English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The purpose of international human rights law is to protect basic individual   rights and provide to the victims of violations legal remedies against the   authors of the abuses. One major difficulty faced in this context originates   in the limiting clauses that states insert in international conventions. This   paper looks at their compatibility with human rights agreements, in the view   of strengthening the legal avenues open to the victims and the possibility   for them to obtain redress. The crucial position of human rights at the core   of the notion of international public order conditions the approach to adopt   in relation to most issues that touch upon the scope and substance of   protected rights, including withdrawal from treaties, reservations, implied   limitations, overtly broad or inappropriate restrictions, misguided   interpretations and failure to apply the relevant provisions. It is put   forward that limiting clauses should be narrowly construed and most   restrictions discarded altogether

Victims of human rights violations and victims of human rights restrictions