International criminal justice has undergone rapid recent development. Since the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in 1993, and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in the following year, the field has changed beyond recognition. The traditional immunity of presidents or heads of government, prime ministers, and other functionaries acting in an official capacity no longer prevails; the doctrine of superior orders is inapplicable except, where appropriate, as in mitigation; and the gap between international armed conflict and non-international armed conflict has closed. More generally, the bridge has been crossed between the irresponsibility of the state and the criminal responsibility of the individual. As a result, the traditional impunity of the state has practically gone. This book, by one of the former judges of the ICTY, ICTR, and the International Court of Justice, assesses some of the workings of the ICTY that have shaped these developments. In it, Judge Shahabuddeen provides an insightful overview of the nature of this criminal court, established on behalf of the whole of the international community. He reflects on its transformation into one of the leading fora for the growth of international criminal law first-hand, offering a unique perspective on the challenges it has faced. Judge Shahabuddeen's experience in international criminal justice makes this volume essential reading for those interested in, or working with, international criminal law.

African-American Males and the US Justice System of Marginalization provides an overview of the economic and social status of African-American males in America, which continues to deteriorate at an alarming rate. Weatherspoon posits that in every American institutional system, from birth to death, the journey of African-American males to achieve racial justice and equity in this country is ignored, marginalized, and exploited. The American justice system, in particular, has permitted and in some cases sanctioned the marginalization of African-American males as full citizens. Weatherspoon examines the idea that African-American males are disproportionately represented in every aspect of the criminal justice system, and that the marginalization of African-American males in America has a long and treacherous history that continues to negatively impact their economic, political, and social status.

It has been many years since O. J. Simpson walked free from a downtown Los Angeles courtroom. For many, it was the demolition of the fundamental principle of right and wrong, and many debated the deficiencies of the American justice system. Since then, we have witnessed the Casey Anthony case, and others, that remind us of issues unaddressed and questions unanswered. In Fixing the Engine of Justice, author David Tunno presents the symptoms of a defective jury system and offers comprehensive, intelligent, and thought-provoking solutions. Tunno, a trial consultant for more than twenty years, has studied and researched key trials and has gleaned stories from his personal experiences to show a system beset with representation issues, incompetence, bias, misconduct, and lack of support and public perception based on misconceptions. He analyzes the flaws in the jury selection process, its lack of effectiveness, and the ways in which it contributes to the delivery of justice. Often humorous and irreverent, Fixing the Engine of Justice offers a diagnosis of the problems and a list of needed repairs to the American legal system. With the prime focus on juries, Tunno also takes aim at judges, attorneys, and other issues relevant to the health of the system.

The public image of judges has been stuck in a time warp; they are invariably depicted in the media - and derided in public bars up and down the country - as 'privately educated Oxbridge types', usually 'out-of-touch', and more often than not as 'old men'. These and other stereotypes - the judge as a pervert, the judge as a right-wing monster - have dogged the judiciary long since any of them ceased to have any basis in fact. Indeed the limited research that was permitted in the 1960s and 1970s tended to reinforce several of these stereotypes. Moreover, occasional high profile incidents in the courts, elaborated with the help of satirists such as 'Private Eye' and 'Monty Python', have ensured that the 'old white Tory judge' caricature not only survives but has come to be viewed as incontestable. Since the late 1980s the judiciary has changed, largely as a result of the introduction of training and new and more transparent methods of recruitment and appointment. But how much has it changed, and what are the courts like after decades of judicial reform? Given unprecedented access to the whole range of courts - from magistrates' courts to the Supreme Court - Penny Darbyshire spent seven years researching the judges, accompanying them in their daily work, listening to their conversations, observing their handling of cases and the people who come before them, and asking them frank and searching questions about their lives, careers and ambitions. What emerges is without doubt the most revealing and compelling picture of the modern judiciary in England and Wales ever seen. From it we learn that not only do the old stereotypes not hold, but that modern 'baby boomer' judges are more representative of the people they serve and that the reforms are working. But this new book also gives an unvarnished glimpse of the modern courtroom which shows a legal system under stress, lacking resources but facing an ever-increasing caseload. This book will be essential reading for anyone wishing to know about the experience of modern judging, the education, training and professional lives of judges, and the current state of the courts and judiciary in England and Wales.

