No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Dissertation presented in the fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of master of arts In the faculty of Arts, Department of History at the University of Zululand. / Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi the leader of KwAZulu government and Inkatha, was amongst other South African homeland leaders. In early 1970s he became the leader of Kwa-Zulu Self-Governing homeland. In 1975 he formed the pseudo-political party that became known as Inkatha Cultural Movement that worked congenially with KwaZulu Government for almost three decades. After the formation of Inkatha, Chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi was soon possessed by a strong desire of insatiable power hunger that forced him to part ways with his old comrades of the African National Congress in 1979 after the aborted London Meeting between him and the Oliver Reginald Tambo the leader of the exiled African National Congress. This became a true political turning point that led to a political watershed that was marked by the untold hostility between Inkath/KwaZulu Government and the African National Congress. Buthelezi being well aware of this hostility, then tried all possible means to convince all those that were close to him including the apartheid government that the African National Congress was baying for his blood. This then led to establishment of the covert relationship between him and some of the senior members of both Defence and the Police Force.. He then embarked on making a watertight defence around him that would protect him against any possible attack from the African National Congress. In 1981 he established the KwaZulu Police (KZP) as part of his defence. The KwaZulu Police was said to be a police force that would do the maintenance of law and order but its main aim was to be a para-military force that would defend Inkatha members against its political opponents. As the eighties unfolded he consolidated his relationship with the apartheid government by accepting an offer of having some of 200 members of Inkatha to be taken for training in Namibia in a place known as Caprivi Strip. These people were trained under the guise of becoming the protectors of KwaZulu VIPs but in mere fact they had been trained to kill all anti-Inkatha. They were the referred to as the Caprivi Trainees since they were trained in Caprivi Strip in Namibia. These people had been trained in different ways of killing those who were anti-Inkatha in huge numbers. The likes of Romeo Mbambo, Israel Hlongwane, Gcina Mkhize and many more became Chief Buthelezi’s private army that killed hundreds of the African Nation Congress ad COSATU members. These people made a harrowing admission in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). In the TRC it was where all the violation of civil liberties were heard coming from these people and others. The Caprivi Trainees, KwaZulu Police, Vigilantes and the Warlords were the ones who turned KwaZulu into a political slaughter house in terms of violation of civil liberties of all non-Inkatha people while Inkatha and KwaZulu Government were cheering them up.

The 2008 subprime mortgage crisis is characterized by an increase in subprime lending and default on such mortgages. A combination of factors, such as risk excessive risk taken on by financial institutions, poorly implemented government housing policies and biased regulation are perceived to have caused the crisis. In response to the crisis, Congress approved the largest bailout of the United States financial system in taxpayer history. Signed into law by President George W. Bush, the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) authorized the federal government to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to purchase distressed assets, including mortgage-backed securities, and provide liquidity to banks. Comprehensive financial reform followed the bailout package in the form of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. This paper examines how both pieces of legislation threaten the constitutional protection of economic liberties.

This MA Report explores existing literature pertaining to three aspects of politics during or directly following crises in the United States: state-building, suppression or expansion of civil liberties, and enduring alterations to the American social hierarchy. While acknowledging the many insights of all three areas of literature, the Report argues that literature on state-building is too concentrated on formal, top-down explanations. As a result, it neglects the crucial dependence state-building has on aspects, such as the active participation of civil society groups. The Report further argues that political science’s absence from research literature on civil liberties during crises needs to end. The abundance of legal and historical accounts on this subject offers a wealth of descriptive insights. However, they fail to offer causal explanations for why crises have such an inconsistent and dynamic impact on civil liberties. Finally, research over the impact of crises on American social hierarchies needs to move away from assuming social groups’ interests a priori. Instead, scholars should attempt to unearth what these interests actually were among these groups within the historical context given, looking specifically to the discursive contests among social groups as they attempt to frame crises in advantageous ways. / text

Existing literature suggests evidence that American citizens have implicit and explicit biases against Muslims that influence or allow biased policies. In general, many of these biases stem from media framing, ethnic discrimination, and religious stereotypes. Some of these stereotypes associate Muslims with terrorism and violence, and public opinion research has concluded that Americans do not believe Muslims uphold American values. Thus, after 9/11, security policies against Muslims have resurfaced the question of suppressing individual liberties for the general welfare of all. My paper analyzes public opinion towards security legislation that discriminates against Muslims and examines how willing Americans are to support policies that infringe on civil liberties. My research poses three main questions: 1) Are opinions on national security influenced by the framing; 2) Does bias and ethnic-profiling make minorities more prone to support protection of civil liberties and 3) Are discriminatory policies against Muslims politicized by party affiliates? Using a survey, I found that framing the chosen policies to emphasize liberty or security had little influence on responses. Furthermore, I argue that, while literature suggests that minority groups tend lean pro-liberty relative to the White demographic, this concept is not substantial across all races when considering current Muslim-profiling policies. Finally, we find some evidence that ideology and ethnocentrism have become closely related factors after the 2016 Presidential Campaign, and that negative feelings of Muslims and national security policy have become more polarized than in the past.

