Sentencing in international law requires reasoned discrimination Essay

Sentencing in international law requires reasoned discrimination. Critically evaluate this statement with reference to role of international tribunals - Essay Example licies regarding the international criminal court (ICC).2 Various states recognised the role of ICC in a multilateral system aiming to put to end impunity and set up the rule of law in the declaration, which was adopted in the meeting. As per the declaration, it is right to say that the key role of ICC is the enforcement and inducement of compliance in regard to the specific norms of international law prohibit and prevent mass violence.3 Following the extensive perpetration of unspeakable atrocities which were the consequences of the Second World War, the international community passed an unparalleled call for justice.4 The community sought to end serious crimes via inter alia, which is adopting the convention of preventing and punishing all crime genocides, the four Geneva conventions and the principles of Nuremberg.5 Despite the fact that sentencing in domestic jurisdictions’ importance has grown over time, it still remains part of international criminal law which is undergoing construction and is likely to be unregulated in various aspects. International sentencing law and practice has not yet been defined by proper specific norms and principles under which one should be prosecuted. International judges have continued receiving little guidance on matters concerning prosecution of individuals. Yugoslavia (ICTY) and Rwanda (ICTR) are the best examples of international sentencing which can comprehensively and coherently explain how the system works. Despite the lack of credible enforcement mechanisms, violating international humanitarian laws have continued over time with glowing impunity. The international community has responded promptly by taking a joint action that involves creating an interconnection system of international justice aiming at preventing impunity for the worst atrocities likely to happen to mankind.6 This vision came into reality in 1998 when states approved and adopted the multilateral treaty by the name Rome Statute of the International

Should the government have a say on what we eat Research Paper

Should the government have a say on what we eat - Research Paper Example Indeed, this happens to be a very divisive question. There are health experts who support a direct state intervention in the dietary choices made by the people. Yet, there are also groups and bodies who believe that government should have no say in what people eat. Pragmatically speaking, government should not have any say at all in what people eat because government has no right to interfere in the decisions people make, and if government really wants to help people eat healthy, it can do say without opting for a direct intervention. Government should not have any say in the food people eat because government has not right to interfere in expression of the free will of the people (Caplan 175). In any thriving democracy, too much government interference in lives of the people is not good. This trend if allowed to gain grounds could certainly lead to a diminishing of the rights of the people (Caplan 175). The government should not have any right to dictate as to what the tax payers or ordinary citizens should eat. People do have the wisdom and the maturity to decide as to what they and their families need to eat. Diet of people happens to be a social issue and not a legal issue. One of the primary roles of the government is to make new laws. Hence, government does not need to pose interference in an issue that happens to be more of a social problem and not a legal issue. Besides, the purpose of any effective government is not to define the lives of the people, but to assure that people are able to live their lives the way they want to. The other thing is that if the government is allowed to have a say in what people eat, the state may surpass this power to interfere with each and every aspect of the people’s life. This is not good for democracy. There does need to be a limit as to how much the government is allowed to interfere in the lives of the people. Telling people what to

