Suchergebnisse

Marjorie Landa is the Deputy Comptroller for Audit at the Office of the New York City Comptroller. Previously, Landa served as Deputy Commissioner for Legal Affairs to the New York City Department of Investigation. There, she counseled the agency on legal issues including criminal and civil procedure, conflicts of interest, forfeiture and restitution, and the agency's unique legal authority. Prior to that, Ms. Landa was Deputy Chief in the New York City Office of the Corporation Counsel, Affirmative Litigation Division. In that capacity she served as lead counsel in high-profile cases including fraud, civil RICO, False Claims Act, intergovernmental funding, commercial and civil rights cases, recovering $63 million in settlements and judgments. Landa earned a B.A. in American History and Literature from Harvard University, and a J.D. from New York University School of Law, where she was a Root Tilden scholar.

Does the United Nations naming and shaming of specific violations of human rights decrease government repression? In this article, we argue that international shaming of specific human rights violations can weaken the target government, bringing new challenges and making the government cessation of repression less feasible. When international naming and shaming campaigns target specific repressive tactics, they increase the costs of some – but not all – means of repression. Using original data on naming and shaming by the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC), we show that the shaming of one physical integrity violation is jointly associated with decreases in that violation and increases in other violations of human rights.

The economic and social dimension of transitional justice has been largely ignored in favour of traditional emphasis on violations of civil and political rights. While early transitional justice processes mainly focused on criminal prosecutions for bodily integrity violations, socioeconomic issues, including economica and social rights (herein ESRs) violations, were seen just as part of background. However, scholarship and practitioners are increasingly calling to include ESRs violations in transitional justice processes. Indeed, economic and social conditions are frequently linked to human rights abuses, often constituting a cause, means or consequence of conflict and authoritarianism. Including the assessment of ESRs violations as an issue for transitional justice might serve the purpose of establishing a more comprehensive understanding of the root causes of past human rights violations as well as to facilitate the pathway to achieve a sustainable peace.

The economic and social dimension of transitional justice has been largely ignored in favour of traditional emphasis on violations of civil and political rights. While early transitional justice processes mainly focused on criminal prosecutions for bodily integrity violations, socioeconomic issues, including economica and social rights (herein ESRs) violations, were seen just as part of background. However, scholarship and practitioners are increasingly calling to include ESRs violations in transitional justice processes. Indeed, economic and social conditions are frequently linked to human rights abuses, often constituting a cause, means or consequence of conflict and authoritarianism. Including the assessment of ESRs violations as an issue for transitional justice might serve the purpose of establishing a more comprehensive understanding of the root causes of past human rights violations as well as to facilitate the pathway to achieve a sustainable peace.

Prosecutors and investigators pursuing corruption cases need all the help they can get. Detecting and proving public integrity violations can require hours of work, specialized expertise, and sometimes expensive software or surveillance equipment. Collaboration across agency lines can be a force multiplier, bringing additional resources, expertise, and legal tools. Strong partnerships can also provide critical cover in politically sensitive cases, helping investigative agencies weather the storm and diffuse political risks. This paper is intended to provide practical insights about the benefits and nuances of inter-agency cooperation on public integrity cases, as well as anticipated challenges. The paper ends with two recent case studies of successful inter-agency partnerships in New York State: the Rockland County Public Corruption Task Force and a multi-agency collaboration to break up a conspiracy to facilitate cheating in commercial driver's license examinations in Manhattan. The paper is based on the lessons, experiences, and concerns shared at an event that CAPI hosted at Columbia Law School on July 20, 2016, Fighting Corruption in New York State. In particular, the paper draws from a presentation by three experts: Thomas Zugibe, the District Attorney of Rockland County; Philip Foglia, Special Deputy Inspector General of the Office of the New York State Inspector General; and Nelson Sheingold, Deputy Comptroller and Counsel for Investigations of the Office of the New York State Comptroller.

AbstractThe ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has been having a devastating impact on society not only from a health and economic perspective but also due to its direct and indirect effects on the human rights of citizens. In particular, the pandemic has had several negative effects on citizens' right to integrity. For example, lockdown measures adopted by governments to manage the pandemic frequently resulted in increased levels of violence against women and girls; so much so that the UN body working on gender equality (UN Women) coined a new term—'shadow pandemic'—to refer to the severe intensification of all forms of violence against women and girls that occurred during the pandemic, particularly domestic violence. In addition, in some cases, police officials have employed disproportionate force to ensure strict adherence to public health measures. Finally, hate crimes against individuals of Asian origin or descent have increased substantially in Western countries. However, and perhaps more surprisingly, there have been situations in which the pandemic, directly or indirectly, has seemingly led to a decrease in specific forms of violence. Researchers have, for instance, observed that at the height of the pandemic, there has been a decrease in reported cases of street violence against women, because of fewer people leaving their homes.Based on document analysis and a review of selected country case studies, this article aims to provide a thorough overview of the different types of violations of the right to integrity of the person that have emerged, worsened, or, possibly, decreased as a direct or indirect consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. It focuses on three key types of violations: domestic violence, violence against women in public spaces, excessive use of force by law enforcement agents, and racial violence against individuals of Asian origin or descent. The article starts by introducing the right to integrity of the person and then focuses on the different forms of integrity rights violations that have emerged as a direct or indirect consequence of the pandemic. It concludes by reflecting on lessons learned and by providing some evidence-based recommendations on possible rights-infringement mitigation strategies during public health crises.

