Univ., Diss.--Tilburg, 2006.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität Breslau.

This thesis explores the boundaries of low-level public order law, drawing on optimal pathways and standardizations across the four legal systems of England and Wales, Australia, The United States of America and Germany. The aim is to identify the origins of the public order frameworks, explore limits of proscribed behaviour and to determine whether low-level public order laws satisfy the requirement of certainty within the respective jurisdictions. The requisite mental elements are investigated alongside the range of defences available to those accused of such an offence. In order to fully investigate the unique synergies between protest and low-level public order, the study uses a comparative approach to examine the interaction between the low level provisions and constitutionally guaranteed rights to free expression; including an examination of the conceptual analysis of the wider frameworks within which protest and low-level public order operate. As the source of much contemporary protest, the impact of the War on Terror upon the nexus between public order and protest will also be examined in respect all of the jurisdictions. It is argued that the law relating to low-level public order in all jurisdictions is, to some extent, based around “catch all” provisions that criminalize a broad range of behaviour and also allow the police and the courts a wide range of discretion when dealing with such offences. The various solutions in respect of structure, operation and judicial interpretation of the offences will be examined. This will highlight standardizations and also fundamental disparities between the four jurisdictions. Such a comparative investigation is unique. The study draws upon multiple standardizations to model the lower end of criminality across the four diverse legal systems, providing dynamic areas of contrast through an examination of both civil law and common law solutions to the treatment of low-level disorder. The efficacy of both codified and ad hoc arrangements to regulate disorder while guaranteeing the right to protest are also assessed. The thesis contributes to the understanding of the scope and contours of low-level public order law as well as extrapolating optimal solutions from the findings of this study.

This thesis examines the legislative modernisation of Scots criminal law and justice through a feminist lens. The primary research question that it sets out to answer is whether the legislative modernisation of Scots criminal law and justice – understood as a process that involves increased reliance on legislation and a movement away from the Scottish common law tradition – can meet feminist aims. This thesis approaches this question from a theoretical and practical standpoint, and considers both whether individual, specific areas of Scots criminal law and justice (most notably the corroboration requirement and the partial defence of provocation) can be modernised in a way that is agreeable from a feminist perspective, and whether overall legislative modernisation is likely to be met with feminist approval. Particular attention is paid to feminist ideas about legislative reform, and to the work of feminist legal theorists who have challenged the 'traditional' presentation of law as neutral, autonomous, determinate and self-contained. The relationship between feminism, legal positivism and legal formalism is explored in detail. The central argument of this thesis is that feminist voices should be heard, accurately represented and responded to as the nature, content and form of Scots criminal law and justice continues to evolve and change. This thesis therefore also addresses how the Scottish Government has engaged with feminist ideas to date, and considers what formal policies or procedures are currently in place in Scotland that would facilitate, or hamper, the inclusion of feminist ideas as legislative modernisation continues to occur. In this regard, current 'mainstreaming' practices in Scotland are analysed in some depth. Ultimately, this thesis reaches conclusions that challenge assumptions about the progressiveness of legislative reform and the consequences of the Scottish Government introducing legislation in areas of paradigmatic feminist concern, and the extent to which across-the-board legislative modernisation will have a positive impact on the status of women.