DBQ- minorities in world war II Essay Example for Free

DBQ- minorities in world war II Essay The following question requires you to write a coherent essay incorporating your interpretation of the documents and your knowledge of the period specified in the question. To earn a high score you are required to cite key pieces of evidence from the documents and draw on your knowledge of the period. It is often claimed that the major American wars of the last 150 years have resulted in the most important social and political gains of minorities and women. Evaluate this statement with regard to the experience of minorities and women during World War II. Use evidence from the documents and your knowledge of the period from 1941 to 1945 to compose your answer. Brigadier General B. 0. Davis to General Peterson, 9 November 1943 (Brigadier Davis had just completed an inspection of military bases in Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey and Michigan): â€Å"I was deeply impressed with the high morale and attitudes of the colored officers and soldiers stationed in the states visited in the past two months. They were so different from those of the colored officers and soldiers located in the Southern states. While there has been an improvement in general conditions, there is still great dissatisfaction and discouragement on the part of the colored people and the soldiers. They feel that, regardless of how much they strive to meet War Department requirements, there is no change in the attitude of the War Department. The colored officers and soldiers feel that they are denied the protection and rewards that ordinarily result from good behavior and proper performance of duty†¦.. The Press news items and reports of investigations show that there has been little change in the attitudes of civilian communities in Southern states. The colored man in uniform receives nothing but hostility from community officials. The colored man in u niform is expected by the War  Department to develop a high morale in a community that offers him nothing but humiliation and mistreatment. Military training does not develop a spirit of cheerful acceptance of Jim-Crow laws and customs. The War Department has failed to secure to the colored soldier protection against violence on the part of civilian police and to secure justice in the courts in communities near-by to Southern stations. In the areas recently inspected, the colored soldier feels that he can secure justice in the civil courts. He has not been set upon by the civilian police. He has not been denied the privilege of occupying empty seats in public buses, street cars, etc. taxicabs to serve him. This is not so in Southern communities.† President Roosevelt, Executive Order 9066, February 25, 1942: Whereas the successful prosecution of the war requires every possible protection against espionage and against sabotage to national-defense material, national-defense premises, and national defense utilities. I hereby authorize and direct the Secretary of War, and the Military Commanders whom he may from time to time designate, whenever he or any designated commander deems such action necessary or desirable, to prescribe military areas in such places and of such extent as he or the appropriate Military Commander may determine, from which any or all persons may be excluded, and with respect to which, the right of any person to enter, remain in, or leave shall be subject to whatever restrictions the Secretary of War or the appropriate Military Commander may impose in his discretion.† Korematsu v. United States, 1944. Mr. Justice Murphy, dissenting: â€Å"This exclusion of `all persons of Japanese ancestry, both alien and non-alien, from the Pacific Coast area on a plea of military necessity in  the absence of martial law ought not to be approved. Such exclusion goes over `the very brink of constitutional power and falls into the ugly abyss of racism. Individuals must not be left impoverished of their constitutional rights on a plea of military necessity that has neither substance nor support. Being an obvious racial discrimination, the order deprives all those within its scope of the equal protection of the laws as guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment. It further deprives these individuals of their constitutional rights to live and work where they will, to establish a home where they choose and to move about freely. In excommunicating them without benefit of hearings, this order also deprives them of all their constitutional rights to procedural due process. Yet no reasonable relation to an `immediate, imminent, and impending public danger is evident to support this racial restriction which is one of the most sweeping and complete deprivations of constitutional rights in the history of this nation in the absence of martial law† Congressman Rankin, Mississippi, February 18, 1942: â€Å"I know the Hawaiian Islands. I know the Pacific coast where these Japanese reside. Even though they may be the third or fourth generation of Japanese, we cannot trust them. I know that those areas are teeming with Japanese spies and fifth columnists. Once a Jap always a Jap.You cannot change him. You cannot make a silk purse out of a sows ear. Do not forget that once a Japanese always a Japanese. I say it is of vital importance that we getrid of every Japanese whether in Hawaii or on the mainland. They violate every sacred promise, every canon of honor and decency. This was evidenced in their diplomacy and in their bombing of Hawaii. These Japs who had been there for generations were making signs, if you please, guiding the Japanese planes to the objects of their inequity in  order that they might destroy our naval vessels, murder our soldiers and sailors, and blow to pieces the helpless women and children of Hawaii. Damn them! Let us get rid of them now!† Franklin D. Roosevelt, Fireside Chat on the Home Front, October 12, 1942: â€Å"In order to keep stepping up our production, we have had to add millions of workers to the total labor force of the Nation. And as new factories come into operation, we must find additional millions of workers. This presents a formidable problem in the mobilization of manpower. It is not that we do not have enough people in this country to do the job. The problem is to have the right numbers of people in the right place at the right time. In some communities, employers dislike to employ women. In others they are reluctant to hire Negroes. In still others, older men are not wanted. We can no longer afford to indulge such prejudices or practices. Women are welders [sic] discuss the production of motor mounts and welded parts in a welding booth at the Inglewood, Calif., plant of North American Aviation, Inc. 1942. National Archives and Records Administration. President Roosevelt, Executive Order 8802, June 25, 1941: WHEREAS it is the policy of the United States to encourage full participation in the national defense program by all citizens of the United States, regardless of race, creed, color, or national origin, in the firm belief that the democratic way of life within the Nation can be defended successfully only with the help and support of all groups within its borders; WHEREAS there is evidence that available and needed workers have been barred from employment in industries engaged in defense production solely because of considerations of race, creed, color, or national origin, to the detriment of workers morale and of national unity; NOW, THEREFORE, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the statutes, and as a prerequisite to the successful conduct of our national defense production effort, I do hereby reaffirm the policy of the United States that there shall be no discrimination in the employment of workers in defense industries or government because of race, creed, color, or national origin, and I do hereby declare that it is the duty of employers and of labor organizations, in furtherance of said policy and of this order, to provide for the full and equitable participation of all workers in defense industries, without discrimination because of race, creed, color, or national origin;

