This dissertation is an empirical study of the actors and organizations working in criminal and drug courts. Specifically, the dissertation examines the structure (as defined by the interactions and relationships of players) of a criminal court and a drug court operating under a state trial court system in the United States. Recent reforms to trial courts indicate that the organizational structure of a typical trial court has changed in many states. Separately, specialty courts which help coordinate treatment for offenders like drug users and mental patients in many jurisdictions have changed the structure, process, and the nature of trial courts.The study is an inductive study using a case method research strategy to build new theory from past findings of organizational studies of criminal courts and from the little we know about drug courts as organizations. The method of inquiry in the study is a triangular research strategy that incorporates both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis. The qualitative data collection methods include primarily participant observations of drug team meetings and court proceedings, and semi-structured interviews with actors representing organizations participating in both criminal and drug courtrooms. The study uses network analysis as the primary method for analyzing quantitative data. The research site is the Arizona Superior Court in Pima County, located in Tucson, Arizona.I found that the most important central actors across all phases of the criminal court case disposition process are judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys, and that measuring core workgroup actors across all phases give a more accurate picture of the criminal court case disposition process. I also found that defense attorneys may be less familiar with other court actors than prosecutors because they may enter the criminal justice system from many different sponsoring organizations. As for the drug court case disposition process, the study shows that the most central player is not always the judge. In addition, the study reveals that drug courts, as court reforms, have little overall connection to overall criminal court organization. Important policy implications and theory inferences, as well as recommendations for future court studies, are discussed.

This thesis critically examines the origins and development of international criminal lave to identify the defining features of this emerging legal tradition. It critically evaluates the experimental approach taken in Article 21 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which attempts to codify an untested normative super-structure to guide this legal tradition. / International criminal law is a hybrid tradition which seeks legitimacy and answers to difficult questions by drawing on other established legal traditions. Its development at the confluence of public international law, international humanitarian law, international human rights law and national criminal laws has resulted in gaps in difficult cases with no clear answers. These lacunae have been filled by recourse to judicial discretion, exercised consistent with Patrick Glenn's theory of transnational common laws, and by privileging one of the competing aims of international criminal law: enhancing humanitarian protection versus maximizing fairness to the accused.

Thesis (LL. M.)--University of Toronto, 2005.

Thesis (M.A. (Human Rights))--Mahidol University, 2004.

Thesis (M.A. in Stabilization and Reconstruction)--Naval Postgraduate School, March 2005. / Thesis Advisor(s): Douglas Porch, Nancy Roberts. Includes bibliographical references (p. 65-69) Also available online.

Thesis (M.A. in International Security and Civil-Military Relations)--Naval Postgraduate School, December 2002. / Thesis advisor(s): James Holmes Armstead, Thomas Bruneau. "AD-A411 084." Includes bibliographical references (p. 129-134). Also available online.

Written for the Faculty of Law. Title from title page of PDF (viewed 2010/03/26). Includes bibliographical references.

Abstract not available. / Thesis (LL.D.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 2011.

<p>In the aftermath of World War Two, the International Community has shown a renewed commitment towards the protection of human rights. However, whether during wars or under dictatorial regimes, numerous human rights abuses occurred everywhere in the world, from Latin America to Eastern Europe and from Southern Europe to Africa. Countries which experienced oppressive governance or outrageous atrocities has to address the legacies of their past on the return of democratic rule or peace. In other words, they had to emerge from the darkness of dictatorship or civil war in order to establish a democracy. Today, after 14 years of civil war, Liberia is faced with the challenge of achieving a successful transition where the imperatives of truth, justice and reconciliation need to be met. The purpose of this research paper was to make some recommendations on the way the accountability process in Liberia should be shaped as far as prosecution is concerned.</p>

The principle of complementarity is the cornerstone of the establishment of the International Criminal Court as well as one of the key factors for its successful operation.  Having said that, the qualities of being flexible and adaptable make the task of interpreting the principle of complementarity extremely sensitive and technically tricky.  According to the current wording of the principle of complementarity in the Rome Statute, the ICC could factually exercise primacy over the national jurisdiction, if a loose interpretation of the principle is adopted, or conversely being residual to national jurisdictions, if the principle was strictly interpreted. While the principle of complementarity was at the heart of the negotiating process for the establishment of the International Criminal Court, the emerging practice of the Court to date has left the vast majority of the questions on complementarity unanswered, even the few issues which the Court has touched upon are not immune from criticism. This thesis will thus strive, through an in-depth analysis of the past, present and practice of the principle of complementarity and its corollary issues, to offer workable answers as well as constructive criticism.  Guided by the central objective of ending impunity for the core crimes through criminal justice, this thesis, in interpreting the principle of complementarity, will follow a balanced approach which, while unequivocally favours national prosecutions where possible, it adopts a broadening interpretation when national jurisdictions are genuinely unavailable or ineffective.  To this end, this thesis eventually presents the principle of complementarity as a managerial principle which promotes for the effective investigation and prosecution of the core crimes through the adoption of different policies which encourage, <i>inter alia</i>, a division of labour between the International Criminal Court and domestic jurisdictions, and enable states to carry out proceedings and overcome dilemmas of ‘inability’ or ‘unwillingness’ without the role of the International Criminal Court being limited in such incidents to excluding national jurisdiction.