Skip to content
dhilipsiva.
the rights nobody has to earn · book 1
← ContentsMarkdownManuscript source

Works Cited

Every work the book's notes cite, in alphabetical order, with the places that cite it. The notes themselves give the pinpoint, and say what was read where only an abstract or a description could be checked; the figures the arguments use are also recorded, with their sources, in the book's evidence registry.

A

  • The Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 (No. 18 of 2016), section 7. Cited in Chapters 1 and 4.
  • Ran Abramitzky, Lessons from the Kibbutz on the Equality–Incentives Trade-Off, Journal of Economic Perspectives 25(1), pp. 185–208 (2011), especially p. 186 for the 268 communities and pp. 192–200 for incentives, selection and exit; author copy. Cited in Chapter 29.
  • Bruce Ackerman, "The Emergency Constitution", Yale Law Journal 113 (2004), 1029–1091, at 1047–1049. Cited in Chapter 20.
  • Additional District Magistrate, Jabalpur v. S. S. Shukla, Supreme Court of India, 28 April 1976, (1976) 2 SCC 521, majority order; Indian Kanoon. Cited in Chapter 21; Part III's opening case.
  • The American Statistical Association's statement on significance and p-values (7 March 2016), p. 2, principles 3 and 5. Cited in Chapter 29.
  • Elizabeth Anderson, Private Government (2017), lecture 2. Cited in Chapter 29.
  • Elizabeth S. Anderson, “What Is the Point of Equality?”, Ethics 109 (1999), 287–337, at 289, 316 and 318. Cited in Chapter 29.
  • Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act 2022 (c. 22), ss. 1, 2 and 5(1). Cited in Chapter 13.
  • Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja, Civil Appeal No. 5387 of 2014, Supreme Court of India, judgment of 7 May 2014, (2014) 7 SCC 547, paras 54 and 77, in the Indian Kanoon text, which is unofficial. Cited in Chapter 13.
  • The Animal Welfare Board of India v. Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 23 of 2016, Supreme Court of India, Constitution Bench, judgment of 18 May 2023, 2023 INSC 548, paras 37 and 40, official copy. Cited in Chapter 13.
  • Krzysztof R. Apt, Howard A. Blair and Adrian Walker, “Towards a Theory of Declarative Knowledge”, in Foundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming (1988), 89–148. Cited in the method.
  • Article 30(3) of the Fundamental Law. Cited in Chapter 12.

B

  • Bank WIR's institutional history. Cited in Chapter 29.
  • Aharon Barak, Proportionality: Constitutional Rights and their Limitations, trans. Doron Kalir (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), doi:10.1017/CBO9781139035293, Part III, chapters "Proper purpose", "Rational connection", "Necessity" and "Proportionality stricto sensu (balancing)", pp. 245–370. Cited in Chapter 8.
  • Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, Article 20a (official English translation; the German text is authoritative). Cited in Chapter 12.
  • Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, Article 67. Cited in Chapter 17.
  • Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, Article 79(3), official English translation. Cited in Chapter 22.
  • Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, arts 109(3), 115(2) and 143d(1), as amended by the Act of 29 July 2009, BGBl. I p. 2248, official English translation. Cited in Chapter 10.
  • Manudeep Bhuller, Gordon B. Dahl, Katrine V. Løken and Magne Mogstad, "Incarceration, Recidivism, and Employment", Journal of Political Economy 128(4) (2020), 1269–1324. Cited in Chapters 27 and 29.
  • David Bilchitz, Poverty and Fundamental Rights (Oxford University Press, 2007), the chapters on the reasonableness approach and on the minimum core. Mazibuko, para. 57 and note 46, cites him as urging the approach that court declined. Cited in Chapter 6.
  • Jonathan Birch, Charlotte Burn, Alexandra Schnell, Heather Browning and Andrew Crump, Review of the Evidence of Sentience in Cephalopod Molluscs and Decapod Crustaceans (LSE Consulting, November 2021), commissioned for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, pp. 7–8; on the uneven evidence across groups, pp. 6 and 8–9. Cited in Chapter 13.
  • Bundesverfassungsgericht, First Senate, judgment of 5 November 2019, 1 BvL 7/16, BVerfGE 152, 68, headnotes and paras 150, 158–159, 189 and 201, in the Court's abridged English translation. Cited in Chapter 9.
  • Bundesverfassungsgericht, First Senate, judgment of 9 February 2010, 1 BvL 1/09, BVerfGE 125, 175, headnotes and paras 134–135, in the Court's English translation. Cited in Chapter 9.
  • Bundesverfassungsgericht, Order of the First Senate of 24 March 2021, 1 BvR 2656/18 and others (Climate Change), official English translation, headnote 4 and paras 109, 146, 183 and 192–194. Cited in Chapter 12.

