Proefschrift Åbo. / Bibliogr.: p. 324-339. Met lit. opg. en index.

Thesis (L.L.D.)--University of Pretoria, 2005. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on July 22, 2006). "Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Laws (LLD) in the Faculty of Law, University of Pretoria." Includes bibliographical references (p. 355-386).

Diss.--Universidad Javeriana.

This thesis attempts to ascertain the implications for human rights when rebels become the only advocates of a population targeted by mass violence. The specific focus is placed on the case of Kurdish rebel organisations from Iraq and Turkey. Lacking an ability to organise freely within either state, these groups established a presence in the more open political environment of the West where they undertook efforts aimed at winning global support. After setting a theoretical basis in chapters one and two, the case studies that follow begin with an overview of the causes of the violence experienced by the Iraqi and Turkish Kurds, before proceeding to assess how this violence was represented on the global stage by the rebel organisations and their representatives. The time period assessed runs from the immediate aftermath of World War One through to the present day. Whereas previous studies of advocacy in International Relations have looked closely at the actions of more benign actors such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, this study is more concerned with what happens when important human rights abuses go unnoticed. In such a context, rebels often become a people's only representatives. The result is that the message presented to the global community is one that conforms to the interests of the rebel organisation. This raises major questions and problems for millions whose perspectives might not match with rebel aims. In short, what is not said is more important than what is said. This focus on rebel-directed activism also casts serious doubts on the value of advocacy by exploring its role in reproducing rebel power at the expense of those that are most in need of support. It was only when Kurdish activists were able to establish an independent perspective that some of these limitations were addressed. In this, the act ivities carried out by the London-based Kurdish Human Rights Project (KHRP) are especially notable. By helping bring cases to the attention of the European Court of Human Rights, the KHRP has helped give voice and obtain tangible results for ordinary Kurds who never figured prominently in the agendas of any Kurdish rebel faction.

No description available.

Rule 31.22 of the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 provides, as a general rule, that those who receive documents through disclosure during civil proceedings may use them only for the purpose of the proceedings at hand. The general rule is subject to three exceptions, and judges have discretion to authorise subsequent use for other purposes. However, the foundational presupposition underpinning CPR 31.22 is that subsequent use, generally speaking, is improper. The thesis has two primary aims: (1) to demonstrate that the rule governing subsequent use (as developed in the case law) is theoretically and practically flawed, and that maintaining a blanket, general rule against subsequent use is unsound in principle, unjust, and procedurally inefficient; and (2) to generate a normative and procedural framework suitable for reform. Part I outlines the content, origins and operation of CPR 31.22. Through historical analysis, it suggests that presumptively categorising as improper all forms of subsequent use beyond the original litigation contradicts traditional authority. By identifying and examining the three principal rationales said to justify the modern rule, it argues that none affords sound justification. By analysing the exceptions to the rule, including judicial discretion, it seeks to show that such measures are incapable of remedying the defects in the underlying rule. Part II attempts to formulate a theoretically defensible, procedurally viable model for reforming CPR 31.22. It suggests that the presumption against subsequent use should be abolished, and the law reoriented around two central norms: the harm principle and a balancing approach. It tests this theoretical model by applying it to seven paradigmatic categories of subsequent use. Finally, it outlines a possible structure for procedural reform.

Thesis (doctoral)--Deutsche Hochschule für Verwaltungswissenschaften, Speyer, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [567]-578).

Thesis (J.C.L.)--Catholic University of America, 1989. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 48-55).

Thesis (M.P.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 1996. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 109-111).

Dissertation (doctoral)--Freie Universität, Berlin 2009. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 213-223).