Aims and Purposes of Sentencing

Aims and Purposes of Sentencing Discuss, and comment, on the aims and purposes of sentencing. To what extent are they a reflection of sentencing currently practised by courts? A sentence in law, according to the Oxford Dictionary of Law (2006) is: Any order made by a court when dealing with an offender with respect to his offence now governed by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 Courts deal with sentences choosing from a mix of different aims for the sentence to have. There are six main types of aim when assessing the purpose of any sentence: Retribution, Deterrence, Desert Theory, Rehabilitation, Restorative Justice and Incapacitation Firstly, retribution is where The Old Testaments an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth form of justice is taken. It takes the view that offenders deserve to be punished and satisfies the victims need for revenge. This form of punishment is full of criticism, for example Mahatma Ghandi himself stated an eye for an eye will make us all go blind. This highlights the disproportionate nature of retributivism. In the case of Sargeant  retribution as a purpose of sentencing was de-applied in the criminal courts where the judge stated: The Old Testament concept of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth no longer plays any part in our criminal law This shows how judges and parliament have moved away from this form of justice to others. However, in cases not to do with criminal law, such as Tort law or other aspects of law that give damages, it could be construed that there is a retributive aspect of taking damages from someone who has wronged you. Granted this is a sort of reparative justice (discussed lower) but the principle is well the same. Deterrence is a similar form of justice to retributivism in that it attempts to maintain order through threats and fear. There are two forms of deterrence, general and individual. They are fairly self explanatory, general is where the courts sentence heavily to dissuade the general criminal public and individual is where the courts sentence heavily on the individual to supposedly make them not want to commit crime anymore. An example of deterrent sentencing can be seen in the case of Storey. It was an attempt to make an example of the offender so as to stop others committing the same crime, in this case, robbery, statistics show that it only worked in the short term. An issue is that deterrence is disproportionate, and does not take into account the cause of crime. It assumes that the offender thinks rationally of his choices, which is not always the case. There has been much legislation and policy to curtail judicial discretion with regard to deterrence in sentencing. For example the CJA 1991 stated that deterrence was not to be used as a means of lengthening a sentence. However, traditionally the courts have steered toward a deterrent policy of sentencing, and in the face of opposed legislation they were not about to give that up easily. The CJA 1991 was so poorly written that Lord Taylor in the case of Cunningham  managed to read section 2 (2) (a) of the 1991 Act as follows: The purposes of a custodial sentence must primarily be to punish and to deter. Accordingly, the phrase commensurate with the seriousness of the offence must mean commensurate with the punishment and deterrence which the seriousness of the offence requires. This enabled judges to effectively disregard the statute in such a manner that they could continue on business as usual.  There was also a government White Paper in 1990 that came close to directly saying that deterrence was no longer a valid consideration when sentencing. However, despite all of this deterrence has once again emerged as a key aim of sentencing courtesy of section 142 (1) (b) of the Criminal Justice Act (hereon CJA) 2003 where deterrence is one of the only purposes mentioned directly. Desert Theory is a form of justice based around proportionality. The Swiss judiciary uses this as their main purpose for sentencing. It essentially means that the sentence must be proportionate to the culpability of the offender. The CJA 2003 includes culpability into judicial reasoning. A case of where Desert has been put into practice would be Lord Lane CJs justification of his lowering of the sentence for social security fraud. This is the case of Stewart  where it was given that the crime was non-violent, non-sexual and non-frightening. The Halliday Report  shows a large preference to Desert Theory as it emphasises the need to link severity of punishment with culpability and seriousness of the offence, so as to give a proportionate sentence. Problems with this form of principle are that there is an assumed blame factor on the offenders side, which does not take into account social situations when taken literally. The actual limits of proportionality are also contentious; the key concept of proportionality itself is too open to divergent opinion. However, it could be interpreted that desert is a main principle for our system as the CJA 2003 incorporates much of what desert stands for into it i.e. mitigation and culpability. The concept of rehabilitation is also mentioned directly in CJA section 142. This principle