Read On! Law and Rights: Global Perspectives on Constitutionalism and Governance

(Read On! ... occasional posts on writing we're reading) It’s nearly Spring in North America (it IS coming), so in addition to feeling the sun and hearing the birds, we’re looking forward to a bevy of new books on global issues by women in international and comparative law. Two prominent feminist legal advocates are adding to the reading list.
Leading experts Penelope Andrews (right), Professor of Law at Valparaiso School of Law, and Susan Bazilli, (pictured in photo at bottom), Director of the International Women's Rights Project (IWRP), which is based jointly at the Centre for Global Studies, University of Victoria, Canada, and in Johannesburg, South Africa, have co-edited a new collection on constitutionalism, rights implementation, and the rule of law.
Law and Rights: Global Perspectives on Constitutionalism and Governance (Vandeplas 2009) engages current debates about “the context, substance and meaning of constitutionalism,” using both comparative and municipal approaches.

Among the authors are leading constitutional, human rights, anti-discrimination, and socio-economic rights scholars and advocates based in Australia, Canada, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States. They include, for example, Taunya Lovell Banks (right), Jacob A. France Professor of Equality Jurisprudence and the Francis & Harriet Iglehart Research Professor of Law at the University of Maryland School of Law.
According to the abstract, the contributors

analyze and interpret these issues from the perspectives of those who administer and implement constitutional mandates, such as legislators and judges. But they also examine constitutionalism from the perspectives of those who especially stand to benefit from constitutional provisions, particularly social and economic rights, and their enforcement.

Understanding and strengthening links among constitutional texts, judicial enforcement mechanisms, and on-the-ground realities is particularly crucial in this time of heightened competition over economic and social resources.
(The wonderful photo below is of women’s rights advocates at a Women's Legal Rights Program. It is from the IWRP Scrapbook. The women shown are (from left) Mmatshilo Motsei, Bete Mathabela, Sizakele Hlatshwayo, Doo Aphane, and Susan Bazilli.)

On February 28

On this day in ...
... 1859 (150 years ago today), the Arkansas legislature enacted a law that required free African Americans to leave the state or return to enslavement. Florida and Missouri legislators subsequently passed similar expulsion bills, and such legislation was seriously considered in 9 other states. Governors vetoed Florida's and Missouri's bills; as for Arkansas (in light green at left), legislators suspended its expulsion act in 1860, even though by that time most free blacks had already left."
... 1525, in what is now Mexico, Spanish troops acting under orders from conquistador Hernán Cortés executed the last leader of the Aztec Empire, Cuauhtémoc (right), by hanging. Some years earlier Cortés had ordered the torture of Cuauhtémoc in an unsuccessful effort to extract information regarding the whereabouts of Aztec riches.

Prior February 28 posts are here and here.)

Julkkiksia!

Olin kuvaamassa Luovat Palvelut nimisen yrityksen synttäribileissä. Tällaiset kuvaukset eivät ole päätuotteeni, mutta jos hyvä asiakas pyytää, niin toki menen kuvaamaan. 

Yritysjuhlien kuvaaminen on eräänlaista repparikuvaamista, jossa pitää dokumentoida hyvä tunnelma paikan päällä. Näissä bileissä oli paikalla huomattava määrä julkkiksia, joka on minulle pieni ongelma. Olen toki vuosien mittaan kuvannut monenlaista julkimoa aina Suomen presidentistä kansainvälisiin rokkistaroihin, mutta olen kovin huono seuraamaan julkkisten elämää. Tästä seuraa että en oikein tunne uusimpia julkkiksia enkä tiedä kuka on kuka.

Tämä julkkishomma on mielenkiitoinen ilmiö, sillä joillekin ihmisille nämä julkisuuden henkilöt ovat kuin toisesta maailmasta, josta esimerkkinä YLEn tiloissa sattunut pieni ja hauska välikohtaus.

Kuvasin YLEllä eläkeläisten kiertokäyntiä studiotiloissa. Kuvat tulivat YLEn arkistoon ja tämä tapahtui joskus 90-luvun alkupuolella. Menimme studiosta toiseen, kunnes tultiin uutisstudioon, jossa ihan ilmielävä Arvi Lind oli seuruetta vastassa. Siinä meinasivat mummoilta jalat mennä alta. Eräs vanha rouva sanoi vapisevalla äänellä: "saanko koskea?"

Kuvasin synttäribileissä  varmuuden vuoksi mahdollisimman kattavasti ja pyrin siten tallentamaan kaikki tärkeät ja vähemmän tärkeät vieraat. Tai ei kai siellä niitä vähemmän tärkeitä ollutkaan. 

Käytin kuvauksessa Nikon D700 kameraa, 24 - 70 mm f/2.8 ja 14 - 24 mm f/2.8 zoomeja sekä SB-800 salamaa. Salamassa minulla oli kääntösuodin, joka muuttaa salamanvalon keinovalon väriseksi.

Olisin pärjännyt hyvin pelkällä pidemmällä zoomilla, mutta aluksi ajattelin, että 14 millisellä voisin tehdä jotakin hauskoja ja dramaatisia kuvia. Koska minulla oli vain yksi runko, niin käytännössä kuvasin miltei koko illan 24 - 70 mm zoomilla, koska se on erittäin hyvä polttovälialue.

Tuo 14 - 24 mm zoomi on kyllä ihan tajuton kakkula optisesti. Piirto on erinomaista täydellä aukolla kuvan reunoille asti. Huonoa on pullistuva etulinssi, joka on esillä hieman liikaa. Ulkona kuvatessa etulinssiin tulee pisaroita aivan heti, jos vähänkin sataa. Suodatinta ei myöskään voi käyttää. Minulle tämä on tärkeää, koska joskus kiinnitän kameran autoon imukupilla ja kuvaan auton liikkuessa. Suodatin voi pelastaa, jos linssiin osuu pieni kivi tai jotain muuta.

