Log in
University of Bristol research into international, regional and national mechanisms for preventing torture is at the root of important changes in the operation and working practices of the key bodies involved. The UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, the domestic legislation and policies adopted by national governments and the work of organisations set up by individual states to prevent torture have all been deeply and directly affected by Bristol's insights. The AHRC, which funded the research from 2006 to 2009, described the impact of the Bristol project as "dramatic". In the AHRC's judgment, it not only improved institutional processes but actually reduced the probability of torture taking place around the world.
The European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC), led by Leach, has combined research and litigation over ten years, to achieve access to justice for individuals in the former Soviet Union. It has mentored and trained lawyers and non-governmental organisations; raised awareness about human rights violations; and improved the functioning of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Impact on public policy is evidenced by: (i) justice for individuals; (ii) compensation secured through the ECtHR; and (iii) consequential changes in national law and policy. To date, EHRAC's impact includes 98 ECtHR judgments against Russia, Georgia and Ukraine, on behalf of 1,100 victims.
The research:
1.1 was used in EU negotiations on EU Directives on procedural rights for suspects and defendants as the `leading study in the field' to address deficiencies in existing mechanisms;
1.2 informed the training of more than 250 judges, prosecutors and lawyers from at least 23 EU member states regarding respect for and implementation of procedural rights;
1.3 provided a template used by NGOs in other regions in their investigations of procedural rights in practice; these include a consortium of NGOs in six Latin America countries who are using it in order to produce positive changes in regulation and practice.
This case study describes the impact of the work conducted by the Centre for American Legal Studies (CALS) relating to capital punishment and the death penalty. The impacts which will be identified, explained and evidenced in this document are as follows:
Non-territorial cultural autonomy (NTCA) is viewed as a means of ensuring peace between minorities and majorities, and protecting minority rights. University of Glasgow research into the historical application of NTCA within Central and Eastern Europe and its potential to provide a multicultural template for modern politics continues to influence the debate around cultural autonomy in Europe. The research findings have influenced the European Centre for Minority Issues in Germany, national governments, political parties and national minority representatives in the UK, Romania, Armenia, Hungary, Croatia and Slovenia, the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
This case study focuses on the impact on the legal and policy debate at the domestic and international level of research carried out within the Centre for Research in Law (CRiL) on the legal protection of fundamental rights in situations of exception.
In particular, it discusses how the research in question has:
(a) assisted NGOs in shaping their strategies;
(b) informed the debate within international organisations;
(c) contributed to raising public awareness of issues relating to respect for fundamental rights in the context of counter-terrorism.
By raising awareness of the relevant legal constraints upon States and by assisting NGOs and international organizations, the research has contributed to reinforcing the protection of the fundamental rights of individuals belonging to specific groups and, more broadly, to the strengthening of the rule of law at both the domestic and international level.
Professor Hodgson's empirical criminal justice research has resulted in the creation of new professional standards encouraging proactive defence lawyering and quality assessment requirements for the legal profession in England and Wales. A model of more effective defence rights, underpinned by empirical research in English, Welsh and French criminal justice, has also influenced recent developments in Scotland and in EU criminal justice; has been relied upon in extradition proceedings in the UK and Canada; and, through a study at the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), has improved legal representation of those seeking to have their cases reviewed for appeal, as well as the Commission's ability to work with defence lawyers.
Comparative legal and penological research conducted by Professor Dirk van Zyl Smit (DvZS) and Dr Róisín Mulgrew (RM) has had a significant effect internationally and nationally in shaping law and policy relating to the implementation of imprisonment in general, and on life imprisonment, sanctions for young offenders and the transfer and treatment of foreign and international prisoners in particular. This research has underpinned the creation and development of penal law and policy in states (e.g. Bangladesh and Malaysia), international and regional organisations (e.g, European Union, Council of Europe, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime), as well as in the judgments and policies of international and regional human rights and criminal courts and tribunals (e.g. European Court of Human Rights and the International Criminal Court).
Professor Patricia Lundy's research, which began in 2005 and continues today, has:
1) Directly led to the Minister of Justice commissioning HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) to investigate the Police Service of Northern Ireland's Historical Enquiries Team (PSNI/HET).
2) Directly led to the Northern Ireland Policing Board (NIPB) holding the PSNI to account; and a reassessment of the Board's own procedures.
3) Directly led to the resignation of HET's Director and Deputy Director, suspension of all military case-reviews, complete overhaul of HET, and policy changes in how PSNI/HET investigates historic crimes.
4) Directly led to Committee of Ministers holding the UK government to account with regards to fulfilment of its obligations deriving from European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) judgements and HET Article-2 compliance.
5) Directly led to reopening inquests, legal proceedings and informing stakeholders.
6) Directly created critical public debate about the future of the HET and policy more generally around addressing the legacy of NI conflict.
This case study focuses on the right to assemble and to protest through International human rights' law. It has impacted upon judicial rulings of human rights' compliant approaches to monitoring and policing peaceful protest. Sustained research with the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe's Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) has increased national and international understandings of and respect for one of the fundamental human freedoms through the development of the Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly (Jarman et al. 2010). These guidelines are increasingly recognised as international soft law standards and they have been used by international and national human rights' organisations throughout eastern Europe and the south Caucasus including the United Nations. The beneficiaries of this research impact are governments and NGOs working across eastern Europe, the south Caucasus and central Asia. They include Amnesty International, Human Rights' Watch, Helsinki Foundation and the International Foundation for Human Rights (FIDH).