C

D

  • Angela Y. Davis, Are Prisons Obsolete? (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2003), the "Abolitionist Alternatives" material, read in the publisher-authorised excerpt (Bookforum, 23 June 2020). Cited in Chapter 27.
  • DeGraffenreid v. General Motors, 413 F. Supp. 142 (E.D. Mo. 1976), discussed at 141. Cited in Chapter 11.
  • Dorothy E. Denning, “A Lattice Model of Secure Information Flow”, Communications of the ACM 19(5) (1976), 236–243. Cited in the method.
  • Die Verfassung des Deutschen Reichs ("Weimarer Reichsverfassung") of 11 August 1919, Reichsgesetzblatt 1919, p. 1383, Article 48(2)–(3); German text at documentArchiv.de. Cited in Chapter 20.
  • Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law, OJ L 305, 26.11.2019, p. 17, Article 21(5), with its rationale in recital 93. Cited in Chapter 16.
  • Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, OJ L 276, 20.10.2010, p. 33, Articles 1(3) and 4, consolidated text of 26 June 2019. Cited in Chapter 13.
  • District Court of The Hague, 5 February 2020, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2020:865 (English translation ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2020:1878), paras 6.77, 6.86, 6.95 and 7.2. Cited in Chapter 2.
  • Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka, Zoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal Rights (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), chapters 2 and 5–7. Cited in Chapter 13.
  • Jean Drèze and Amartya Sen, Hunger and Public Action (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), chapters 5, 7 and 13; doi:10.1093/0198283652.001.0001. Cited in Chapter 5.
  • Drèze, Khalid, Khera and Somanchi, Aadhaar and Food Security in Jharkhand: Pain without Gain? Economic and Political Weekly 52(50), pp. 50–60 (16 December 2017), p. 58, “Postscript”, on the order of 27 March 2017 and the cancellations that followed. Cited in Chapters 4 and 29; the opening note.
  • Katja Drinhausen and Vincent Brussee, China's Social Credit System in 2021: From fragmentation towards integration, MERICS China Monitor (3 March 2021, updated 9 May 2022), key findings. Cited in Chapter 19.
  • Peter Dwyer (project lead), Final Findings Report: The Welfare Conditionality Project 2013–2018 (University of York, June 2018), pp. 4 and 23. Cited in Chapter 9.

E

  • Economic Policy Institute, CEO Pay (15 September 2026), Figure A, Table 1 and their. Cited in Chapter 29.
  • Asbjørn Eide, Report on the right to adequate food as a human right, E/CN.4/Sub.2/1987/23 (7 July 1987), paras 66–69 and 112–115, where fulfilment is the last level; the updated study, E/CN.4/Sub.2/1999/12 (28 June 1999), paras 52–53. Cited in Chapters 3 and 6.
  • Zachary Elkins, Tom Ginsburg and James Melton, The Endurance of National Constitutions (Cambridge University Press, 2009), chapters 5 and 7. Cited in Chapter 22.
  • Jon Elster, Solomonic Judgements: Studies in the Limitations of Rationality (Cambridge University Press and Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l'Homme, 1989); the argument was read in its lecture version, "Taming Chance: Randomization in Individual and Social Decisions", The Tanner Lectures on Human Values IX (1988), 105–179, at 109 and 162–164, tannerlectures.org. Cited in Chapter 5.
  • Ezekiel J. Emanuel et al., "Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of Covid-19", New England Journal of Medicine 382(21) (2020), 2049–2055, doi:10.1056/NEJMsb2005114, Recommendations 1–3. Cited in Chapter 5.
  • Ethics & Compliance Initiative, The State of Ethics & Compliance in the Workplace: A Look at Global Trends (2021 Global Business Ethics Survey report, March 2021), pp. 22–23. Cited in Chapter 16.
  • Virginia Eubanks, Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor (New York: St. Martin's Press, 2018). Cited in Chapter 2.
  • European Court of Human Rights (Grand Chamber), Hirst v. the United Kingdom (No. 2), application no. 74025/01, judgment of 6 October 2005, § 82 and operative point 1. Cited in Chapter 18.