recognises the need to lower future crime and reconviction. This form of justice views the sentence and the associated loss of liberty as the real punishment; it puts forward the concept that through cognitive training during this time of lost liberty crime can be reduced, such as with the Think First program and the What Works ethos developed by Maguire and Priestley. It is particularly useful in cases dealing with drugs and alcohol abuse. However, long term studies have indicated that in other circumstances it is unlikely to be of much use, as was found by the nothing works  research project. A 1998 Home Office survey evaluated that: there have been very few well-designed and carefully evaluated studies in this country of the effectiveness of programmes designed to rehabilitate and reduce the risk of re-offending. This represents a warning that rehabilitation is a very niche area giving various so-called experts powers over who is let out and who is not, based upon loose assertions that the offenders are better or not. However, it does remain in the CJA 2003 section 142, but not as the sole rationale. The Mental Health Act 1983, despite the previous 1998 report, still gives the courts jurisdiction over the mentally ill, and as addiction can be construed as a mental illness then it is possible to infer that the government supports this form of sentencing in this context. The principle of making amends for ones crime is the idea of restorative justice. criminal justice should focus [on] restoring individual damage and repairing ruptured social bonds a truly reparative system would seek the holistic restoration of the community Some of these developments in this form of justice are to make sure the criminal does not profit from his crime, i.e. compensation. Others are more reparatory in nature, meaning criminals are put to work for little or no wages in an effort to rebuild a part of the community they have victimised, for example a vandal fixes broken street lights for his criminal damage. The Powers of the Criminal Courts Act 2000 can be seen to greatly support the use and amendment of differing forms of community reparative sentences and further evidence is given to support reparation in the CJA 2003. However, various problems rise up when this form of justice is used. Firstly, it is disproportionate in nature, where a minor offence is committed a seemingly longer sentence of reparation will be administered rather than a shorter jail term. The disproportionate side enters where if the offender does not conform then a much harsher sentence will be imposed upon them. This does not address the cause of crime and can never be used for violent offenders as to do so would be a gross injustice to the victim. Therefore as a rationale it can only ever be taken in certain circumstances. Incapacitation is where the offenders opportunity to commit crime is taken away, by removing key aspects of his liberty that facilitate the crime convicted. For example a dangerous driver is disqualified and electronically tagged. As a result of humanitarian issues, such as imposing a harsh curfew which may interfere with someones right to personal autonomy and personal life, this gives the result with this being a heavily prescribed form of rationale. It is mainly limited to repeat (career) criminals or those deemed to be dangerous courtesy of the CJA 2003 sections 224-229 criteria. Incapacitation could also be construed within mental illness cases as well. The Mental Health Act 1983 gives judges the opportunity to use various methods of incapacitation on mentally ill offenders. The primary power the court has is the Hospital Order in respect of section 37 of the 1983 Act. Despite the fact that this is a form of incapacitation in Birch  Mustill LJ explained that the intention of this was different and meant to be humane. This principle of justice is held to be in the favour of the defendant, even though all liberty is removed by an order of the court. Liberty can be further removed in the interests of protecting the public  using a Restriction Order as of section 41 of the 1983 Act. A Home Office report however supports this when used on the mentally ill where practicable and appropriate.  This would show that incapacitation is a form of justice that most governments find irresistible to direct judges upon when issuing Acts and policies on sentencing. The point that Ashworth makes is that the CJA 2003 incorporates all of these rationales in the consideration of sentencing. This is true. It would then also be true that there is a pick-and-mix element to judgement with regard to this Act. However, it is untrusting of the judiciary to state that this invites inconsistency. While the main thrust of this Act could be seen to be the Desert Theory, as there is much mention of different levels of blame, this would show that this gives judges the discretion they will need to achieve justice for all. It would be the assertion of this paper that the CJA 2003 invites consistency of judgement but allows for the discretion of the inconsistency of crime in its own chaotic nature. Table of Statutes: Criminal Justice Act 2003 Criminal Justice Act 1991 Powers of the Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 Mental Health Act 1983

