No description available.

Thesis (M.A.)--Lehigh University, 2009. / Adviser: John M. Gillroy.

<p> The 1990s saw a rise in the participation of NGOs answering the demands of affected populations caught in between armed conflicts, bouts of natural disasters and diseases. Though their intentions were good, it was from this point onwards NGOs have gained their notoriety, despite the work they do to address the needs of man. With a consistent rise of the number of actively participating NGOs, these humanitarian actors have since gone under scrutiny by the general population, which range from ineffective operations, scandals surrounding aid money, ethics within humanitarianism as well as many aid organizations that still remain independent from each other.</p><p> This paper will seek to answer how to improve the role of humanitarian aid in emergency situations, and address its issues and shortcomings. This will be done by analyzing the different criticisms faced by these humanitarian actors, as well as analyzing the different solutions that have since been proposed in order to answer these criticisms and find a new way for these organizations to operate and define themselves. Finally, these analyses will be evaluated and compared among one another.</p><p> Interviews have been held with aid workers and members of humanitarian organizations, in order to get a more intimate perspective of the inside workings of an NGO. Recent literature, studies and findings have also been utilized in order to get a clearer picture of the current state of humanitarian aid, notably from writers such as Thomas Weiss, Hugo Slim, David Rieff and Linda Polman.</p><p> Humanitarian aid cannot be cured with a simple solution; instead, it is an ongoing, gradual process that requires cooperation from governments and organizations in order to move forward. The non-protit sector can stand to learn a lot from the for-profit sector, especially in terms of professionalism and collaborating amongst one another. This change will not come easily, but humanitarian aid also cannot remain stagnant if they hope to reach out to populations in need with quality aid.</p>

A complete theory of interpretation for human rights law must answer two kinds of questions. First: Who should interpret international human rights law? Second: What principles should guide the interpretation of human rights law? Individual governments frequently claim the right to interpret international law as it applies to them, but this claim is contested by many United Nations subgroups and by nongovernmental organizations like Amnesty International. I argue that international institutions are more likely to give a fair hearing to people's human rights than are their own governments. Accordingly, we can conclude as a general rule that international institutions should be assigned authority to interpret international human rights law. The general rule has an exception, however. Democratic states that protect basic freedoms of speech and assembly will promote and protect their own citizens' human rights better than undemocratic states. Moreover, free democratic states, by giving a voice to all citizens, can take advantage of local knowledge about particular human rights problems and solutions, and so are more likely than international institutions to interpret human rights law with a sensitivity to the human rights of all citizens and to the locally important human rights issues. Therefore, unlike other states, liberal democratic states should have the authority to interpret international human rights law as it applies within their borders. What principles should guide the interpretation of human rights law? The answer depends on whether we take a short- or long-term perspective. Currently, the institutions of international law are relatively ineffective when compared to most domestic legal systems. While this remains the case, a principle allowing interpreters to use their judgment about moral human rights in interpreting human rights law can be justified on the basis of the contribution this would make to global deliberation about the proper understanding of moral human rights. As human rights law develops more effective, less voluntaristic institutions, this principle of interpretation should be phased out.

This study introduces a new theory, called group hegemony, that explains how a group of wealthy countries maintains the liberal economic order, and how this order helps sustain the economic disparity between the core and the periphery in the post-WWII era. The theory of group hegemony advances three propositions. First, the Group of Seven (G-7) has replaced the US as the hegemon. The evidence indicates that a hegemon exists. The concentration of power within the core has remained relatively constant since the early 1960s. The US is not responsible for this concentration of power since its economic superiority has declined, whereas the power of the G-7 has remained constant. The G-7 accounts for about three-fourths of the core's power throughout the post-war era even though it constitutes less than one-third of the core's membership. In the early post-war period, the majority of the G-7's power was attributed to the US, but by the mid-1970s, power was more evenly distributed among the G-7 countries. The evidence indicates that the G-7 is the group hegemon. The second proposition contends that the group hegemon maintains the stability of the liberal economic order. The G-7 is the only group with enough power to provide liquidity, manage exchange rates, maintain large open markets, and supply foreign investment. The G-7 countries coordinate their policies when necessary to stabilize the liberal economic order. They collectively intervened in the 1970s and 1980s to stabilize exchange-markets. They coordinated their policies to offset the stock market crash in 1987. They also helped ease the debt crisis, finance the Gulf War, and aid Russia and other economies in transition. The third proposition holds that the rules governing the liberal order help sustain the gap between the core and the periphery. The rules are biased in favor of the core. These rules include preferential treatment for core members, tariff peaks on goods of particular export interest to developing countries, and tariff escalation. The liberal economic order benefits all, but some more than others.

