<p>People use a variety of means to orient themselves towards the future. A more organised approach to handling the future known as "futures studies" is often used in a variety of contexts including long-term planning within large organisations. In the effort to enhance the quality of such studies, there have been arguments for better methods (which makes sense), but methods may not be the most important aspect in the production of futures studies. Greater theoretical awareness in the substantive questions upon which the study is based is more important. To that end, the intent of this dissertation is to infuse a keener awareness of fundamental assumptions in futures studies and contribute to increasing their quality.</p><p>One objective of the dissertation is to formulate a method or procedure to analyse the futures studies of large organisations, apply it to two empirical cases and thereafter analyse its strengths and weaknesses. The method I discuss and develop extensively in this work consists of an analytical framework that focuses on three aspects of each future study: its architecture, its relationship to a few of the key future issues of our time and its assumptions regarding our views on society, humanity and technology. A second objective is to systematically study future documents from two large organisations and attempt to clarify motives, orientation, methodology and distinguishing characteristics in their future processes. The cases I have chosen are the Swedish Armed Forces and the telecommunications company Ericsson, which were both in a period of transition around the mid 1990s.</p><p>The dissertation shows how the method has been used to bring to the fore and clarify central ideas in futures studies, identify ambiguities and fuzzy thinking and to show and expose more covert assumptions. The analysis also illustrates that certain aspects of the model have been observed in the empirical material, other ideas are found to a lesser extent and certain perspectives are entirely absent. The paper stresses that the model developed has both strengths and weaknesses, but the overall assessment is that it was well-balanced and maintains appropriate depth in relation to desired efficiency. The study shows that the analytical method is relevant and adequate to understand and describe the direction and content of futures studies and in so doing enhance their quality.</p>

<p>The first part of this study evaluates the historical events that led to the referral of the DRC situation to the ICC. This includes the background of the conflict and the extent to which international crimes have been committed. Both regional and domestic attempts and initiatives to address the conflict are discussed, with specific reference to peace agreements and restorative justice mechanisms. The second part of the study deals with the prosecution of the perpetrators by the ICC. It examines the approach of the Pre- Trial Chamber to two legal issues, the principle of complementarity and modes of criminal participation as part of the ICC Statute. In this regard, the study makes a critical evaluation of two preliminary decisions confirming the charges against Lubanga, Katanga and Chui before the cases proceeded to the trial stage.</p>

<p>This research paper is an analysis of the case United States v Flick et al which took place in 1947 in Nuremberg, Germany. Friedrich Flick, a powerful German industrialist, and several high ranking officials of his firm were tried by a United States military tribunal for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Third Reich. The&nbsp / proceedings and the decision itself are the subject of a critical examination, including an investigation of the factual and legal background. The trial will be regarded in the historical context of prosecutions against German industrialists after World War II. Seen from present-day perspective, the question will be raised whether any conclusions can be drawn from the Flick case in respect of the substance of present-day international criminal law. <br /> &nbsp / </p>

<p>Kenya&rsquo / s December 2007 Presidential elections sparked a wave of violent clashes over allegations of election rigging. The protests broke out along ethnic lines, causing greater civil unrest. There have been allegations that during these outbreaks of violence crimes against humanity were committed. This violence attracted world-wide concern and was universally condemned. Kenya is loathe to prosecute the perpetrators or those who bear the highest responsibility for the alleged commission of crimes against humanity. It has instead established a national investigatory mechanism, the Kenyan Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission (hereafter TJRC). This approach adopted by Kenya has been criticized for the fact that it fosters a culture of impunity. However, the Prosecutor of International Criminal Court (hereafter ICC) has used his proprio motu powers to initiate an investigation of alleged commission of crimes that fall within the jurisdiction of the Court. This research paper has analysed the reasons for the proprio motu intervention of the ICC in Kenyan situation. It also examined whether Kenya was unwilling or genuinely unable to prosecute the perpetrators of the post-election violence of 2007. Furthermore, the paper&nbsp / evaluated the provisions of the Kenyan TJRC, the major shortcomings of the Commission and the challenges it is facing in fulfilling its mandate. In conclusion the paper analysed the relationship between TJRC and ICC and re-evaluate any role that the two bodies could play in dispensing justice in Kenya. But before that, the paper laid down the factual&nbsp / background that led to the proprio motu interevention of the ICC in Kenya where a truth commission had alreday been established.<br /> <br /> &nbsp / </p>

<p>This paper analyses head of state immunity, a traditional rule of international law, in relation to the indictments by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2009 against the current Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir. It can be agreed that the doctrine of immunity in international law attempts to overcome the tension between the protection of human rights and the demands of state sovereignty. The statutes and decisions of international criminal courts make it clear that no immunity for international crimes shall be attached to heads of states or to senior government officials. However, the case against the Sudanese President, where the jurisdiction of the ICC was triggered by the UN Security Council‟s referral of the situation in Darfur to the Court, represents the first case where a serving head of state has, in fact, been indicted before the ICC. From this case, a number of legal issues have arisen / such as the questions where the ICC‟s jurisdiction over an incumbent head of state, not party to the ICC Statute, is justified, and the obligations upon ICC state parties to surrender such a head of state to the requesting international criminal court. This paper gives an analysis of these questions.</p>