No Solutions Offered in There Are No Children Here :: There are No Children Here Essays

No Solutions Offered in There Are No Children Here  Ã‚  Ã‚      Does your home have a lock on your door, a telephone and working appliances and plumbing? Do you dodge bullets in your sleep, have 13 people living in one apartment or wash your dishes in the bathtub because the kitchen sink hasn’t worked for months? Do you wash your clothes in the bathtub because the laundry room is too dangerous to do your washing? Do you live in an environment with no role models, where the gangs control everything and you can’t trust anyone? You may think these are strange questions for people who live in America in the late 20th century, but some people’s answers to these questions may be very different from yours. Those people are the one’s living in the â€Å"other America†. Alex Kotlowitz tells us â€Å"the story of two boys growing up in the other America† in his book There Are No Children Here. The â€Å"other America† Kotlowitz describes in his book is the public housing complex at Henry Horner Homes in Chicago. By following the lives of two boys, Lafeyette and Pharoah Rivers, we are exposed to the misfortunes, turmoil and death that their lives are filled with. Lafeyette and Pharoah are faced with many hardships in their day to day activities. Their apartment, the once beautiful complex, now has broken appliances, poor plumbing, horrible security and from the basement come smells that one housing manager described as â€Å"foul odors† that â€Å"no equipment presently in use by staff could be used to withstand the odor beyond a minute† (p. 240). The boys wake up every morning in this horrible public housing that would most likely be condemned if it was located in any decent neighborhood. Lafeyette and Pharoah get ready for school, usually putting on clothes which have been washed the night before in the bath tub, and then leave for school. Pharoah, who loves school, is always in a hurry to get there, leaving the apartment before anyone else. School is the one place for Pharoah to stand out and get away from the neighborhood for a while. He even attended a summer school program that was supported by the University of Illinois. Lafeyette, on the other hand, isn’t into school very much; which explains why he has such a large number of tardies. Both boys are always careful as they walk through the streets to school to be alert for gunfire, they don’t want to die young like so many friends of theirs.

The Quintessential Rebel :: essays research papers

The Quintessential Rebel In Allan Sillitoe’s The Loneliness of a Long Distance Runner, we are introduced to Smith, a man with his own standards, beliefs, values, and battles. As we are taken through the story of a period of his live, we come to understand what Smith really stands for. He is a diehard rebel that is destined to always stick to his beliefs, and is willing to sacrifice all in a battle against his greatest enemy and opressor, society. Throughout the book Smith gives us a chance to get to know him. He willingly shares his thoughts with the reader, and often times his thoughts develop as he is telling his story giving us an up-close look at the inner workings of Smith’s mind and personality. Smith belongs to a group of people he calls the Out-Laws. It is the underprivileged lower class poor street criminals. Crime runs in Smith’s family, and being born into poverty he nether sees, nor is even willing to contemplate a life without crime. At a point he hints on having some communist views, and perhaps suggests that his father had communist friends, if he wasn’t one himself. Fatally inflicted by cancer, Smith’s father died a painful death. We later find out that it was Smith who found his father breathless in a pool of his own blood, and to this day has a great deal of respect for him. The first time Smith’s family gets a taste of a financially comfortable life is when the factor y his father worked in gave them a lump of cash upon his father’s death. â€Å"†¦a wad of crisp blue-back fivers ain’t a sight of good† (Sillitoe, 20) says Smith as the one break his family got was only due to his father’s death. Smith is not money hungry, he steels simply to get by. He knows exactly where he stands in the world- in direct opposition of the In-laws, the â€Å"pig-faced snotty-nosed dukes and ladies"†(Sillitoe, 8). He realizes that he is a poor nobody, a petty criminal, an outcast of society. Smith by nature is a rebel. He puts himself and his fellow Out-laws in direct opposition of the rest; for him it’s â€Å"us versus them†. As we are getting to know Smith, he is spending his time in a Borstal after having been caught for a bakery robbery. He has no regrets about doing what he did in the bakery shop, and has a big enough heart to be happy for his accomplice, Mike for getting off.