F

  • Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation of 18 April 1999 (SR 101), arts 174, 175 and 177(1), English translation as at 3 March 2024, which has no legal force. Cited in Chapter 17.
  • Federal Constitutional Court (Second Senate), judgment of 15 November 2023, 2 BvF 1/22, Second Supplementary Budget Act 2021, operative part and paras 188–208, 222 and 230, English translation, which is abridged. Cited in Chapter 10.
  • Richard W. Franke, Local Planning: The Kerala Experiment (2008), author-copy p. 1 for the 35% development-budget share and pp. 3–4 for training. Cited in Chapter 29.

G

H

  • J. F. C. Harrison, Robert Owen and the Owenites in Britain and America (1969; linked reprint 1994). Cited in Chapter 29.
  • Mireille Hildebrandt, Law for Computer Scientists and Other Folk (Oxford University Press, 2020), chapter 10. Cited in the method.
  • Hoge Raad der Nederlanden, State of the Netherlands v. Stichting Urgenda, No. 19/00135, 20 December 2019, ECLI:NL:HR:2019:2007 (unofficial English translation; the Dutch text, ECLI:NL:HR:2019:2006, is authentic), paras 5.2.2, 5.3.2, 5.7.1–5.8 and 8.2.7. Cited in Chapter 12.
  • Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Supreme Court of India, 12 February 1979, (1980) 1 SCC 81, [1979] 3 SCR 169, at 173; Indian Kanoon. Cited in Chapters 25, 26, 27 and 28; Part IV's opening case.

I

J

K

  • Kangas, Jauhiainen, Simanainen and Ylikännö (eds.), Suomen perustulokokeilun arviointi, Ministry of Social Affairs and Health 2020:15, urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-00-9890-2, the official evaluation of the experiment's effects on wellbeing and employment. Cited in Chapter 3.
  • Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v. State of Kerala, Supreme Court of India, 24 April 1973, (1973) 4 SCC 225, Khanna J. at para 1599(vii) in the Indian Kanoon numbering. Cited in Chapter 22.
  • Christine M. Korsgaard, Fellow Creatures: Our Obligations to the Other Animals (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018), Part Two. Cited in Chapter 13.
  • Lily Kuo, "China bans 23m from buying travel tickets as part of 'social credit' system", The Guardian, 1 March 2019, citing the National Public Credit Information Centre. Cited in Chapter 19.
  • Will Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), chapter 3, "Individual Rights and Collective Rights", pp. 34-48 in the online edition, doi:10.1093/0198290918.001.0001. Cited in Chapter 15.

L

M

N

O

  • Office of the Parliamentary Commissioners of Hungary, Comprehensive Summary of the Report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Future Generations of Hungary 2008–2009 (Budapest, 2010), p. 6, the office's own account. Cited in Chapter 12.
  • Chile, Constitución Política, art. 14, as replaced by Ley 21.773 (Diario Oficial, 7 October 2025) and applying from 2026 under transitional provision 54, bcn.cl. Cited in Chapter 15.
  • Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, UN General Assembly resolution 57/199 of 18 December 2002, annex, UN Doc. A/RES/57/199, Articles 3, 17–20, 21(1), 22 and 24; in force 22 June 2006, 2375 UNTS 237. Cited in Chapter 28.
  • Elinor Ostrom, Governing the Commons (1990), chapter 3. Cited in Chapter 29.