This essay aims to examine Martha Nussbaum's proposal for a classical defense of reform in liberal education and her critique of utility thinking in higher education. I want to explore how Nussbaum uses history to create an ethical alternative that cultivates both moral and intellectual virtues, which she considers to be crucial for the survival of democracy. In examining Nussbaum's use of Aristotle, I focus on her work as a proposal for institutional implementation of an Aristotelian epistemology and the cultivation of the individual as an ethical political subject. This study highlights the epistemological, educational and political ideas that form the basis of Nussbaum's ideals. I intend, however, to go beyond a contextualizing reading and thus establish a dialogue with a radical intersubjectivity to respond to Nussbaum's ambitions to recognize human vulnerabilities as assets for reason. From this perspective, I problematise Nussbaum's aspirations for reform and argue that she maintains a loyalty to an ideal that stands in contrast to the possibilities for epistemological and thus ethical political change.

<p>The first part of this study evaluates the historical events that led to the referral of the DRC situation to the ICC. This includes the background of the conflict and the extent to which international crimes have been committed. Both regional and domestic attempts and initiatives to address the conflict are discussed, with specific reference to peace agreements and restorative justice mechanisms. The second part of the study deals with the prosecution of the perpetrators by the ICC. It examines the approach of the Pre- Trial Chamber to two legal issues, the principle of complementarity and modes of criminal participation as part of the ICC Statute. In this regard, the study makes a critical evaluation of two preliminary decisions confirming the charges against Lubanga, Katanga and Chui before the cases proceeded to the trial stage.</p>

<p>This research paper is an analysis of the case United States v Flick et al which took place in 1947 in Nuremberg, Germany. Friedrich Flick, a powerful German industrialist, and several high ranking officials of his firm were tried by a United States military tribunal for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the Third Reich. The&nbsp / proceedings and the decision itself are the subject of a critical examination, including an investigation of the factual and legal background. The trial will be regarded in the historical context of prosecutions against German industrialists after World War II. Seen from present-day perspective, the question will be raised whether any conclusions can be drawn from the Flick case in respect of the substance of present-day international criminal law. <br /> &nbsp / </p>

<p>This paper analyses head of state immunity, a traditional rule of international law, in relation to the indictments by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 2009 against the current Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir. It can be agreed that the doctrine of immunity in international law attempts to overcome the tension between the protection of human rights and the demands of state sovereignty. The statutes and decisions of international criminal courts make it clear that no immunity for international crimes shall be attached to heads of states or to senior government officials. However, the case against the Sudanese President, where the jurisdiction of the ICC was triggered by the UN Security Council‟s referral of the situation in Darfur to the Court, represents the first case where a serving head of state has, in fact, been indicted before the ICC. From this case, a number of legal issues have arisen / such as the questions where the ICC‟s jurisdiction over an incumbent head of state, not party to the ICC Statute, is justified, and the obligations upon ICC state parties to surrender such a head of state to the requesting international criminal court. This paper gives an analysis of these questions.</p>

<p>Kenya&rsquo / s December 2007 Presidential elections sparked a wave of violent clashes over allegations of election rigging. The protests broke out along ethnic lines, causing greater civil unrest. There have been allegations that during these outbreaks of violence crimes against humanity were committed. This violence attracted world-wide concern and was universally condemned. Kenya is loathe to prosecute the perpetrators or those who bear the highest responsibility for the alleged commission of crimes against humanity. It has instead established a national investigatory mechanism, the Kenyan Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission (hereafter TJRC). This approach adopted by Kenya has been criticized for the fact that it fosters a culture of impunity. However, the Prosecutor of International Criminal Court (hereafter ICC) has used his proprio motu powers to initiate an investigation of alleged commission of crimes that fall within the jurisdiction of the Court. This research paper has analysed the reasons for the proprio motu intervention of the ICC in Kenyan situation. It also examined whether Kenya was unwilling or genuinely unable to prosecute the perpetrators of the post-election violence of 2007. Furthermore, the paper&nbsp / evaluated the provisions of the Kenyan TJRC, the major shortcomings of the Commission and the challenges it is facing in fulfilling its mandate. In conclusion the paper analysed the relationship between TJRC and ICC and re-evaluate any role that the two bodies could play in dispensing justice in Kenya. But before that, the paper laid down the factual&nbsp / background that led to the proprio motu interevention of the ICC in Kenya where a truth commission had alreday been established.<br /> <br /> &nbsp / </p>