Nikon D700 on todella miellyttävä kamera käytellä. Minulla tietenkin sormet ovat tottuneet Canoniin, mutta siltikin kuvaaminen Nikonilla oli sujuvaa. Kuvasin koko illan ISO 1600 asetuksella ja minulla ei ole pahaa sanottavaa kameran suorituskyvystä tältä osin. Tarkennus toimi hyvin, mutta erittäin hämärässä tuli muutamia hutilaukauksia. Muistikortin lokeron kansi aukesi muutaman kerran kameraotteeni seurauksena, joka oli erikoista ja ennennäkemätöntä minulle.

Kokeilen Nikonia vielä muutamissa kuvauksissa ja katsotaan sitten mihin siitä loppujen lopuksi on.

Yllä muutama otos bileistä.

Guest Blogger: Valerie Oosterveld

It is IntLawGrrls' great pleasure to welcome Valerie Oosterveld (pictured right) as a guest blogger. Valerie is Assistant Professor and Director of the International Law Internship Program at the Faculty of Law of the University of Western Ontario, where she teaches International Criminal Law, International Human Rights Law and Public International Law. Valerie received her LLB from the University of Toronto and her LLM and SJD from Columbia Law School.

Valerie's expertise in international criminal law stems from her participation as a member of the Canadian delegation to the International Criminal Court negotiations and its Assembly of States Parties. She also served in the Legal Affairs Bureau of Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, where she provided legal advice on international criminal accountability for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, especially with respect to the International Criminal Court, the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, the Sierra Leone Special Court, and other transitional justice mechanisms such as truth and reconciliation commissions. Valerie has published extensively on gender issues in international criminal law, including two articles this year, one in Human Rights Review on gender-based violence before the Special Court for Sierra Leone and one in the Canadian Yearbook of International Law on the Special Court for Sierra Leone and forced marriage, the topic of her guest blog today (related to my blog last week on the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and forced marriage).

Heartfelt welcome!

Forced marriage judgment at the Special Court for Sierra Leone

(My thanks to IntLawGrrls for inviting me to contibute this guest post.)

On Wednesday, the Special Court for Sierra Leone’s Trial Chamber I issued its judgment in what is referred to as the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) case – Prosecutor v. Issa Sesay, Morris Kallon and Augustine Gbao. The leaders and fighters of the Revolutionary United Front were infamous for committing brutal atrocities, such as sexual mutilation and amputation. Their targets were often civilians. Girls and women were often abducted by the RUF to serve as fighters, porters, cooks and “wives” to combatants. Boys and men were also abducted in large numbers to serve as fighters, spies, bodyguards and laborers.
The first accused, Issa Sesay, (pictured right) served as the Interim Leader of the RUF. The second accused, Morris Kallon, was a former RUF commander and the third accused, Augustine Gbao, was a senior RUF officer and commander. These three were originally indicted alongside Foday Sankoh, former leader of the RUF, and Sam Bockarie, former Battlefield Commander of the RUF, but both died before being brought to trial.
The Special Court’s Trial Chamber convicted all three for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Sierra Leonean conflict [Special Court Press Release is here]. Sesay and Kallon were each found guilty on 16 out of 18 counts. Gbao (pictured left) was convicted of 14 of 18 counts. All were convicted for gender-based crimes against humanity - rape, sexual slavery and inhumane acts (forced marriage) – as well as for the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity. The forced marriage convictions represent the first of their kind within an international or internationalized criminal tribunal. [In another Special Court case – that of the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council – the Appeals Chamber recognized (at paras. 175-203) that forced marriage could be considered a separate crime against humanity under the category of “other inhumane acts”, but convictions were not entered.] Here is the Prosecutor’s response to the RUF convictions:

The Court today for [the] first time in world history convicted each of these individuals of ‘forced marriage’ as a separate “crime against humanity.” In doing so, it recognizes the very deep and long lasting suffering inflicted upon women through conscription as ‘bush wives’ during the Sierra Leone conflict.

Two of the accused, Sesay and Kallon, were convicted of the war crime of “conscripting or enlisting children under the age of 15 years into armed forces or groups, or using them to participate actively in hostilities”. Gbao (pictured right) was found not guilty on this charge.
Interestingly, all of the accused were found not guilty on certain charges relating to the abduction and holding of UN peacekeepers as hostages in 2000 (though all were convicted of “intentionally directing attacks against personnel involved in a humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping mission”). It was this hostage-taking by the RUF that prompted the UN Security Council to consider asking the government of Sierra Leone and the United Nations Secretary-General to jointly create the Special Court.
Sentencing will take place in the coming weeks, likely in March. The only remaining trial of the Special Court is that of former Liberian leader Charles Taylor, taking place in The Hague.
The RUF trial judgment is not yet posted on the Special Court’s website, but once it is available, I will blog about the treatment of gender-based crimes within that judgment.

Meanwhile, Back at the ECCC . . .

This week, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia were scheduled to hear appeals from the detention orders against Ieng Thirith, the former Khmer Rouge social affairs minister and her husband Ieng Sary, the former Khmer Rouge foreign minister. On Tuesday, the Vergès defense (prior IntLawGrrls post) was in full display by Thirith, who launched into an angry tirade, telling her accusers they would be "cursed to the seventh circle of hell." Claiming her innocence, she blamed "everything" on Nuon Chea, the Khmer Rouge second-in-command, who will also be tried before the ECCC. And yesterday, Ieng Sary's appeal hearing was postponed due to ill health -- the 83-year-old complained of dizziness, fatigue, and intermittent coughing, after having been rushed to hospital Monday night for passing blood in his urine. While it may be beyond the capacity of the tribunal to ensure that those found guilty take responsibility for their crimes, here's hoping that those in charge at the ECCC do everything in their power to move forward quickly enough to try the remaining defendants while their health permits.

