Suchergebnisse

Sexual exploitation and abuse by United Nations (UN) peacekeepers is not an isolated or recent problem, but it has been present in almost every peacekeeping operation. A culture of sexual exploitation and abuse is contrary to the UN's zero-tolerance policy and has been the target of institutional reforms since 2005. Despite this, allegations of sexual abuse continue to emerge, and the reforms have not solved the problem. This book is a response to the continued lack of accountability of UN peacekeepers for sexual exploitation and abuse. Focusing on military contingent members, this book aims to analyse ways in which the UN can fill the accountability gap while taking a feminist perspective and emphasising the needs of victims, their communities, and the host state.This book directly challenges the status quo of relying on troop-contributing countries (TCCs) to hold their peacekeepers to account. It proposes first, the establishment of a series of hybrid courts, and second, a mechanism for dealing with victim rehabilitation and reparation. It addresses these topics by considering international and human rights law and will be of interest to researchers, academics, policymakers, and students with an interest in international criminal law, United Nations peacekeeping, and peace studies.

AbstractCountries throughout the world practice several forms of transitional justice, hoping to attain peace, democratic stability and reconciliation. They apply different mechanisms to achieve these goals. Thispaper offers a theoretical analysis of foundation, proceedings and legacy of the Extraordinary hambersin the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). First, the Author examines the notion of the analysis of hybrid courts as a way of overcoming constraints that criminal justice mechanisms in post-conflict societies may face. Second, the Author explores the so-called "Khmer Rouge Tribunal". Due to the significance and controversies that surround the ECCC, its work attracts great attention. Furthermore, political will is critical, so these hybrid judicial institutions should have more international support in terms of political means, funds, dissemination of results, and complementary mechanisms of transitional justice.IntisariNegara-negara di seluruh dunia mempraktikkan beragam bentuk keadilan transisional, dengan harapan untuk memelihara perdamaian, stabilitas demokrasi, dan rekonsiliasi. Mereka menerapkan mekanisme yang berbeda-beda untuk mencapai tujuan tersebut. Penelitian ini menyajikan analisis teori yang dilakukan terhadap landasan, proses, dan pengaruh Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). Pertama-tama, penelitian ini meninjau gagasan mengenai analisa terhadap pengadilan hibrida sebagai cara untuk mengatasi kendala yang dihadapi oleh mekanisme pengadilan pidana di masyarakat pascakonflik, dan kedua, mengeksplorasi apa yang disebut "Pengadilan Khmer Rouge". Karena signifikansi dan kontroversi yang menyelubungi ECCC, karyanya menerima perhatian yang besar. Tekad secara politis sangat penting, sehingga pengadilan hibrida ini dapat memperoleh dukungan internasional lebih banyak dalam hal sarana politik, dana, penyebaran hasil, dan mekanisme untuk melengkapi keadilan transisional.

AbstractParenting plan Assessments, also known as child custody evaluations, are forensic psychological investigations into the needs of children, the parenting capacities of their caregivers, and the resulting fit between the children's needs and caregiver capacities. Typically, they result in recommendations that are, in the opinion of the assessor, formulated to meet the best interests of children regarding a parenting plan, child sharing, parental responsibilities and ancillary services that are likely to support the children's optimal functioning as well as the functioning of the now reconfigured family. Such assessments are part of a pathway to untangling conflicts between the parents regarding the most appropriate parenting plan for the reconfigured family. Paradoxically, the assessment process can exacerbate the conflict, entrench parental polarization, and create lingering feelings of helplessness, frustration, and disempowerment in the parents. This article provides a rationale for the use of a hybrid process that incorporates alternative dispute resolution as an integrated part of the parenting plan assessment and provides an illustrative model of such a hybrid process.

This article offers a novel take on the problem of judicial independence in nondemocracies. Some scholars hold that political fragmentation leads to more judicial independence; others argue that it leads to less independence in nondemocracies. These studies have focused on judicial politicization and neglected judicial corruption. Using a process-tracing controlled comparison of reforms in Georgia and Moldova, I investigate the impact of political fragmentation on judicial corruption. I argue that politicians in less fragmented regimes, as in Georgia, have stronger incentives to reform corrupt courts, and utilize anticorruption measures for establishing long-term political control. In more fragmented regimes, as in Moldova, politicians have stronger incentives to resist anticorruption measures and instead utilize corrupt courts for short-term private gains. These findings suggest that political fragmentation in hybrid regimes can propel politicians to delegate neither more, nor less power to courts, but instead to use distinct avenues, or "entry-points," to influence judicial outcomes.

