The right to strike is a human right. As history shows us, strikers, labour unions and social movements have often been criminalized, and this leads to a statement of the obvious. In current times – the times of uber, austerity and hyper-vigilance –, people have had a great amount of rights taken away, such as labour rights, social security and privacy. At the same time, society has new demands, generated by aspects such as gender violence, economic disparity and racial inequality, that can be perceived in private relations, between workers and companies, but also results from the lack of public policies that originally aim to change these disparities, and because of this, the right to strike is essential. This paper will analyze the right to strike as the “first right,” or, in other words, the one that makes it possible for the people to recover lost social rights, according to the research of Roberto Gargarella, who states that protests are vital for democracy.
With the entry into force of the 1991 Constitution in Colombia, the traditional system of sources of law changed, not only in the prevalence of the constitutional text and the judicial control of constitutionality, but also in the preponderant role of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court in determination the new fundamental rights, minimum essential content and the limits to the exercise thereof.
This is the impact of constitutionalism on the theory of fundamental rights that has become more evident when judicial decisions are about social and economic rights, for example: health, education and environment healthy.
This paper seeks to explore this relationship between constitutionalism and the theory of fundamental rights, as well as the analysis of the variations in the concept and the foundation of economic and social rights.
Article 227 of Brazilian Constitution expressly provided that the fundamental rights of children must be guaranteed by the State, society and families with “absolute priority”, as well as stated by the CRC/UN that the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. However, studies in Brazilian public law are silent on analyzing this constitutional provision, even though children are at the center of very important constitutional debates, such as the prohibition of homeschooling, compulsory vaccination and medical treatment against parents’ beliefs and damages from institutionalized alternative care. This present article aims to deepen this debate through the lens of proportionality, especially with regard to the child’s full capacity to evoke constitutional rights, despite their limited autonomy; to their fundamental right, and its horizontal effect, to absolute priority of their rights and best interests; and also to their fundamental right to equality and solidarity
Although it has been the theme visited and revisited, since pension and social security reforms have already occurred in Brazil and in other countries, in more than one moment of their contemporary history, the present study gains strength with the new pension reform presented by the Brazilian Executive Power in 2019. New and complex norms make up the mentioned Amendment in the Brazilian Constitution of 1988, in wich acquired right remains expressly guaranteed. From a deductive and analytical method of some particularities of the Brazilian reform, this text will restart the subject of acquired right, but mainly the expectation of the right, that for a long time has been defended not like a right, but rather an expectation. But the study will have as its central objective finding points for criticism and debate, in relation to which the expectation may not be a mere changeable factual situation, but also a right to be discussed and guaranteed by the State and its institutions.
Migrant domestic workers are estimated at approximately 11.5 million persons worldwide. European women are being replaced in their household chores by immigrant women, e.g. from Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe. The paper focuses on human labour rights of domestic migrant workers, especially from the point of view of the typology which divides international standards concerning labour as a matter of human rights into four groups: rights relating to employment (eg. the prohibition of slavery and forced labour); rights deriving from employment (eg. the right to social security, the right to just and favourable conditions of work); rights concerning equal treatment and non-discrimination, and instrumental rights (eg. the right to organise, the right to strike). The aim of this paper is to reveal insufficient effectiveness of human labour rights according to the above-mentioned typology. Thus, the author will concentrate on the issues of modern slavery, hyper-precarity and discrimination
The aim of this proposal is to identify the problems deriving from the use of digital platforms and find out whether tax law might give a solution to such problems. If, on the one hand, technological innovation has incontrovertibly improved our lives, on the other hand it has affected the weakest part of the population and exposed it to social exploitation, since the level of employment in certain productions has plummeted (from the manufactory industry to the booksellers). In addition, the use of digital platforms by MNEs has played a pivotal role in avoiding the application of tax provisions, which has resulted in a significant loss in terms of revenue for the National Budgets and has shrunk the Welfare State. In this respect, what can tax law do? Does international tax law have a social aim (like domestic tax law: e.g. the Italian Constitution explicitly mentions the social purpose of direct taxes)? The paper will explore the initiatives at OECD and EU level aimed at tackling phenomena of profit shifting through digital means and verify if they are capable of protecting the Welfare State and social rights and contribute to reduce the current intolerable level of economic injustice.