On February 27

On this day in ...
... 1864 (145 years ago today), the 1st captured Union troops arrived at the Confederate prison camp at Andersonville, Georgia (left). As IntLawGrrl Beth Van Schaack has posted, atrocious conditions there led to the post-Civil War war crimes trial of the camp commander, Henry Wirz.
... 1844 (165 years ago today), on the Caribbean island of Hispaniola (right), rebels seized a fortress in Santo Domingo, an event that triggered the separation of the Dominican Republic from Haiti. The date is celebrated as Dominican Independence Day.

(Prior February 27 posts are here and here.)

FAO fisheries report likely to have bad news

On March 2, the Food and Agriculture Organization will release its biennial report on the State of the World's Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA). The news is not likely to be good.

Although figures are not typically broken out by gender, it is clear that the decline in fisheries will hit the millions of women work in fisheries particularly hard. According to the FAO's 2006 SOFIA:

Women participate as entrepreneurs and by providing labour before, during and after the catch in both artisanal and commercial fisheries. Their labour often consists of making and mending nets, baskets and pots and baiting hooks. In fishing, women are rarely engaged in commercial offshore and deep-sea waters, but more commonly involved in fishing from small boats and canoes in coastal or inland waters – harvesting bivalves, molluscs and pearls, collecting seaweed and setting nets or traps. Women also play an important role in aquaculture, where they attend to fish ponds, feed and harvest fish, and collect prawn larvae and fish fingerlings. However, women’s most important role in both artisanal and industrial fisheries is at the processing and marketing stages. In some countries, women have become important entrepreneurs in fish processing; in fact, most fish processing is performed by women, either in their own cottage-level industries or as wage labourers in the large-scale processing industry.

Overfishing has already put fisheries around the world under terrible pressure. Climate change is likely to further decimate fish stocks.

Along with diminishing wetlands, mangrove swamps and other nursery areas, and pollution, climate change and overfishing make food insecurity more likely for the 2.6 billion people dependent on fish as a primary source of protein. (map credit)

The affected people tend to be clustered in many of the same countries with the highest levels of food insecurity to begin with. As a result, these countries already start off less resilient to social and environmental challenges. This is just one of the many environmental justice issues we can expect to confront as the effects of global warming multiply.

It was gratifying that President Obama called for carbon trading in his Address to Congress. But, when markets cannot manage to accurately value and trade financial instruments, it is hard to imagine how they will be able to value carbon, with all its many unquantifiable effects.

On February 26

On this day in ...
... 1957, "one the greatest athletes in American sporting history," Connie Carpenter-Phinney (left), was born in Madison, Wisconsin. The winner of many national and international cycling championships, she won gold in Los Angeles "in the 1984 Olympic road race, the first ever for women." A dozen years earlier, at age 15, she speed-skated for the U.S. team in the Olympics at Sapporo, Japan. She's the 1st woman to have competed in both Summer and Winter Olympic Games. (photo credit)
... 1984 (25 years ago today), approximately 1,000 U.S. Marines left Beirut, Lebanon, thus bringing to an end American military presence in the city. The withdrawal came several months after a bomb blast killed hundreds of U.S.and French servicemembers.

(Prior February 20 posts are here and here.)

OECD National Contact Points

In August 2008 the United Kingdom’s National Contact Point (NCP) for the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (OECD Guidelines) issued its Final Statement in Global Witness v. Afrimex Ltd. This case was the topic of a recent ASIL Insight (much of which is summarized here), describing the background on the case, the basic outlines of the NCP’s decision and its potential implications. The NCP found Afrimex had failed to abide by the OECD Guidelines and, more specifically, had failed to respect the human rights of the populations most affected by their activities, had failed to contribute to the economic, social and environmental progress of its host location, had not worked to encourage its business partners and suppliers to apply rules like the Guidelines, and had failed to exercise sufficient due diligence in its supply chain, as evidenced by Afrimex’s use of child and forced labor. The NCP made a number of recommendations, including that Afrimex adopt a corporate code of conduct, make use of the OECD’s Risk Awareness Tool and exercise it influence over contracting parties to ensure that their supply chain is free of child and forced labor.

Among the notable features of the NCPs decision is the reference it makes to the recent report of the UN SRSG on the issue of Business and Human Rights (SRSG Report), about which Naomi Norberg and I have previously blogged here and here. The decision uses the report as an indicator of the kinds of due diligence Afrimex might undertake in order to include human rights concerns in its policies and operations. This is important in two respects. First, and obviously, because it is another example of the spaces in which the Report is having an influence. Perhaps more important is the attention the combined punch of the Report and the Afrimex decision will bring to NCPs as access points for communities aggrieved by corporations that are failing to respect human rights.

NCPs have been used more than might be known. According to an October OECD document (available here), since NCPs were established by a June 2000 OECD Council Decision, well over 100 “Specific Instances” (complaints) have been considered by NCPs in 28 countries. The decisions – or Final Statements – of the NCPs are similarly under-reported and relatively unknown. The SRSG Report has identified the potential of NCPs, if they are made more robust (and, presumably, if their work is better known), to serve as non-judicial or quasi-judicial points of access to remedies. Through the Afrimex case, Global Witness (which has advised various aspects of the SRSG’s work) has demonstrated how NCP Specific Instances and Final Statements might be used as another source of light for illuminating the misdeeds of companies like Afrimex.

On February 25

On this day in ...
... 1896, the 1st edition of a bimonthly periodical entitled Le Féminisme Chrétien (Christian Feminism) , appeared in France. The journal aimed "to disseminate feminist ideas in Christian milieus and Christian ideas in feminist milieus." The publisher was Marie Maugeret (1844-1928), who founded the Société des féministes chrétiennes the same year. Soon after, claiming the mantle of patriotism, she would agitate against Alfred Dreyfus, a military officer of Jewish heritage who was condemned to solitary confinement at the Devil's Island penal colony after being wrongly convicted of espionage in a trial tainted by anti-Semitism. (credit for caricature from a different journal, depicting Dreyfus as a serpentine traitor)
... 1885, expanding its colonization efforts in East Africa, Germany "annexed" Tanganyika and Zanzibar, in the area now comprising the country at right, Tanzania. (map credit)
... 1944 (65 years ago today), U.S. Rep. Suzanna Kosmas (D-Fla.), elected to Congress last November, was born in Washington, D.C.