"What happens to Buddhist monks and nuns who commit crimes? Buddhism in Court is the first book to uncover a long-overlooked Buddhist campaign for clerical legal privileges that aim to exempt monks and nuns from being tried and punished in the courtroom. It unveils this campaign's origins in Indian Buddhism and how Chinese Buddhists' engagement with it reshaped Buddhism's place in the jurisdictional landscape in China from the fourth century to the present. In Asia, the jurisdictional boundary between Buddhism and the state was never fixed. Buddhism in Court is the first study to examine the unique contribution of Chinese Buddhists in negotiating that boundary by creating what Cuilan Liu describes as "hybrid courts" and "hybrid laws" in the fourth century to deal exclusively with religious legal matters. Drawing on various pre-modern and contemporary primary sources in Chinese, Buddhism in Court traces the legacy of the campaign for clerical legal privileges from its origins in India to its transformation in China and its continuing impact in the Chinese courtroom to the present day. Diverting from the dynasty-centered approach to studying religion, law, and history in China, Buddhism in Court expands our understanding of this legacy of early Chinese Buddhism and challenges the notion that the passage between imperial and post-imperial China was one of disruption"--

This book examines hybrid tribunals created in Sierra Leone, Kosovo, Cambodia, East Timor, and Lebanon, in terms of their origins (the political and social forces that led to their creation), the legal regimes that they used, their various institutional structures, and the challenges that they faced during their operations. Through this study, the author looks at both their successes and their shortcomings, and presents recommendations for the formation of future hybrid tribunals. Hybrid tribunals are a form of the international justice where the judicial responsibility is shared between the international community and the local state where they function. These tribunals represent an important bridge between traditional international courts like the International Criminal Court (ICC), the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and various local justice systems. Because hybrid tribunals are developed in response to large-scale atrocities, these courts are properly considered part of the international criminal justice system. This feature gives hybrid tribunals the accountability and legitimacy often lost in local justice systems; however, by including regional courtroom procedures and personnel, they are integrated into the local justice system in a way that allows a society to deal with its criminals on its own terms, at least in part. This unique volume combines historical and legal analyses of these hybrid tribunals, placing them within a larger historical, political, and legal context. It will be of interest to researchers in Criminal Justice, International Studies, International Law, and related fields.

The nexus between justice and peace has grown stronger in recent years. Prompted by the experiences in Argentina, the Western Balkans, Rwanda and South Africa, discussions have focused on the necessity of holding accountable those responsible for committing atrocities and grave crimes during armed conflicts to enable a more sustainable peace-building process. In 2003, several significant developments in formal institution building occurred in the sphere of post-conflict justice. The International Criminal Court (ICC), established in July 2002, has moved from a paper court to a fully functioning one. All of the court's key staff -- the judges, the Chief Prosecutor and the Deputy Prosecutor -- were elected and, by the end of the year, they had identified the situations in the Ituri region of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda as the first two cases the court would hear. However, the progress of the ICC has been beset by continued opposition, particularly from the United States, which has maintained its policy of pursuing Bilateral Immunity Agreements with states parties to the Rome Statute and non-states parties alike, and implemented the American Service Members' Protection Act. The Rome Statute can be seen to have established a system of international criminal law rather than simply a court. Several states have already begun to incorporate laws against crimes within the ICC's jurisdiction into domestic law. This will further embed the concept of non-impunity. The creation of treaty-based 'hybrid' courts or second-generation courts -- part international and part national -- such as the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the Extraordinary Chambers for Cambodia were important developments in 2003. They underline the international community's acknowledgement that a partnership with domestic actors from the outset is essential to the peace-building process. However, the existence of the hybrid courts and the domestic Iraqi Special Tribunal brought to the fore the question of burden-sharing in the delivery of justice after conflict. The cases of Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Afghanistan illustrate that the international community is still divided as to which of the current models in place is the most appropriate. These examples also raise the question of who decides which model to apply where, and why. Immediately after the US-led intervention in Iraq in 2003, members of the international community acknowledged that the atrocities committed during Saddam Hussein's regime should be dealt with, but could not agree on a suitable mechanism for legal redress. Various models were considered, ranging from a military tribunal to a hybrid court. In the end, a domestic tribunal with little international participation was chosen-largely because the main occupying power has an aversion to international courts. The establishment of the Iraqi Special Tribunal could arguably be seen as a reversion to a system based on victors' justice, which the international community has previously been anxious to move away from. The financial viability of post-conflict justice is still to be addressed. The international community, particularly a select group of states, has spent over $1 billion on international courts. With so many international courts now in place the question of the financial sustainability of maintaining them arises. Nor is further devolution to the local level a solution because, as in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the costs still fall to the international community. The debate about striking the delicate balance between resource constraints and symbolic justice that ensures optimum and appropriate levels of punishment is one that will continue for some time. Adapted from the source document.