Durham Law School seeks to appoint a Chair/Reader in Criminal Law. Durham Law School welcomes applications from exceptional scholars with research and teaching interests in the broad field of Criminal Law. Expertise in criminal evidence or gender/feminist perspectives would be advantageous.
The appointee would be invited to play a leading role in the Centre for Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, which seeks to support research collaboration and engagement within and beyond the university.
Successful applicants will, ideally, be in post by 1 September 2016. Applicants should clearly state in their application for which post or posts they wish to be considered. Shortlisted applicants will be asked to provide samples of their publications prior to interview.
The closing date for applications is 13 March 2016.
For more information, click here.
Japan’s most recent and controversial apology to the government of South Korea for sexual slavery committed by its military against “comfort women” during WWII has raised important questions about apologies for crimes and serious human rights violations during armed conflict. What is the proper role of an apology for such massive crimes against humanity? What can apologies do and what should they not be meant to do for survivors and victims?
The latest Japanese apology, which some have seen as part of a strategic geopolitical deal struck between Japan and South Korea, has led to protests among the 46 surviving South Korean victims as well as the victims in other countries occupied by Japan during the war.
After working for 15 years on reparations for victims in over 50 countries, ICTJ has found that many victims feel that an apology unaccompanied by other forms of reparation does not constitute justice, even as material reparations, such as compensation, without a meaningful acknowledgement of responsibility also falls short.
An estimated 200,000 women in Asia were forced into sexual slavery by the Japanese Imperial Army just prior to and during World War II. Japan systematically established an extensive network of “comfort stations” throughout its occupied territories, to which “comfort women” were trafficked and used as sexual slaves. Many of these “comfort women” were barely teenagers when they were enslaved and the surviving few are now of very advanced age and dwindling in numbers. Continue reading
A United States Federal judge approved Spanish extradition requests on Friday ordering the deportation to Spain of Inocente Orlando Montano Morales, a former Salvadoran colonel, where he will stand trial for his role in planning the murders of six Jesuit priests and two women during El Salvador’s civil war in 1989. Most of the priests were originally from Spain.
“In short, the government’s evidence shows (Montano) was a decision-maker and member of a group of officers who collectively ordered the unlawful killings of Jesuit priests,” Federal magistrate judge Kimberly Swank wrote.
The judge also cited evidence that Montano provided information to the killers, including the location of a priest who was considered a primary target, then later threatened a witness’ wife to help conceal the crime. Montano served as the country’s vice-minister of public security and was part of an inner circle of powerful military officers.
The judge ordered that US marshals take custody of Montano so he can be turned over to Spain, pending final approval by the State Department.
The civil war left 75,000 dead and 8,000 more disappeared, the vast majority of whom were victims of the military regime’s “dirty war” against political opponents, leftist activists, and other community organizers, including many religious leaders.
The Jesuits had a long-standing affiliation with liberation theology, and government officials suspected the priests of sympathizing with the insurgency.
To date, the majority of individuals responsible for the widespread human rights abuses committed during the civil war have not been held accountable for their crimes.
Title of the Conference: “Beyond our comfort zone? Situating the authority of international lawyers, institutions, & other international actors”
By the British Institute of International and Comparative Law and the European Society of International Law’s Interest Group on International Legal Theory
Date: Monday 25th April 2016, 14:00-19:00
Venue: British Institute of International and Comparative Law, Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5JP
The 2016 theme reflects an enduring question: the concept of authority in international law. That the international legal system is a legal system properly socalled should by now be an accepted fact: even if not always and universally enforced, the validity of international legal rules functions itself as a reason for compliance, quite independently of the nature or character of the actions to be done. The legitimacy of international law, therefore, derives from more than the consent to be bound.
The conference convenors welcome contributions on the concept of authority in international law, including, but not limited to:
- Theorising about the nature of authority, its relationship to legitimacy and power, and how authority serves to justify the validity of international legal rules;
- The responsibility of international legal officials (judges, legal officers in international organisations, State legal representatives, international legal practitioners) in upholding the international legal system;
- The role of international lawyers in performing functions not necessarily linked to their expertise in international law, in particular political, diplomatic or advisory functions, serving on commissions of inquiry, etc;
- The interaction between international lawyers and experts in other fields, in particular those of a scientific or technical character, and the nature of that interaction in, for example, disputes concerning the environment, cyber, surveillance, etc; and
- The role of amici curiae in international legal proceedings, the risks and rewards of inviting non-legal expertise into the courtroom.