(Prior February 25 posts are here and here.)

Ammattilaatua?

Nykyään objektiiveissa on hyvin korostetusti lähes jokaisella valmistajalla niin sanottuja ammattikäyttöön tehtyjä sekä harrasteluun tehtyjä objektiiveja. Joskus muinoin, ehkä ennen 90-lukua tilanne oli hieman toinen, sillä objektiivit olivat ainakin mekaaniselta rakenteeltaan enemmän toistensa kaltaisia. Tuo tarkoittaa, että ne olivat keskimäärin parempia kuin tänä päivänä. Tai ainakin tasalaatuisempia keskenään mekaaniselta rakenteeltaan.

Automaattitarkennus toi mukanaan muovista tehtyjä objektiiveja. Muistan, kun ensimmäiset Nikonin automaattitarkenteiset kakkulat tulivat markkinoille. Ne olivat aivan hirveitä muovitötteröitä, joita oli käsin todella hankala tarkennella. Esim. Nikonin legendaarisen metallirunkoisen 180 mm f/2.8 ED objektiivin automaattitarkenteinen seuraaja oli mustan muovipurkin näköinen ja myös tuntui siltä.

No, nykyään saa laatua, jos niin haluaa. Mutta mitä, jos esim. Canonin käyttäjä ei halua kaikista isointa, kalleinta ja painavinta objektiivia? Mitä, jos kuvaaja haluaa laadukkaan pienikokoisen objektiivin? Esimerkiksi 35 mm f/2, joka on mitä parhain kompromissi suhteellisen hyvän valovoiman ja pienen koon väliltä. 

Mainittu 35 millinen Canonin valikoimasta on optisesti melkoisen hyvä, kevyt ja pieni. Lähes täydellinen vaikkapa paljon reissaavalle kuvaajalle, joka ei halua kantaa liian painavaa laukkua. Tämän objektiivin ongelmana on juuri tuo muovinen rakenne, joka toisaalta varmaan kyllä auttaa pitämään painon kurissa.

Saksan karnevaaleja kuvatessani minulla oli toisessa rungossa juuri tuo mainittu 35 millinen kiinni. Ryysis oli aivan hirveä ja ihmiset tönivät toisiaan, kun liikkuivat. Minäkin sain osani tönimisestä ja niin sai kamerakin. Vastavalosuoja tippui maahan tai niin ensiksi luulin. Vv-suojan mukana tippui objektiivin etuosasta muovinen rengas, joka pitää muutamaa muuta osaa paikoillaan. Onneksi enempää tavaraa ei pudonnut ja onnistuin keräämään kaikki muovinpalat talteen.

Irronneseen muoviosaan kiinnittyy vv-suoja ja koska vv-suoja sai pienen tällin, niin koko muovirengas irtosi. Mielestäni todella helposti. Tämä olkoon esimerkkinä siitä, että työkalut pitää olla tehtävän mukaiset. Sääli, sillä pidän todella Canonin 35 mm f/2 objektiivista.

New and Noteworthy---Flames Beyond Gettysburg

Flames Beyond Gettysburg: The Gordon Expedition, June 1863, Scott Mingus, Ironclad Publishing, maps, illustrations, $24.95

Flames Beyond Gettysburg: The Gordon Expedition, June 1863 describes the significant expedition and raid by a mixed force of Confederate infantry, artillery, and cavalry with the goal of capturing Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Newly promoted Brig. Gen. John B. Gordon led roughly 1,500 Southern soldiers on a mission to seize a vital bridge crossing over the Susquehanna River between Wrightsville and Columbia, Pennsylvania. The capture of this bridge, which carried both trains and foot traffic, was crucial for the advance of Maj. Gen. Jubal A. Early's division into Lancaster County. Additionally, the capture and ransom of very prosperous York, Pennsylvania, along with the destruction of important railroad bridges and the critical Hanover Junction rail yard further isolated Washington, D.C. In conducting this mission, Gordon and his men became the first Confederates to occupy Gettysburg the week before the battle.

Flames Beyond Gettysburg is a very detailed and accurate account of the Gordon Expedition and the Pennsylvania emergency militiamen and civilians who resisted the invasion. Like others books in Ironclad Publishing's "Discovering Civil War America" series, Volume 5 features detailed driving tours of sites associated with the Gordon mission, such as the Rebels' route from Maryland, the June 26, 1863 skirmishing at Gettysburg's Witmer Farm, CSA Lt. Col. Elijah V. White's cavalry raid on Hanover Junction, Gordon's triumphal march through York, and the crucial burning of the Columbia-Wrightsville Bridge by Federal troops.

Text Source: CWL edited and added content found at author's website. Also, there is a wonderful online picture gallery that accompanies the book.

Ironclad Publishing now has seven volumns in its Discovering Civil War America Series.

Sigman pikselitirkistelyä

Sigma 50 mm f/1.4 DG HSM on mielestäni hyvä objektiivi ja erittäin mukava käyttää. Edellistä juttuani kommentoinut Anonyymi kertoi, että vastavalosuoja kuuluu objektiivin hintaan mukaan, joka on ilman muuta hyvä uutinen.

Täällä on muutama esimerkki 100 % osasuurennoksineen. Näistä voi päätellä jotakin Sigman paremmuudesta. Parasta antia on hyvä terävyys ja nopea tarkennus. Huonointa on aberraatiot ja iso koko.

Sigma maksaa ostopaikasta riippuen vajaat 400 euroa, mutta näyttää juuri nyt olevan tarjouksessa Rajalassa hintaan 359,-.