Since the International Military Tribunal (IMT) at Nuremberg, the first international tribunal to try individuals for international crimes, the role of victims of international crimes in international criminal proceedings has been limited to that of witnesses. The ad hoc international tribunals – the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) did not change this position. As such, the International Criminal Court (ICC) is the first international criminal tribunal to provide for the rights of victims to participate in their own right in criminal proceedings. Similarly, it is the first such tribunal to provide for the right to reparations. This thesis focuses on the right of victims to participation and to reparations under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. It argues that the ICC offers an opportunity for the entrenchment of the concerns of victims in the international criminal process. However, it suggests that this depends on what framework of justice the Court adopts. The thesis further argues that previous international criminal tribunals – the IMT at Nuremberg and the ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals (ICTY, ICTR and SCSL) – operated on retributive and utilitarian theories of criminal justice that are exclusionary of and inimical to specific concerns of victims of international crimes. The largely retributive and utilitarian objects driving these systems limited victims to a peripheral status in the process and failed to address fully the harm occasioned to victims. This thesis suggests that the ICC should adopt a restorative justice paradigm in order to give full effect to the rights of victims while protecting the rights of defendants and meeting the law enforcement functions of the Court. The thesis reviewed the relevant texts – the Rome Statute, its Rules of Evidence and Procedure and other instruments – and demonstrated the fact that the ICC framework provides a basis for such a restorative justice paradigm. In order to suggest a trajectory for the operationalisation of the ICC victims’ rights regime underpinned by principles of restorative justice, the thesis attempts a systematic review of the rights of victims in criminal law processes in select domestic criminal justice systems, international human rights tribunals and other international courts. At the same time, the thesis reviews the implementation of reparations in various contexts and made suggestions as to how the ii ICC and the Victim Trust Fund (VTF) should proceed in this regard within the relevant legal and institutional framework. In relation to the right to participate, the thesis concludes that Article 68(3) of the Rome Statute – the general provision on the subject – strikes the right balance between the right of victims to participate, defence rights to an expeditious trial and the law enforcement function of the Prosecutor. However, the scope of victim participation at various stages of the proceedings will depend on, among others, the paradigm of justice adopted by the Court and, in view of the Prosecutor’s seemingly knee-jerk opposition to victim participation, the attitude adopted by the Court itself to this new right of victims to participate. The thesis reviewed relevant texts and concluded that the Rome Statute’s victims’ rights regime presupposes a restorative model of justice – understood as values and principles rather than ‘practices’ and ‘methods’ as applied in some national criminal justice systems. Restorative justice contemplates a central role for victims of crime in relevant proceedings. Henceforth, the rights of defendants must not only be weighed against the concerns of the Prosecutor but also the right of victims to participate. The thesis concluded further that the tests established for victims’ participation – appropriateness, the requirement for their personal interests to be affected and the rights of defendants – present serious challenges in view of the fact that ICC crimes for the most part will involve mass atrocity. The number of victims who may eventually participate in particular proceedings is thus very small. The thesis notes that while the provision for legal representation of victims alleviates some of the difficulties associated with participation by a varied mix of victims in complex proceedings, it may be considered as diminishing the impact of direct participation. While the scope and modes of victim participation will vary at various phases of proceedings, current jurisprudence at the ICC shows that the Court seems to favour a broad presumption of victim participation. Since full realisation by victims of the right to participate will depend on the role that the Court will play, it is crucial that the right paradigm of justice is adopted. With respect to the right to reparations, the thesis notes that this is perhaps the greatest innovation in the Rome Statute. The study found that the Rome Statute establishes two ‘focal points’ for purposes of reparations – the Court and the Victim Trust Fund (VTF) – in close relationship with each other. Drawing from the iii experience of national criminal justice systems, the thesis acknowledged the practical difficulties involved in vesting a criminal court with a reparation function will pose particular challenges for the Court. These include the need to protect the right of a defendant to a speedy trial, the presumption of innocence and to conduct efficient proceedings. Having reviewed the texts and relevant jurisprudence, the study concluded that various mechanisms, including various permissive rules and the creation of the VTF make it possible to address some of the difficulties associated with the right to reparations in the ICC. The thesis further noted that while a reading of the relevant provisions establishes the possibility of the Court and VTF instituting independent reparations schemes, it is imperative that the two collaborate in order to give full effect to that function. In any case, while Regulation 56 of the Court’s Regulations provides for the possibility of considering reparations issues during the main trial, the fact that a reparation order against an accused is dependent on finding of guilt of the accused, it necessarily means that a definitive finding on reparation has to come after that. Further, the thesis concluded that in context of mass atrocities and the possibility that numerous victims may prove the requisite links to a case to obtain reparations, holding joint proceedings would complicate and burden the trial. However, the thesis endorsed the initial view of the Court that evidence concerning reparations could, at least in part – where appropriate, and in the interest of efficiency and victims – be considered during the trial. The thesis further concluded that the VTF, which presents greater flexibility than the Court in terms of standards of proof, the requirement for criminal liability and various other mechanisms should be allowed a more prominent role in the processing of reparations. A survey of various mass reparation schemes – Holocaust reparations, South African TRC, the Rwandan Gacaca model and the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), as well as the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), a particular mass tort litigation mechanism – offer some useful lessons on a range of challenging reparation related questions. The study concluded that while the Rome Statute offers an important opportunity for victims in terms of reparations, various challenges including shortage of funds and the large number of victims requires that situation countries – those states under investigation by the ICC and from which victims are drawn – cannot abandon iv their primary responsibility of providing appropriate remedies for victims. The ICC is not, and cannot be a panacea for the concerns of victims of international crimes.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Univ., Diss.--Poitiers, 2005.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universiteit van Amsterdam, 1901. / Includes bibliographical references.