Integrity violations often generate political scandals, but what conditions determine whether this eventually leads to the improvement of integrity measures and policies? This article analyzes integrity scandals of 17 Dutch municipalities in the period 2006–2010 using qualitative comparative analysis. Three conditions are taken into consideration: media attention, presence of external audits, and involvement of civil servants in the violation. First, the results describe that in nearly half the cases nothing changed at all after a scandal. Second, this study explains why integrity policies changed—or remain the same. The analysis shows that changes are more likely when other civil servants are involved in a scandal and that the presence of an external audit helps to create a window of opportunity for change. On the other hand, more intense media coverage was not a sufficient condition for change in integrity policy. The study concludes that a scandal alone is not enough to create a window of opportunity for change, but that particular conditions need to be present—most notably external audits and involvement of other civil servants in the violation.

In the first chapter, the editors introduce the content and the relevance of this book to the quality of governance and why and how public values matter. Central concepts are defined, the meaning and phases of governance are addressed, including an introduction of the significant public values stemming from the literature. These values are dealt with in relation to good and bad governance in the chapters of the book: democratic legitimacy, accountability, transparency, integrity, lawfulness, effectiveness, professionalism, and robustness.

Examines the relationship between Romanian academic standards & political corruption, focusing on recent, highly publicized cases of plagiarism & copyright violations. In a state where integrity carries little currency & the political culture lauds plagiarists, questions about research ethics, copyright laws, & penalties for violations inevitably arise. The history of academic dishonesty in Romania is outlined, with particular attention to the problem of plagiarism during & after the communist period. The conclusion proposes some possible solutions to the problem, including increasing state funding for education, giving research priority over teaching for the professoriate, establishing double-blind peer review, & cracking down on resume packing by public officials & bureaucrats. 2 photographs. K. Coddon

"Measuring Violations of Human Rights Standards" published on by Oxford University Press.

Can states afford to protect human rights when facing a terrorist threat? Contemporary academic literature suggests that the answer to this question is no, concluding that states that afford their citizens basic political rights and civil liberties leave themselves more exposed to terrorist attacks (Piazza 2008; Wade and Reiter 2007; Pape 2003; Eubank and Weinberg 1994). American policymakers seem to agree. Both the Bush and Obama administrations regard the curtailment of physical integrity rights as a necessary element of effective counterterrorism policy. The Bush administration responded to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, with policies permitting indefinite detention, extraordinary rendition, use of physically abusive interrogation practices, and increased and largely unchecked surveillance and wiretapping of suspected terrorists. Although it banned abusive interrogation and announced plans to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, the Obama administration has maintained the practice of wiretapping, reserved the option of rendition, and dramatically increased unmanned drone attacks against suspected terrorists in Pakistan, which often results in civilian casualties. Both presidents have claimed that these policies are necessary to keep Americans safe from terrorism (Hosenball 2009; "Bush Defends Policy on Terror Detainees" 2005).

Arbitration — United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982 — Part XV and Annex VII — Dispute Settlement Mechanism — Dispute between Republic of Malta and Democratic Republic of São Tomé and Príncipe — Award on Jurisdiction and the Merits — Finding that Malta entitled to claim reparation in a further phase of proceedings — Suspension of proceedings — Unsuccessful settlement negotiations — Resumption of proceedings — Malta submitting claim and supplementary claim for reparation — São Tomé not participating in reparation phase of proceedings — Whether São Tomé to pay Malta compensationDamages — Compensation — Quantum — Material damages for lost earnings, value of cargo, payment to secure release of vessel, vessel repairs, classification expenses, administrative expenses, reputational losses — Non-material damages for prosecution and detention of persons — Calculation method — Whether Malta sufficiently substantiating quantum of its claims — Whether Malta establishing causation between its loss and São Tomé's unlawful conduct for each head of claim — Whether Settlement Agreement mitigating any of damages suffered by owner of the Duzgit Integrity — Whether claims under Settlement Agreement distinct from claims brought by Malta at international law under United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982 — Whether acts and omissions of the Duzgit Integrity, its Master, owner and Charterer mitigating any of damages claimed by Malta — Costs — Parties normally bearing expenses in equal share — Implementation of normal rule — Interest payable — Practice of international courts and tribunalsSea — Treaties — United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982 — Annex VII — UNCLOS Article 49(3) — Archipelagic waters — Sovereignty of coastal State — Arbitration Tribunal finding violation of Article 49(3) by São Tomé — Reparation phase of proceedings — Article 9 of Annex VII to UNCLOS — Whether claims of Malta well-founded in fact and law — Full reparation — Material damages — Non-material damages — Interest — Appropriate damages payable by São Tomé for breach of UNCLOS Article 49(3) — Rights of flag State under UNCLOS — Claims brought by Malta at international law under UNCLOSState responsibility — Law of State responsibility — Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts 3252001, Article 15 — Detention of the Duzgit Integrity by São Tomé — Point at which detention unlawful — When detention incompatible with United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982, Article 49 — Whether São Tomé's breach of Article 49 taking form of composite act — First of actions of composite act — Length of actions not in conformity with international obligation — Whether Malta to be compensated for loss of hire of the Duzgit Integrity during its detention — Full reparation — Interest as element of full reparation recognized in Articles on State Responsibility

How do human rights violations affect post-election protest? Until recently, post-election protests have been explained primarily by election-related factors such as the level of manipulation and the quality of electoral institutions. We argue that there are three dimensions along which human rights violations influence post-election protest: (1) the physical cost to protesters, (2) the ability to connect the violation to an election outcome, and (3) the ability to connect the repressive action to the government. Using this framework, we identify political imprisonment as the physical integrity right violation most likely to increase the probability of post-election protest. We test our hypotheses empirically with data on all national-level elections in the world between 1982 and 2012. We find that political imprisonment, a violation easily connected to government action and election outcomes, and less costly physically than other physical integrity rights violations, increases the probability of post-election protest.