The Next Best Thing

On July 23, 2002, in the courtroom of Judge Daniel T.K. Hurley, a South Florida jury returned a $ 54.6 million verdict, encompassing punitive and compensatory damages, in favor of three Salvadoran survivors of torture. The case, Romagoza v. Garcia, was brought by the Center for Justice & Accountability on behalf of three Salvadoran refugees--Dr. Juan Romagoza, Professor Carlos Mauricio, and Neris Gonzalez (Mauricio & Gonzalez are pictured at left)--against two former ministers of defense of El Salvador: Jose Guillermo Garcia (below right) and Carlos Eugenio Vides Casanova.
The verdict heralded a major victory in the worldwide fight against impunity for human rights violations. Most significantly, the case was one of the first Alien Tort Statute cases in which defendant commanders, fully contesting the allegations and testifying in their own defense, were held liable for human rights violations exclusively under the doctrine of command responsibility.

Another case in which the plaintiffs relied solely on the doctrine of command responsibility, Ford v. Garcia, was brought in the same courtroom against the same two generals by families of the four United States churchwomen who were raped and murdered by members of the Salvadoran National Guard in 1980. In November 2000, a jury rendered a verdict in the Ford case that the generals could not be held liable for the crimes, apparently because the jury was not satisfied that the two generals had "effective control" over their subordinates. (See a prior post on the Ford case here). Both cases are the subject of a PBS film, Justice & the Generals.

The Romagoza plaintiffs managed to recover a couple hundred thousand dollars from an investment account held in Vides Casanova's name. The rest of their judgment, however, remains unexecuted as no other assets have been found. Thanks to Florida homestead laws and other legal barriers, General Garcia has never paid a penny of the judgment against him.
Garcia may not be enjoying his Florida retirement for long.

The U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, R. Alexander Acosta (right), and Anthony V. Mangione, Special Agent in Charge, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Office of Investigations, Miami Field Office (ICE), recently unsealed a two-count indictment against Garcia. Unfortunately, Garcia is not being charged with torture under 18 U.S.C. § 2340, a statutory provision enacted in the wake of the United States' ratification of the Torture Convention, but well after the civil war in El Salvador. Rather, Al Capone-style, the Indictment charges Garcia with
► using a passport procured by false statement, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546(a), and
► making a materially false statement to a federal officer, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2).

According to the press release accompanying the indictment:

The defendant used an El Salvadoran passport at Miami International Airport on July 7, 2006 in an attempt to enter the United States. The defendant had obtained the passport after falsely telling the Government of El Salvador that he had lost his previously issued passport. In fact, however, his prior passport had not been lost, but had been seized by United States immigration authorities.

In addition, the Indictment alleges that on the same day, July 7, 2006, the defendant falsely stated to United States immigration authorities at Miami International Airport that he had obtained the second El Salvadoran passport after his attorney had told him that his first passport, which had been seized by U.S. immigration authorities, had been lost by those authorities. According to the defendant, his attorney had told him that because the immigration authorities had lost the passport they had seized from him, it was permissible for him to obtain a new passport to travel to El Salvador. The Indictment alleges that the defendant knew this statement was false.

The case will be heard by U.S. District Court Judge Patricia Seitz. The charges carry maximum penalties of ten years’ imprisonment (using a passport procured by false statement) and five years’ imprisonment (making a materially false statement to a federal officer).

Go On! Future of International Criminal Justice

(Go On! is an occasional item on symposia of interest) On March 13-14, Santa Clara University School of Law will host a symposium and experts' round table to discuss "The Future of International Criminal Law." The event is free and is co-sponsored by the American Society of International Law and its ASIL-West contingent.
The symposium will featured panels on:
► The International Crimes of Terrorism;
► Complementarity and the International Criminal Court;
► Universal Jurisdiction; and
► Systemic Criminality.
It will conclude with a roundtable discussion in which panelists will explore how the international legal system may better achieve the goals of international criminal law.
Professor M. Cherif Bassiouni (right) will provide the keynote address. The symposium will feature several Int'l Law Grrls members, alumnae, and visitors, including Naomi Norberg, Luz Estella Nagle (left), and Jenny Martinez (below right). Additional participants include Linda Carter, Jordan Paust, Payam Ahkavan, Steve Vladeck, Michael Scharf, Wolfgang Kaleck, Laura Dickinson, Jamie Mayerfeld, Allison Danner, Dapo Akande, Mark Drumbl, Andre Nollkaemper, Julian Ku, Allen S. Weiner and Almudena Bernabeu along with David Sloss and me from Santa Clara. Click here for a full schedule of events.
The symposium's theme is described below:

The international criminal proceedings held in Nuremberg and Tokyo following a global war of catastrophic proportions are credited with launching the modern regime of international criminal law. After a Cold War hiatus, the international community began to build upon this revolutionary postwar legacy in significant ways. Key events are the 1994 establishment of the first ad hoc criminal tribunal, the 1998 launch of a permanent International Criminal Court in The Hague; the 1998 arrest of General Augusto Pinochet of Chile [below left] in the United Kingdom in response to an arrest warrant from Spain for him to stand trial for torture, genocide, and other international crimes over which Spain asserts universal jurisdiction; and the 1999 indictment of President Slobodan Miloševic, the first against a sitting head of state.
Notwithstanding these important developments, progress toward a more comprehensive system of international justice has not been linear or continuous.
Rather, it has featured a number of oversteps and backslides that include the failure of international troops and domestic officials to arrest key indicted war criminals from the Yugoslav war; the in absentia indictment in Belgium of high-level political figures from powerful states, which resulted in an international backlash and a contrite amendment of Belgium’s universal jurisdiction law; the failure of the East Timor Special Panels to gain jurisdiction over any defendants of real consequence as a result of Indonesian obstructionism and international neglect; and the summary execution of Saddam Hussein [below right] after a controversial trial and while important charges remained pending against him. Most important, perhaps, the tragic events of September 11, 2001, led to the creation of "legal black holes" at Guantánamo and elsewhere where pure power for a time had all but eclipsed law.
It cannot be gainsaid that international criminal law has become a regular feature of international relations and part of the repertoire of any transitional government moving from a period of repression and state terror to one in which the rule of law can take root. At the same time, international criminal law is also invoked outside of conflict zones in states with transient custody over offenders, but scant other connection to the crimes in question. Even more controversially, states have attempted to assert jurisdiction over individuals who are not in their custody and who have never stepped foot on their territories. These expansive assertions of international and extraterritorial jurisdiction are not without their detractors. In these varied contexts, international actors do not resort to international criminal law in a vacuum. Rather, choosing to implement a regime of international criminal justice
is a political choice, among other available and competing political choices. As such, it is impossible to consider international criminal law without also invoking issues of state sovereignty, national security, and the exercise of power in international relations.
Given the centrality of institutions and processes of international criminal justice to contemporary public international law and international relations, this conference brings together leading academic and practitioners to discuss cutting edge issues associated with international criminal law and its enforcement. These topics include the controversial exercise of universal jurisdiction, the principle of complementarity before the International Criminal Court, responses to collective and systemic criminal behavior, and the contested crimes of terrorism. Our perspective is expressly forward looking in an effort to anticipate where the field is going in light of its current manifestations.