Dominance is an integral aspect of strategy. Strategy, whether in war, sports or business, is about how one can place themselves in a competitive position that gives them an advantage over competitors. If that position can be made so overwhelming by one competitor that others are effectively taken out of effective competition, that competitor is dominant. Dominance wins. The game is over. Everyone else is playing for second place or lower. Creating Dominance describes how successful law firms have gone about dominating their marketplaces - be they a practice area, a city or an industry. The book begins by describing the characteristics that identify a dominant firm and the precise strategies law firms can use to put themselves in a position of dominance.

This title poses a challenge to the consensus on the best way to reform legal systems in order to attract and support foreign direct investment (FDI) in developing countries. Using detailed examples from Sri Lanka, it shows that the "ideal paradigm" approach to legal reform espoused by multilateral development organizations and bilateral aid donors is not only fundamentally flawed, but misconceived for reasons that we may not fully understand. The author recommends a shift in emphasis from the "global" legal reform agenda to a country-specific approach, based on a rigorous formulation of the common ground where the expectations of investors and the countries in question meet. The crux of this "ideal paradigm" approach resides in the generally accepted belief that a Western-style market-oriented, rule-bound legal system is the sine qua non of successfully attracting and supporting FDI. However, through a wide-ranging survey of Sri Lankan and foreign business people, lawyers, non-legal advisers, NGO workers, diplomats, development workers, and government officials, Perry shows that this is far from the case. Investors are generally insensitive to the nature of the host state legal system when making the decision to invest, and their perceptions and expectations of the host state legal system may be significantly affected by such factors as their nationality, export orientation and size. Perry suggests that the conclusions drawn from this detailed analysis from Sri Lanka, applied on a global scale, have the potential to greatly improve the quality of many developing countries' participation in the world economy. The positive and forward-looking thesis of this book will be of great value to policymakers in international organisations and donor government agencies, to law firms handling international business transactions, and to academics in development and other areas of international finance, as well as to investors everywhere.

The European Court of Justice is widely acknowledged to have played a fundamental role in developing the constitutional law of the EU, having been the first to establish such key doctrines as direct effect, supremacy and parallelism in external relations. Traditionally, EU scholarship has praised the role of the ECJ, with more critical perspectives being given little voice in mainstream EU studies. From the standpoint of legal reasoning, Gerard Conway offers the first sustained critical assessment of how the ECJ engages in its function and offers a new argument as to how it should engage in legal reasoning. He also explains how different approaches to legal reasoning can fundamentally change the outcome of case law and how the constitutional values of the EU justify a different approach to the dominant method of the ECJ.

This book offers an analysis of the current trends and developments in Nordic civil litigation and is divided into four main parts. In the first part a picture of the current civil litigation landscape is provided by focusing on whether there is a truly Nordic form of civil litigation, the current state of Nordic civil litigation, the recent major reforms of civil procedure legislation and the effects of Europeanization. In the second part, the way rules on court-connected mediation have been implemented and practiced in the Nordic countries is discussed. The authors offer their insights on why court-connected mediation has not been fully embraced by Nordic lawyers and the Nordic approach to this type of mediation is contrasted with the Austrian and German approaches. In the third part, recent developments affecting access to justice in the Nordic countries are discussed. Among the topics are changes in legal aid schemes, the impact of recent civil procedure law reforms, hindrances for larger companies to use litigation as a method of dispute resolution and differences in costs and delays. Additionally, Alternative Dispute Resolution and Class or Group Actions are explored as methods to enhance access to justice. The potential adverse effects of Alternative Dispute Resolution and Group Actions are also examined, both in a Nordic and European context. In the final part, conclusions are drawn from both historical and future-oriented perspectives.