La RFId provoque une évolution dans les moyens d'identification. Exprimant dans un premier temps une logique issue du code à barres, sa mise en œuvre a eu pour finalité d'améliorer la traçabilité pour des raisons essentiellement sanitaires et logistiques. Cependant ce mode d'identification concerne, chaque jour davantage, les personnes physiques. Techniquement c'est au moyen de systèmes RFId que sont mis en œuvre les nouveaux passeports biométriques et cartes nationales d'identité électroniques. C'est également au moyen de ces systèmes que fonctionnent les titres de transport, ou encore les badges des salariés. L'identification est ainsi accrue dans sa précision, mais également dans sa réalisation dans l'espace, et dans le temps. La loi informatique et libertés permet aux personnes physiques de bénéficier d'une protection de leurs données personnelles. Dans le respect de cette loi, les responsables de traitements RFId, identifiant une personne physique, seront tenus de respecter un certain nombre d'obligations. Le recours au consentement des traitements, comme critère de légitimité, modifie l'équilibre du droit des données personnelles. Afin de garantir la protection la plus satisfaisante, de nouveaux moyens sont envisagés. Ceux-ci cherchent à intégrer des procédés techniques, ou encore à offrir à la personne le soin d'assurer elle-même la garantie de ses droits individuels. Le droit fait face, une nouvelle fois, à un défi issu des technologies de l'information et de la communication, dans le respect de ses attributions, et doit permettre qu'un équilibre soit maintenu entre les contraintes économiques et les droits individuels. / RFId implies an evolution of identification technicity. Although, at the beginning, issue of the logic which gave birth to the bar code, this finally developed into a system improving tracability in spheres such as sanitation and logistics. However, more and more each day, this method of identification affects individual, physical, people.It is through this technical progress,that RFId systems produced the new biometric passports and electronic national identity cards. This is also the case for transport vouchers and identity badges for staff, which function using the same systems.Identification precision is thus increased, as also the realisation of identity control at distance .The « informatique et libertés » law is purposed to guarantee people the protection of their private personal details.In order to conform to this law, people responsable for dealing with RFId, which identifies an individual, are constrained to respect a certain nu mber of obligations. Citing previous consent as a criteria of legitimacy, modifies the equilibrium of the law governing personal data .In order to guarantee a more satisfactory protection, new means are envisaged, including integration of technical procedures,or, perhaps, offering to the individual the possibility of guaranteeing his own rights. Once again, the Law has to face up to a new challenge, outcoming from information and communicatio techniques, whilst respecting the limits of its own attributions, and must maintain the equilibrium between economic constraints and individual liberties.

La sécurité privée a connu un développement économique relativement important dans les années 70. Cette montée en puissance incontrôlée a généré des faits graves impliquant des agents de sécurité privée. C'est à la suite de ces évènements que le législateur a été contraint de réguler une première fois cette activité par la loi du 12 juillet 1983. Cette loi reste 30 ans plus tard, la réglementation de référence pour le secteur. Aujourd’hui, les menaces pesant sur la société ont évolué pour devenir plus violentes. Par ailleurs, la puissance publique opère, faute de moyens financiers, un recentrage vers des missions dites plus prioritaires. Cela se traduit par le transfert de nouvelles responsabilités au secteur privé de la sécurité. Dès lors, la question de la préservation des libertés apparaît comme un sujet essentiel. En effet, certains agents disposent de pouvoirs potentiellement liberticides (des palpations de sécurité ou l’inspection et la fouille de bagages) à l’image des agents de sûreté aéroportuaire. Pour encadrer le développement de ce secteur, le législateur a créé une instance chargée du contrôler ces activités. Toutefois, l’encadrement de cette profession demeure insuffisant au regard des nouveaux transferts envisagés par la puissance publique. La professionnalisation par la formation des acteurs constitue, par conséquent, une garantie importante des libertés. C’est d’ailleurs pour cette raison que le législateur a décidé récemment d’inclure cette activité dans le livre VI du code de la sécurité intérieure. La sécurité privée participe, aujourd’hui, à des missions de sécurité intérieure aux côtés des forces de sécurité publique et ce dans le respect des libertés. / The economic growth of the private security sector has been relatively important during the 70s. This rapid but uncontrolled development has however generated important problems implicating private security personnel. In order to respond to these problems, the legislator was forced to regulate the sector through the law of July 12th 1983. Thirty years later, the 1983 law remains the sector’s rules of reference. Today, threats on modern societies have evolved and become more violent. Furthermore, due to a lack of economic resources, public authorities have reduced the range of security mission they’ll undertake to focus solely on high priority issues. As a consequence, new responsibilities have been transferred to private security actors. In this context, the safeguard of individual liberties appears has an important topic. For example, private security agents operating at airports have been granted rights (body check and luggage searches) that interfere with people’s freedom. To regulate the sector’s development, the legislator has created a structure to control these activities. Despite this effort, regulations remains insufficient especially has more missions are transferred by the State to private security actors. As a result, reinforcing training programs for these private actors constitute an important step towards maintaining people’s rights. It is the reason behind the Legislator decision to include training programs in book VI of domestic security laws. Today, private security actors participate actively in domestic security missions alongside public security forces while respecting individual liberties.