We welcome your contributions to our symposium and hope to see you there! Registration is helpful, so that we have enough food.

On February 24

On this day in ...
... 1959, educator Ivy Lawrence Maynier (left) gave the 1st lecture in a series of 11 lectures. Born in 1921 in Montreal, Canada, of Trinidadian parents, she'd become, in 1945, the 1st woman of color to graduate from the University of Toronto law school -- and the 1st graduate ever to earn honors in international law. She practiced law in England and Trinidad, and then worked with the United States Information Service in Paris. Back in the West Indies, "she pursued her lifelong passion for adult education and developing courses, programs and lectures that would make university more accessible to dispossessed groups and communities...." She died in 1999. (photo credit)
... 1971, the Home Secretary announced Britain's new Immigration Bill, which would strip Commonwealth citizens of their automatic right to remain in the United Kingdom. As of the naxt New Year's Day, "Commonwealth immigrants will face the same restrictions as any other person applying to live and work in Britain"; that is," to be allowed to stay, they will have to produce a work permit relating to a specific job in a specific place." According to the BBC, "Representatives of immigrants in the UK say the new bill, designed to stem racial tensions, will serve only to increase them."

(Prior February 24 posts here and here.)

News---GNMP's Electric Map Will Not Be Plugged In Again; Now It Belongs To The Ages

Iconic Electric Map Destined For Storage, Scot Andrew Pitzer, Gettysburg Times, February 23, 2009.

The iconic Electric Map that entertained tourists for generations at Gettysburg National Military Park is destined for storage, and probably won’t be seen again for a very long time. When the new $103 million park Visitor Center opened in April 2008, the map’s plug was pulled, indefinitely. The map still sits within the former park complex, along Taneytown Road, awaiting its fate. “We were originally promised that it would be preserved and stored. Now what? I don’t know,” says Walton Jones, spokesman for the Rosensteel family that created the Electric Map. “The family’s feeling is that once it’s taken apart and divided into sections, it won’t be seen again.”

According to GNMP spokeswoman Katie Lawhon, the gigantic map will be “cut into sections” — probably three or four pieces — and moved out of the old visitor center to a storage facility. The top layer of the map is made of friable asbestos, so it will have to be removed before the map is transported elsewhere. A multi-million dollar battlefield rehab project aims to demolish the old visitor center and restore Ziegler’s Grove, where the facility presently sits. Bids for the project were sought before Christmas, but no contract has been announced. Initially, the park had hoped to begin the demolition in December 2008.

“One of the first things that the contractor will do is set up a base of operations in the old visitor center parking lot,” explains Lawhon. “The first part of the job will be to remove the map.” It is unclear, specifically, where the map will be stored. The map is 30 by 30 feet, or 900 square feet, made of plywood and affixed to a steel frame. Jones hopes that the park considers the basement of the new visitor center as a home for the map. The basement is currently occupied by the thousands of artifacts that are not on display in the museum, and it is a climate-controlled environment.

“There aren’t too many places that are large enough to accommodate it,” says Jones. The Gettysburg Foundation, the park’s management and fundraising partner, conducted a feasibility study on the map, determining its weight, removal methods, and among other details, the materials that the map is made of, according to Lawhon. The Gettysburg Times asked for a copy of the study, but the foundation has not responded to the request. “The current plan is that we may be able to use shipping containers,” Lawhon says regarding the removal process. “We could cut it into three or four strips, one per container, and then store it at one of the park’s buildings for preservation and possible future use.”

Relatives of Electric Map inventor Joseph Rosensteel had hoped his creation would remain on display, somewhere. Two years ago, the park entertained offers for the map, but there were stipulations. For example, the ownership group had to be non-profit, and located outside of the Gettysburg tourist area, because the park and foundation didn’t want the map competing against the attractions at the new visitor center. “They didn’t want the map competing against the attractions at the new visitor center,” says Jones. “I know they offered to give it away for free, but when the groups came to town to see it, they backed away.”

For decades, the map was the primary attraction at the park, delighting visitors — or according to critics, boring them — with 625 flashing Christmas bulbs that illustrated the movement of troops during the Battle of Gettysburg. But the map was never incorporated into the plans for the new Battlefield Visitor Center, a near 15-year project. When the new $103 million complex opened in April 2008 along the Baltimore Pike, the doors to the old facility closed.

The plug was pulled on the Electric Map, and it was replaced at the new visitor center by a 22-minute feature film. Sales for the movie floundered so badly at first that the Gettysburg Foundation and park insisted that they had no choice but to adjust ticket rates. The park now charges a flat fee to see the facility’s three primary attractions — the movie, Cyclorama painting and artifact museum — even though officials promised during the planning stages of the project that the museum would be free to the public. “I’m still convinced that the map is the best way to learn about everything about the Battle of Gettysburg in 20 minutes, but they disagree and I have no idea why,” says Jones.

