Eickj Blog

presentation Introduction for Thurday April 19, 2007:

The aboriginal people in the United States (Native Americans) and the aboriginal people in Australia have a long history of oppression by the national governments. Both nations were settled by the English who brought with them diseases and new ideas. The aboriginal people in both nations were forced from their lands by the British people’s greedy desire to have more land and resources. Over time, the people were forced onto reservations and their rights were slowly taken away. Today, many issues still exist in regards to the human rights of both peoples; there are governance issues, land issues, and issues with the overall quality of life of the aboriginal people.

Since I assume that most people have a more solid background on the rights of Native Americans, the readings focus more on the rights of Australian aboriginals.

http://www.eniar.org/issues/history.html -this page gives a brief history on the aboriginal people of Australia

http://www.eniar.org/issues/nativetitle.html - A description of the Native Title Act and its effect on the people.

http://www.eniar.org/issues/humanrights.html - a little bit on the human rights violations against aboriginal Australians

Posted by Jennifer E at 2:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

Introduction for Thursday's presentation (March 29, 2007):
The legal status of the detainees being held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba is still up in the air. The United States Government originally made the decision to hold suspected terrorists at Guantanamo because they believed they could argue that because the base was not located on United States soil that the nation’s laws and jurisdiction did not apply to the base. The Bush administration also holds that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to suspected terrorists because they are not soldiers sanctioned by any government and are actually “enemy combatants.”
There are three important Supreme Court cases that deal with the legal status of the detainment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay: Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, Rasul v. Bush, and Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. The last case, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, declared that it was illegal to try the prisoners using Military Commissions (trials in front of military judges). In January of 2004, the both houses of Parliament in the United Kingdom wrote an amicus curiae brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in favor of granting the prisoner’s in Guantanamo access to the U.S. court system. The brief argued that U.S. government’s behavior was contrary to the nation’s “commitment to the rule of law and its international obligations.” International organizations, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have declared the United State’s detainment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay to go against international law and the Geneva Conventions.
The United Nations, in a report released in February 2006, called for the release or trial of prisoners at Guantanamo, but their ruling has been ignored by the U.S. This study was already discussed in Lauren’s presentation regarding the prison conditions at Guantanamo Bay, so I don’t think it is really necessary to reread it.

Readings:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/guantanamo-bay_legal.htm (just read the first section regarding the U.S. Supreme Court decisions).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4721068.stm (this is newspaper article that was releases on the day after the UN’s report was released that summarizes the findings of the UN)

Posted by Jennifer E at 10:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the “principle judicial organ of the United Nations.” It was established in 1946 when it replaced the Permanent Court of International Justice and is located in the Hague, Netherlands. The Court performs two different roles: to settle legal disputes between nations and to give advisory opinions to authorized agencies.

The Court has 15 judges, all from different nations, who serve nine year terms. The judges are elected by the UN General Assembly and the Security Council, independent of each other. The elections are held every 3 years, where 1/3 of the judges are up for election each time.

The first role of the ICJ is to settle Contentious Cases between nations. Basically, this is a court case between two nations; individuals may not appear before the Court. The Court only has jurisdiction over cases in which both nations have agreed to the Court’s jurisdiction.

Cases in which the Court has jurisdiction (Article 36 of the Statute of the ICJ):
1. The interpretation of a treaty
2. Any question of international law
3. The existence of any fact which, if established, would constitute a breach of an international obligation
4. The nature or extent of the reparation to be made for the breach of international obligation

The Court has two official languages: English and French. There is a written and an oral phase and the proceedings are conducted in a public setting. There is no opportunity for appeal and if a nation refuses to comply with the decision, the other nation may bring it to the UN Security Council. The decisions made by the Court only apply to the nations directly involved, they cannot be used a precedent for future cases.

Sources of Law:
1. International conventions, whether general or particular, establishing rules expressly recognized by contesting states;
2. International custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law;
3. The general principles of law recognized by civilized nations;
4. …judicial decisions and the teachings of the most highly qualified publicists of the various nations.

In addition to settling Contentious Cases, the Court may also give Advisory Opinions. They can only be given to certain authorized bodies- 5 organs of the UN and 16 specialized agencies. The decisions are not binding and only 25 have been given to-date.

Although the Court is an important part of UN, it has many shortcomings. Only 67 of the 192 members of the UN accept the Court’s jurisdiction. The United States does not submit to compulsory jurisdiction and only accepts the rulings of the Court on a case-by-case basis.

A good summary of my research can be found at: http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/igeneralinformation/inotice.pdf

Possible Essay Questions:

1. What are the main problems with the International Court of Justice?

2. Do you think the fact that the United States does not submit to compulsory jurisdiction (only accepts rulings on a case-by-case basis) poses a problem for the ICJ?

Posted by Jennifer E at 6:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)