married an Indian national, her sons could not be considered Bangladeshi citizens. Sayeeda Rahman Malkani applied to the Court seeking a declaration that 9 CEDAW Bangladesh
Page 1 and 2: A Digest o
Page 3: A Digest o
Page 6 and 7: Acknowledgements APWLD would like t
Page 8 and 9: Contents ARTICLE 16(f): MARRIAGE AN
Page 10 and 11: Contents MARRIAGE AND FAMILY LIFE -
Page 12 and 13: Introduction regional groups - an i
Page 15 and 16: Part I CEDAW Cases
Page 17 and 18: Imelda Romualdez-Marcos v Commissio
Page 19: Imelda Romualdez-Marcos v Commissio
Page 23 and 24: Sayeeda Rahman Malkani and others v
Page 25 and 26: Mr Benjamin Peter, Mrs Mina Kumari
Page 27 and 28: Nurhatina Hasibuan v Pt. Indonesia
Page 29 and 30: Article 11 Employment Teikoku Zouki
Page 31 and 32: Article 16.1(a) Marriage and Family
Page 33 and 34: to clarify paternity suggested by t
Page 35 and 36: Humaira Mehmood v The State and oth
Page 37 and 38: Humaira Mehmood v The State and oth
Page 39 and 40: Ms Githa Hariharan and another v Re
Page 41 and 42: Article 16.1(f) Marriage and Family
Page 43 and 44: Surya Prakash v Shirley Reshmi Nara
Page 45 and 46: Madhu Kishwar and others v State <s
Page 47 and 48: Madhu Kishwar and others v State <s
Page 49 and 50: Article 16.1(h) Marriage and Family
Page 51 and 52: C. Masilamani Mudaliar and others v
Page 53 and 54: Article 16.1(h) Marriage and Family
Page 55 and 56: Meera Kumari and Mira Khanal v His
Page 57 and 58: Apparel Export Promotion Council v
Page 59 and 60: Apparel Export Promotion Council v
Page 61 and 62: A safe working environment is funda
Page 63 and 64: General Recommendation 19 Violence
Page 65 and 66: Chairman, Railway Board and others
Page 67 and 68: with the complainant. He also state
Page 69 and 70: The Republic of Ki
Page 71:
Part II Constitutional Law<
Page 74 and 75:
Public Prosecutor v Walter Kota and
Page 76 and 77:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Nepal Nationalit
Page 78 and 79:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Japan Employment
Page 80 and 81:
Iwate Bank Case (J
Page 82 and 83:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Republic <strong
Page 84 and 85:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Nepal Discrimina
Page 86 and 87:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Pacific Islands:
Page 88 and 89:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Bangladesh Marri
Page 90 and 91:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Pacific Islands:
Page 92 and 93:
Patricia Molu v Cidie Molu (Pacific
Page 94 and 95:
Prakash Mani Sharma v His Majesty
Page 96 and 97:
John Noel (as representative <stron
Page 98 and 99:
John Noel (as representative <stron
Page 100 and 101:
Hee Jung Woo v Jung Hue Shin, Jong
Page 102 and 103:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Japan Violence A
Page 104 and 105:
Al-Amin and 5 others v The State (B
Page 106 and 107:
Al-Amin and 5 others v The State (B
Page 109 and 110:
A Article APWLD Asia Pacific Forum
Page 111 and 112:
95 Glossary In criminal proceedings
Page 113 and 114:
97 Glossary television or film (or
Page 115 and 116:
countries. Sharia is a religious co
Page 117 and 118:
Bangladesh CEDAW Country Ratificati
Page 119 and 120:
Government is discriminatory. Some
Page 121 and 122:
CEDAW Country Ratification Report:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
of the Republic an
Page 129 and 130:
Status of Ratifica
Page 131 and 132:
COUNTRY CEDAW CEDAW-Op Polynesia 1.
Page 133 and 134:
FAMILY LAW 1. Marriage and custom C
Page 135 and 136:
• A.26 - equality under and befor
Page 137 and 138:
UDHR • A.7 - equality before and
Page 139 and 140:
Notes
Page 142:
Notes Asia Pacific Forum on Women,
show all

A Digest of Case Law on the Human Rights of Women - Asia Pacific ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?