The most recent version of the map was produced in 1962-63 by the Rosensteel family. According to GNMP Supt. John Latschar, the map generated about $777,900 annually over the past five years in gross receipts. The high point of visitation during the park’s operation of the map was in 1994, when about 465,000 attended the program. By 2007, the last full year that the map was open to the public, attendance had fallen by 45 percent to 250,000.

Text Source: Gettysburg Times, February 23, 2009

Photo Source: Baltimore Sun, Civil War Librarian Post

News---US Inspector General's Staff Quizzes GNMP Superintendent

Latschar Under Fire By Feds, Scot Andrew Pitzer, Gettysburg Times, February 21, 2009

The Inspector General’s Office is investigating Gettysburg National Military Park Superintendent John Latschar in what the veteran battlefield boss describes as “an inquiry into everything that my critics allege that I’ve done wrong over the past 15 years.” In an interview with the Gettysburg Times Friday afternoon, Latschar was confident that the investigation would result in a “complete exoneration of all these false charges that have leaked out.”

“I don’t think it’s any surprise to you or anyone else around here that people are trying to get me fired,” Latschar said. “They’ve written to the Park Service, congressmen, the Department of the Interior, everyone. All of those letters have piled up, so eventually, someone is going to look into it.”

“I believe that they’ll find there’s nothing to the allegations, and it will close this door forever,” Latschar concluded.The Inspector General’s Office is a branch of the Department of the Interior. Investigators there declined to comment Friday.

“It was a lengthy interview. They asked about everything,” said Latschar, adding that investigators returned a second time. “They had in their arsenal every single slander that has ever been printed in the newspaper or posted on a blog. They swept up the crumbs over my 15 years here.”

“Being a public figure, like any other public figure out there,” Latschar said, “people that are opposed at what we do think that the best way they can get back at me is to tarnish my name.” A cover story in The National Journal written by Edward Pound reported that the IG is looking into whether Latschar misused $8,700 in park funds to build a fence on four acres of park land, adjacent to his home.

Latschar’s wife, Terry, uses the pasture to exercise her horses under a park permit. The park’s nonprofit partner at the time, Eastern National, paid for the fence as part of what Latschar said was an annual monetary contribution. “If you write the Interior Department a letter that says John Latschar is misusing funds, they’re eventually obliged to see if there’s anything to the allegations,” Latschar said.

According to Latschar, the inquiry stems from his retirement in October 2008, when he planned to transfer to the Gettysburg Foundation and replace President Robert C. Wilburn. Federal ethics officials later advised against the move, so Latschar isn’t going anywhere. “They (the Inspector General) told me that they came here because it was an exit interview,” said Latschar. “They were closing the file.”

Investigators questioned Latschar about what he calls “street rumors.” At one time, his wife’s nephew David Deal worked at the park’s book store, operated by Eastern National. Deal and at least two other employees, according to Latschar, “were caught with their hands in the till” stealing money. They were successfully prosecuted, Latschar said. Cheryl Cline was previously the head of the reservation office at Eastern National. She later took a similar job with the Gettysburg Foundation when Eastern violated its contract with the park in 2006. Critics allege that she downloaded proprietary and credit card data from Eastern’s files — including reservation lists and customer information — and gave it to the foundation. Eastern threatened legal action to keep the data, Latschar said, but nothing transpired.

“Eastern tried to sue Cheryl for giving this so-called proprietary information to the foundation, when in essence, it was the park’s information all along, and we gave it to the foundation,” said Latschar. A spokesperson at the Inspector General’s office said Friday that questions about the investigation are being handled by the National Park Service Public Affairs Office in Washington, D.C. “My understanding is that the Inspector General is doing a review about John Latschar taking the job at the Gettysburg Foundation,” said David Barna, NPS Chief of Public Affairs. “He decided to stay, so I don’t know what they’re looking at now.”

Mainly, according to Latschar, investigators probed the park’s partnership with the Gettysburg Foundation, and fundraising for the $103 million Visitor Center. The inquiry is unrelated to an ongoing probe by the Government Accountability Office, which is looking into park fundraising. Among other issues, Latschar said that the Inspector General’s office talked to him about the park’s relationship with developer Robert Kinsley, who is also chairman of the Gettysburg Foundation Board of Directors. According to The National Journal, Kinsley’s construction firm and another company owned by his son were paid $8.5 million for their work on the visitor center project. The park’s controversial relationship with its former service partner, Eastern National, is also being probed.

Text and Image Source: Gettysburg Times February 21 2009

CWL: The newspaper's headline is incorrect. An interview with the US IG staff is an inquiry, not a firing squad. Check the readers' comments on the Gettysburg Times website. Looks like four to one in favor of Latschar.

Guest Blogger: Myriam Denov

It's IntLawGrrls' great pleasure to welcome as a guest blogger Dr. Myriam Denov (right).

An Associate Professor of Social Work at McGill University in Montreal, she received her doctorate in Criminology from the University of Cambridge.

At McGill Myriam researches and teaches on children and youth at risk, with an emphasis on war and political violence, children and armed conflict, and gender-based violence. She has worked with vulnerable populations internationally including former child soldiers, victims of sexual violence, and people living with HIV/AIDS. Her current research explores the militarization and reintegration experiences of former child soldiers in Sierra Leone and Sri Lanka. Myriam has presented expert evidence on child soldiers and has served as an advisor to government and NGOs on children and armed conflict, and on girls in fighting forces. She is currently writing a book on child soldiers that will be published by Cambridge University Press.

Myriam's guest post below, which draws from her experience in Sierra Leone to focus on girl soldiers, an issue on which another IntLawGrrls guest, Dr. Noëlle Quénivet, also has posted.

Myriam's transnational foremother was herself a girl soldier:

I would like to dedicate this guest post to Mamusu, who I was privileged to meet during my time in Sierra Leone. Mamusu was a former girl soldier who was abducted at the age of 9 by the rebel Revolutionary UnitedFront, forced to fight in battle, and to become the “wife” of a rebel commander. She remained with the rebel group for more than five years and bore two children, as a result of sexual violence. In the aftermath of the war, impoverished and with few systems of support, Mamusu courageously and inspirationally attempted to carve out a life and livelihood for her and her two young children. Mamusu died at the age of 17.