P

  • Parlementaire ondervragingscommissie Kinderopvangtoeslag, Ongekend onrecht, Kamerstukken II 2020/21, 35 510, nr. 2, covering letter of 17 December 2020. Cited in Part II's opening case.
  • Govind Persad, Alan Wertheimer and Ezekiel J. Emanuel, "Principles for allocation of scarce medical interventions", The Lancet 373(9661) (2009), 423–431, doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60137-9, section "The complete lives system". Cited in Chapter 5.
  • Philip Pettit, On the People's Terms: A Republican Theory and Model of Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), chapters 3–5, doi:10.1017/CBO9781139017428. Cited in Chapters 7 and 29.
  • Philip Pettit, Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), chapter 1, "Before Negative and Positive Liberty", and chapter 2, "Liberty as Non-Domination", doi:10.1093/0198296428.001.0001. Cited in Chapters 7 and 29.
  • Frank Podmore, Robert Owen: A Biography, vol. II (1907), pp. 406–407 and 410–411. Cited in Chapter 29.
  • John Pratt, "Part II: Does Scandinavian Exceptionalism Have a Future?", British Journal of Criminology 48(3) (2008), 275–292, doi:10.1093/bjc/azm073. Cited in Chapter 26.
  • John Pratt, "Scandinavian Exceptionalism in an Era of Penal Excess: Part I: The Nature and Roots of Scandinavian Exceptionalism", British Journal of Criminology 48(2) (2008), 119–137, doi:10.1093/bjc/azm072. Cited in Chapters 26 and 29.

R

  • K. Sabeel Rahman, "The New Utilities: Private Power, Social Infrastructure, and the Revival of the Public Utility Concept", Cardozo Law Review 39(5) (2018), 1621–1689, at 1626 and 1659–1661, larc.cardozo.yu.edu. Cited in Chapters 10 and 29.
  • Kate Raworth, Doughnut Economics (2017). Cited in Chapter 29.
  • Reference re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 SCR 217, paras 84, 86, 88 and 155: secession requires a constitutional amendment, which requires negotiation, and a clear majority on a clear question would oblige every party to negotiate. Cited in Chapter 17.
  • Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of 14 September 2022 on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector (Digital Markets Act), OJ L 265, 12 October 2022, p. 1, recital 5 and arts 3(1)–(5) and 3(8), data.europa.eu. Cited in Chapter 10.
  • Johan Rockström et al., "A safe operating space for humanity", Nature 461 (2009): 472–475, doi:10.1038/461472a; the nine boundaries, seven quantified and three transgressed, as stated in the abstract of the open-access companion article in Ecology and Society 14, no. 2 (2009), art. 32. Cited in Chapters 12 and 29.
  • Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme, Report (7 July 2023), vol. 1, pp. xxvi–xxix. Cited in Chapter 2.
  • Yaniv Roznai, Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments: The Limits of Amendment Powers (Oxford University Press, 2017). Cited in Chapter 22.
  • W. M. S. Russell and R. L. Burch, The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique (London: Methuen, 1959), chapter 4, "The Removal of Inhumanity: The Three R's", in the online special edition, which omits the original page numbers. Cited in Chapter 13.