"Must reading for anyone who seeks a better understanding of the U.S. Supreme Court's role in race relations policy."
--"Choice"

"Beware Those committed to the Supreme Court as the ultimate defender of minority rights should not read Race Against the Court. Through a systematic peeling away of antimajoritarian myth, Spann reveals why the measure of relief the Court grants victims of racial injustice is determined less by the character of harm suffered by blacks than the degree of disadvantage the relief sought will impose on whites. A truly pathbreaking work."
--Derrick Bell

As persuasive as it is bold. Race Against The Court stands as a necessary warning to a generation of progressives who have come to depend on the Supreme Court of the perils of such dependency. It joins with Bruce Ackerman's We, the People and John Brigham's Cult of the Court as the best in contemporary work on the Supreme Court.
--Austin Sarat, William Nelson, Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science, Amherst College

The controversies surrounding the nominations, confirmations, and rejections of recent Supreme Court justices, and the increasingly conservative nature of the Court, have focused attention on the Supreme Court as never before. Although the Supreme Court is commonly understood to be the guardian of minority rights against the tyranny of the majority, Race Against The Court argues that the Court has never successfully performed this function. Rather the actual function of the Court has been to perpetuate the subordination of racial minorities by operating as an undetected agent of majoritarian preferences in the political preferences. In this provocative, controversial, and timely work, Girardeau Spann illustrates how the selection process for Supreme Court justices ensures that they will share the political preferences of the elite majority that runs the nation. Customary safeguards that are designed to protect the judicial process from majoritarian predispositions, Spann contends, cannot successfully insulate judicial decisionmaking from the pervasive societal pressures that exist to discount racial minority interests.

The case most often cited as the icon of Court sensitivity to minority rights, Brown v. Board of Education, has more recently served to lull minorities into believing that efforts at political self-determination are futile, fostering a seductive dependence and overreliance on the Court as the caretaker of minority rights. Race Against The Court demonstrates how the Court has centralized the law of affirmative action in a way that stymies minority efforts for meaningful political and economic gain and how it has legitimated the legal status quo in a way that causes minorities never even to question the inevitability of their subordinate social status.

Spann contends that racial minorities would be better off seeking to advance their interests in the pluralist political process and proposes a novel strategy for minorities to pursue in order to extricate themselves from the seemingly inescapable grasp of Supreme Court protection. Certain to generate lively, heated debate, "Race Against The Court" exposes the veiled majoritarianism of the Supreme Court and the dangers of allowing the Court to formulate our national racial policy.

Lack of access of the poor and middle class to civil courts, suits that benefit only lawyers, litigation tactics devoted to victory rather than truth or justice, and inefficient courts are some of the issues addressed by Judge Gerber in his outspoken critical appraisal of America's legal profession and judiciary. The author suggests practical--and in some cases radical--remedies needed to make the system responsive to the public and to give substance to the ideal of equal justice for all. Gerber's criticisms of the legal profession today are far-reaching, and the self-reflection in which he asks us to engage is difficult, even uncomfortable. But it is a necessary step in the continuing efforts we all must make to ensure that our profession upholds the highest ideals of professional responsibility. Sandra Day O'Connor, Supreme Court of the United States Lack of access of the poor and middle class to civil courts, suits that benefit only lawyers, litigation tactics devoted to victory rather than truth or justice, and inefficient courts are some of the issues addressed by Judge Gerber in his outspoken critical appraisal of America's legal profession and judiciary. The author suggests practical--and in some cases radical--remedies needed to make the system responsive to the public and to give substance to the ideal of equal justice for all. Following an introductory overview of the troubled condition of our legal system, Judge Gerber considers the narrow process by which future lawyers are selected and the financial motivations that commonly inspire them to study law. He next takes a hard look at legal education, noting that the litigation model now in vogue inculcates a mentality of combat and downgrades peacemaking and negotiating skills. In a discussion of bar exams, Judge Gerber points out that these tests measure neither ethics nor competency and fail to provide for specialty licensing, for which he recommends periodic reexamination and peer review. Commenting on the complexity, confusion, delays, and extortionate costs that prevent equal access to justice, the author offers specific suggestions for streamlining court procedures and revamping the court system by managerial and procedural changes. He examines ethical abuse by courtroom litigators, contending that periodic ethical review and specialized training are needed to insure that justice is served. Concluding with a critical analysis of major competing jurisprudential theories, Judge Gerber argues that a return to natural law ideals is needed to reinspire lawyers and judges with a philosophical sense of the foundations of justice. This important new work is particularly relevant for legal educators and professionals and for courses dealing with the legal profession, legal ethics, the judiciary, and the court system.