Mamusu joins other IntLawGrrls transnational foremothers in the list below the "visiting from..." map at right.

Heartfelt welcome!

Girl Soldiers in Sierra Leone

(Many thanks to IntLawGrrls for inviting me to contribute this guest post on the issue of girl soldiers, on which another guest also has posted.)

The issue of child soldiers has become an issue of global concern and has moved to the forefront of political, humanitarian and academic agendas. An estimated 250,000 soldiers under the age of 18 are fighting in conflicts in over 40 countries around the world. While there is ample descriptive evidence of the conditions and factors underlying the rise of child soldiery in the developing world, most of the literature has portrayed this as a uniquely male phenomenon, ultimately neglecting the experiences and perspectives of girls within fighting forces.

In this posting, I’d like to highlight a few of the findings from my work on girl soldiers in Sierra Leone. My work has aimed to trace girls’ perspectives and the experiences of girls as victims, participants, and resisters of violence and armed conflict. These findings have been published (many with my colleague and co-author, Dr. Richard Maclure) in several journals, including International Journal of Human Rights, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, Journal of Youth Studies, Anthropologica, and Security Dialogue.

Findings:

► First, whether in the heat of conflict or within postwar programming, girls are, for the most part, rendered invisible and marginalized. During conflict, the roles that they play are frequently deemed peripheral and insignificant by governments, national and international NGOs, policy-makers, and program developers. In the aftermath of war, girls continue to be marginalized within the realms of education, economics, and are frequently discriminated against within formal disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) processes, as well as within the context of their families and communities.

► Second, in spite of this profound invisibility and marginalization, girls are fundamental to the war machine – their operational contributions are integral and critical to the overall functioning of armed groups.

► Third, girls in fighting forces contend with overwhelming experiences of victimization, perpetration, and insecurity. During conflict, girls are subjected to grave violations of their human rights through forced recruitment, killing, maiming, sexual violence, sexual exploitation, abduction, forced marriage, and increased exposure to HIV/AIDS. Many are also forced to participate in brutal acts of violence. In the aftermath of conflict, girls arguably bear a form of secondary victimization through socio-economic marginalization and exclusion, as well as the ongoing threats to their health and personal security.

► Finally, girls in fighting forces are not simply silent victims, but active agents and resisters during armed conflict. Girls’ made remarkable attempts to defend and protect themselves during situations of severe violence and insecurity, as well as efforts to bring about change for themselves and by themselves. Challenging the predominant portrayals of girls as emblematic victims, girls attempted to avoid, minimize, or resist wartime abuses, patriarchal power structures, and the culture of violence that surrounded them.

In light of these research findings, an alternative approach is essential -- one that gives due regard to the ways in which girls in fighting forces are perceived, represented, and conceptualized.

Rather than focusing solely on girls’ vulnerability and victimization, it is essential also to direct our attention to their self-efficacy, resilience, and skills. Moreover, given their significant presence and multiple roles within fighting forces, girls’ experiences and perspectives should be considered as central and indispensable to understandings and analyses of war and political violence, and not regarded as peripheral or, unwittingly or wittingly, rendered invisible.

'Nuff said

(Taking context-optional note of thought-provoking quotes)

209. Most people in Britain, I suspect, would be astonished at the amount of care, time and trouble that has been devoted to the question whether it will be safe for the aliens to be returned to their own countries. In each case the Secretary of State has issued a certificate under section 33 of the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Immigration Act 2001 that the aliens' removal from the United Kingdom would be conducive to the public good. The measured language of the statute scarcely matches the harm that they would wish to inflict upon our way of life, if they were at liberty to do so. Why hesitate, people may ask. Surely the sooner they are got rid of the better. On their own heads be it if their extremist views expose them to the risk of ill-treatment when they get home.
210. That however is not the way the rule of law works. The lesson of history is that depriving people of its protection because of their beliefs or behaviour, however obnoxious, leads to the disintegration of society. A democracy cannot survive in such an atmosphere, as events in Europe in the 1930s so powerfully demonstrated. It was to eradicate this evil that the European Convention on Human Rights, following the example of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 10 December 1948, was prepared for the Governments of European countries to enter into. The most important word in this document appears in article 1, and it is repeated time and time again in the following articles. It is the word "everyone". The rights and fundamental freedoms that the Convention guarantees are not just for some people. They are for everyone. No one, however dangerous, however disgusting, however despicable, is excluded. Those who have no respect for the rule of law -- even those who would seek to destroy it -- are in the same position as everyone else.
211. The paradox that this system produces is that, from time to time, much time and effort has to be given to the protection of those who may seem to be the least deserving. Indeed it is just because their cases are so unattractive that the law must be especially vigilant to ensure that the standards to which everyone is entitled are adhered to. The rights that the aliens invoke in this case were designed to enshrine values that are essential components of any modern democratic society: the right not to be tortured or subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, the right to liberty and the right to a fair trial. There is no room for discrimination here. Their protection must be given to everyone. It would be so easy, if it were otherwise, for minority groups of all kinds to be persecuted by the majority. We must not allow this to happen. Feelings of the kind that the aliens' beliefs and conduct give rise to must be resisted for however long it takes to ensure that they have this protection.

-- James Arthur David Hope (above right), the member of the British House of Lords who goes by the nom de juge of Lord Hope of Craighead, writing last Wednesday in RB (Algeria) (FC) v Sec’y of State for the Home Dep’t.

In the end, the Law Lords ruled in favor of the British government in this "case involving the proposed deportation of two Algerians, identified only as 'RB' and 'U', who the Home Secretary considers are a threat to national security." According to London's Independent, "Home Secretary Jacqui Smith [right] said she was delighted with the decision"; various human rights activists said they were not.

(hat tip for alerting us to this passage to our colleague Eugene R. Fidell)