Aboriginal Peoples in Canada: A History Essay

In studying the early history of relations between the Aboriginal people of the country that is now called Canada, and the European newcomers from first contact to present day, it appears that more of the truth from the past is being revealed even now. Aboriginal philosophy and technology was vastly different and considered primitive to most newcomers but also was seen as brilliant to those newcomers that were able to understand and learn some of the ancient traditions. It would not be fair to assume that marginalization of the aboriginal was increased only as a direct result of technology, as each culture has its own technology not necessarily better or worse than the other. In early times the Europeans were at the mercy of the Aboriginal`s for their very survival as they were not fit to survive in this part of North America because of the difficult geography and climate. In Dickason’s book Canada’s First Nations: A History of Founding Peoples from Earliest Times she makes reference to how, â€Å"Anthropologist Robin Rodington has made the point that their technology consisted of knowledge rather than tools† (Dickason, pg. 40). It was soon seen that the aboriginal technologies including; survival, shared wealth, spirituality, navigating the wilderness, hunting, trapping, song, dance, stories and methods of warfare were all beneficial to the new colonial pioneers. See more: My Writing Process Essay The Europeans also brought; greed, firearms, firewater, reading, religion and writing (books), some of which were beneficial to the aboriginal but not necessary as they had done very well without them for a long time. Dickason then goes on to explain â€Å"that Amerindians had been able to survive as well as they did with a comparatively simple tool kit† (Dickason. Pg. 40) This simple tool kit was used along with complex knowledge to enable pre-contact aboriginal people to thrive in Northern North America. The early Europeans quickly realized that Aboriginals skills would be required in order for them to survive in such an environment, but they did not yet understand that these Aboriginal people were not to be easily conquered. The Canadian Aboriginal people’s military strength was often underestimated and misunderstood. As the aboriginal people eventually became a minority in their own land and their technology was seen as lacking any real value they were seen as being in the way of progress. In his book Sweet Promises J. R. Miller explains in the introduction how one historian has referred to as the ‘onset of irrelevance’. Relations changed drastically as the aboriginal people were no longer needed for military support as peace was on the horizon after the war of 1812. Increased immigration coupled with; death, disease and a lack of a way to provide for themselves led to the aboriginal people becoming even more of a minority. As marginalization hastened resulting in the aboriginal people having few choices left as they had become institutionalized by the government that was clearly not trying to help them at this point. All they could do was survive and try and hold on to what they had known before the Europeans had arrived not to mention their self-respect. Looking at this part of the World at this time which is considered a time of peace after The War of 1812. With the technological revolution under way which would change every culture on the planet, including the Canadian aboriginal way of life. The government with an increasing amount of immigrants and only so much good land to go around would create the reserve and the residential school to deal with the aboriginal. It was a piece at a time process but eventually it would contribute to their further marginalization and demise as a people. The government of its day just wanted what was best for its people of which the aboriginal were not. They were acting as if they were doing something good for the aboriginal people but facts are facts. The Steam engine, the automobile and soon another War would affect the aboriginal way of life both negatively and positively as well. It wouldn’t be until after the Second World War that the Canadian Aboriginal would begin to have any relevance as it would seem as the same as the reasons in the past. As J. R. miller points out in Skyscrapers Hide the Heavens â€Å"that the relationship between the indigenous peoples and non- natives has been shaped by practical, often economic, factors†. (Miller pg. 402-3). The recent â€Å"Idle No More† protest movement is proof that the Canadian aboriginal people are going to become more relevant in Canada’s future. Looking at the history of Canada with a better understanding from both the aboriginal side and the European side it is clear to see the past. In history this same process has occurred between different cultures and their technologies. Sometimes as well in history it has been seen that the cultures that survive exclusion emerge and then their true wisdom and its value is understood by all. More of the cause of the marginalization that has occurred was a clash of cultures; one of greed vs. that of benevolence. I see this happening now more than ever in Canada and the world could learn from the aboriginal knowledge especially how to protect the planet and its inhabitants.