S

  • Charles F. Sabel and William H. Simon, "Destabilization Rights: How Public Law Litigation Succeeds", Harvard Law Review 117 (2004), 1016–1101, at 1016 and 1100–1101. Cited in Chapter 6.
  • Amartya Sen, Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981), chapter 6, on the 1943 Bengal famine, with chapters 1 and 5; doi:10.1093/0198284632.001.0001. Cited in Chapter 5.
  • M. J. Sergot, F. Sadri, R. A. Kowalski, F. Kriwaczek, P. Hammond and H. T. Cory, “The British Nationality Act as a Logic Program”, Communications of the ACM 29(5) (1986), 370–386, at 379 and 381–382. Cited in the method.
  • Ayelet Shachar, Multicultural Jurisdictions: Cultural Differences and Women's Rights (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), doi:10.1017/CBO9780511490330, on the "paradox of multicultural vulnerability"; the book's abstract was checked. Cited in Chapter 15.
  • Henry Shue, Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign Policy (1980; 2nd ed. 1996; 40th anniversary ed. 2020), chapter 1, "Security and Subsistence", and chapter 2, "Correlative Duties". Cited in Chapter 3.
  • Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, annex to the UN Commission on Human Rights document E/CN.4/1985/4 (28 September 1984), annex paras 10–12. Cited in Chapter 8.
  • Nicholas Stern, The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), Summary of Conclusions; 2006 HM Treasury web edition, ch. 2A, pp. 45–47. Cited in Chapter 12.
  • James Stodder, Complementary Credit Networks and Macroeconomic Stability: Switzerland's Wirtschaftsring Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 72(1), pp. 79–95 (2009), abstract, also distributed through RePEc. Cited in Chapter 29.
  • Heather Strang, Lawrence W. Sherman, Evan Mayo-Wilson, Daniel Woods and Barak Ariel, "Restorative Justice Conferencing (RJC) Using Face-to-Face Meetings of Offenders and Victims: Effects on Offender Recidivism and Victim Satisfaction. A Systematic Review", Campbell Systematic Reviews 9(1) (2013), 2013:12, executive summary, pp. 4–5, doi:10.4073/csr.2013.12. Cited in Chapter 21.
  • Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023), decided with the University of North Carolina case, opinion of Roberts C.J. for six Justices, slip op. at 39–40 and 6 n. 2, supremecourt.gov. Cited in Chapter 11.
  • Supreme Court of Canada, Sauvé v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer), 2002 SCC 68, [2002] 3 S.C.R. 519, 31 October 2002, per McLachlin C.J. for five judges, paras 62 and 64. Cited in Chapter 18.
  • Supreme Court of India, Auroville Foundation v. Natasha Storey, Civil Appeal 13651 of 2024, judgment of 17 March 2025, especially paragraphs 12–17, pp. 23–29: consultation on the master plan and the Board's authority over implementation committees are distinct. Cited in Chapter 29.
  • Supreme Court of India, Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Another v. Union of India and Others, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 494 of 2012, judgment of 24 August 2017, Order of the Court, paras. 1–2. Cited in Chapter 7.
  • Supreme Court of India, People's Union for Civil Liberties v Union of India, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 196 of 2001, interim order of 28 November 2001, direction 10, and order of 8 May 2002, direction (f), as reproduced in Right to Food Campaign, Supreme Court Orders on the Right to Food: A Tool for Action (October 2005), pp. 43–45 and 46. Cited in Chapters 4 and 6.
  • Supreme Court of India, Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, judgment of 16 October 2015, [2015] 13 SCR 1, Order of the Court at pp. 1055-1056 and headnote to Khehar J at pp. 17-18; official report. Cited in Chapter 17.

T

U

  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, "OCR Reaches Early Case Resolution With Alabama After It Removes Discriminatory Ventilator Triaging Guidelines", press release, 8 April 2020, hhs.gov. Cited in Chapter 5.
  • Uber BV v Aslam [2021] UKSC 5, paras 69–71, 76 and 87 (Lord Leggatt, for the court). Cited in Chapter 9.
  • UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 12: The right to adequate food, E/C.12/1999/5 (12 May 1999), para. 15, and footnote 1, which credits the three levels to the published form of Eide's study. Cited in Chapter 3.
  • UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 14: The right to the highest attainable standard of health, E/C.12/2000/4 (11 August 2000), para. 12. Cited in Chapter 3.
  • UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 3: The nature of States parties' obligations (fifth session, 1990), in E/1991/23, annex III, para. 10. Cited in Chapters 3 and 6.
  • UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment 4: The right to adequate housing (sixth session, 1991), in the compilation HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 (Vol. I), paras 7–8, pp. 12–13: housing is more than "merely having a roof over one's head", and paragraph 8 lists seven aspects of adequacy. Cited in Chapter 3.
  • UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, General comment No. 1 (2014): Article 12: Equal recognition before the law, CRPD/C/GC/1 (19 May 2014), paras 3, 17, 21 and 28. Cited in Chapter 14.
  • UN General Assembly resolution 48/134, "National institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights", 20 December 1993, UN Doc. A/RES/48/134, annex, "Competence and responsibilities" para. 2 and "Composition and guarantees of independence and pluralism" paras 1–3. Cited in Chapter 28.
  • Uniform Law Commission, Collateral Consequences of Conviction Act (last amended 2010; redesignated a model act in 2022), ss. 4–8 and 10–11. Cited in Chapter 24.
  • United Nations General Assembly, Resolution 70/175, United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules), adopted 17 December 2015, A/RES/70/175 (distributed 8 January 2016), annex, rules 1 and 3, p. 8; the phrase on good principles and practice is preliminary observation 1, p. 7, which also says the rules describe no model system of prisons. Cited in Chapter 25.
  • United Nations, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 4, read in the treaty text hosted by the UN human rights office. Cited in Chapter 20.

V

W

Y

dhilipsiva · prose CC BY 4.0MarkdownSources & licencesAgent index