Currently available political theories all fail to explain the nature or justification of territorial claims. My dissertation fills these gaps. In chapter one I distinguish between property and territory, explaining the inapplicability of property theories to territorial claims. Chapter two raises a challenge to egalitarian and cosmopolitan theories of global justice. The central claim of the chapter is that local democracy is an essential part of global justice, but that cosmopolitan theories cannot give due weight to local democracy. In addition, cosmopolitan theories are not entitled to the conception of equality or distributive justice to which they appeal; their failure in this respect is due to their failure to consider the distribution of land, which scuttles comparability and, with it cosmopolitan distribution principles. In contrast, there is good reason to think that a turn toward effective localized governance would promote democracy and the quality of life of all people. Chapters three, four, and five constitute the core of the dissertation. Chapter three isolates the particular sort of claim I hope to elucidate: prima facie primary rights to territory. Chapter three also defines what I call the "problem of relevance": the problem of finding political principles that could even speak to the issue of connecting peoples to places. Such principles are not forthcoming from mainstream political philosophy. Chapter four solves this problem with a geographically influenced conception of cultures. Chapter five defends the value of cultures so conceived, by arguing that stable cultural membership is an important component of individual freedom, and so merits protection and promotion through political and economic institutions. Finally, chapter six aims to situate the theory of prima facie primary rights to territory within the context of an "internationalist" theory of global justice. Such a theory takes from cosmopolitan theories a sophistication about global institutions and their effects on distributive schemes and power relations. But the theory also takes from culture-based theories an appreciation for the value of communal life and local, grassroots control of the institutions under which we live.

The legal control of nuclear power sources (NPS) regulates the use of an advanced technology necessary for the exploration of outer space but which nevertheless presents potential hazards. The legal control of the use of NPS results from international space conventions and, since 1992, from the Principles Relevant to the Use of NPS and established preventive and emergency measures, and a liability and compensation regime. Several areas call for improvement to increase efficiency and comprehensiveness of the control. Proposals for revision encompass reinforcing the 1992 Principles (scope, applicability, binding force etc.). Other proposals want to integrate to the existing regime the principles elaborated for terrestrial applications of nuclear energy. It is also broadly recognized that an efficient control must take into consideration the space debris issue. Modalities of the revisions proposed as well as their potential framework vary as opinions differ as to the extend of the revision to be conducted.

This thesis analyses the international legal protection of the world built heritage. It points out the democratic and cultural values of the architectural patrimony as a source of knowledge, self-identification, social and historical continuity of peoples, and as a source of common enrichment of mankind. It examines the extent to which this cultural heritage relates to natural and human environments, and reasserts the need to prevent monuments or any of their original fabrics from removal for the illicit trade of artefacts worldwide. It argues in favour of the continued commitment of sovereign States and of international society as a whole in order to preserve the cultural rights of present and future generations as stated in the Conventions and Recommendations of the United Nations Organisation for Education, Science and Culture. It emphasizes the interest to implement the international law of architectural conservation in peacetime and wartime and to improve means of cooperation and emergency assistance for the safeguard of the common heritage. For the integration of the legal instruments of conservation and their formal recognition by governments, with the help of professional experts in several international organisations, provide the actual basis for an increasing number of conservation programs in different regions of the world. A further significant territorial development of thee law of architectural conservation is the involvement of local communities in the preservation and management of cultural sites and buildings, as participatory and decentralized means of conservation strongly impact on the social development of people and their political organisation.

Following slavery, capital punishment is slowly finding its way toward abolition. This trend is manifested both in international criminal law norms and international human rights norms. / In the international criminal law field, capital punishment, accepted under the Nuremberg and Tokyo Charters, was rejected half a century later in the Statute of the International Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia, then in the Statute of the International Tribunal for Rwanda, and most recently in the Rome Statute. / Parallel to developments in the international criminal law field, a similar evolution was experienced in the area of international human rights. The trend towards abolition in the human rights field began with the restriction of the death penalty application to a certain group of people and crimes. However, a European human rights instrument, Protocol No. 6 to the ECHR, shifted the trend from restriction to abolition of the death penalty. / For the abolitionist cause to succeed, the abolitionist trend should be accepted by retentionist countries such as the US and the Islamic states of the Middle East and Africa. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)

The invention of the airship and subsequently, at the beginning of the last century, of the airplane made legislators think about comprehensive legal regulation of navigation in airspace. The scope of the first laws and international treaties was limited to the regulation of navigation performed by a vehicle deriving its support in the air from reactions against the air, either aerostatic or aerodynamic. As technical developments have advanced, new vehicles capable of navigating in airspace have been invented using different principles of support in the air. Due to their different support in the air, they fail to comply with the definition of aircraft in its present wording, as set forth in the regulatory system of the Chicago Convention, the only multilateral international treaty dealing with basic aspects of navigation in airspace. / Generally, there are at present three categories of vehicles capable of navigating in airspace---non-aircraft, state aircraft, and civil aircraft. Consequently, there are three legal frameworks---a legal trichotomy---to apply for navigation in the air. An analysis of this trichotomy and its impact on the safety of navigation is the objective of this thesis. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)