In June of 1972, the Democratic National Party headquarters in Washington, D.C., was the site of one of the most famous burglaries in U.S. history. The abortive Watergate break-in and subsequent cover-up is reexamined in this book from the unique perspective of the Supreme Court judges, who grappled with its political and legal ramifications. Howard Ball presents the litigation in the U.S. vs. Nixon case from the inside out, analyzing the constitutional issues that faced the court and the way in which the justices worked to resolve conflicts, overcome obstacles, and arrive at an institutional opinion. In recounting the tragedy of Watergate from the viewpoint of the judges, the book makes use of a number of important original sources, including interviews and letters from the justices. Perhaps most important in telling this story, though, are the conference notes and docket sheets of the Court members, especially those of Justices William J. Brennan, Jr., and William O. Douglas. To set the Watergate tapes litigation against the proper background, Ball also examines the role of the federal judiciary in the political system, the crucial concept of judicial review, and the Supreme Court's processes and personnel at the time of the litigation. A selected bibliography and comprehensive index conclude the work. As a unique chronicle of the Watergate scandal, this book will be a valuable resource for courses in American history, legal studies, and the Supreme Court, as well as a significant addition to academic, legal, and public libraries.

In modern societies, full criminal trials are avoided on many occasions. This book is concerned with mechanisms that either divert from or speed up the proceedings. Koen Vriend argues that the fair trial rights as established by the European Court of Human Rights under Article 6 ECHR provide a normative framework that does not only apply in a full criminal trial, but that it can also be used for diverted and shortened proceedings. He shows that the concept of fairness-as derived from ECtHR case law-is a fundamental principle that underlies all criminal law enforcement. It provides for the appropriate framework to assess whether diverted or shortened proceedings are fair and legitimate. The book is intended for criminal law scholars and practitioners and human rights scholars. Dr. Koen Vriend is a Lecturer of Criminal Law and Criminal Procedural Law at the University of Amsterdam.

Lopeman examines the impact advocacy of intentional judicial activism by a justice of a state supreme court can have on establishing the court as a policy maker. He examines the attitudinal model and the judicial role model of decision making and concludes that, while the attitudinal model might describe the decision-making process in the U.S. Supreme Court, the judicial role model better describes decision making in state supreme courts. This judicial role model allows the activist to transform a court into a policy maker.

The traditions, recent history, and biographies of recent justices of the Indiana, West Virginia, and Ohio courts are examined to establish a significant relationship between the presence of an activist advocate justice and active policy making by the courts. These courts' decisions in cases with policy making potential are contrasted with decisions in similar cases of three state supreme courts that did not have an advocate justice. Lopeman argues that the presence of an activist advocate explains a court's transformation to active policy making, and that other apparent explanations are insufficient. He emphasizes that the motives of an activist advocate are likely to determine the permanence of policy making in the court. This volume is an important resource for political scientists, legal scholars, and other researchers involved with judicial decision making, state politics, and state constitutional law.

In his Judicial Deliberations: A Comparative Analysis of Judicial Transparency and Legitimacy (Oxford 2004), the American-French scholar Mitchel Lasser has, among other things, tried to re-establish the strengths of the French cassation system. Using Lasser's approach and ideas as a starting point, in this book judges from the French, Belgian and Dutch Cassation Courts reflect on the challenges that their Courts are facing. The book also contains a series of contributions from scholars analyzing the wide range of factors that determine the legitimacy of these courts' decisions. Specific attention is given to the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights that has been so important for the moral legitimacy of the European legal order, and to courts in post-communist systems, which face many similar challenges and are even under greater pressure to modernize. The book is a multidisciplinary contribution to the international debate about the legitimacy of the highest courts' rulings as well as the concept of judicial leadership and offers a new perspective in the USA versus Europe debate. It is recommended reading for academics, judges, policymakers, political scientists and students. Nick Huls is a Professor of socio-legal studies at the Faculty of Law of the Erasmus University Rotterdam and Leiden University's Faculty of Law, The Netherlands. Maurice Adams is a Professor of law at Tilburg University, The Netherlands, and part-time Professor of comparative law at Antwerp University in Belgium. JaccoBomhoff is a Lecturer in law at the Law Department of the London School of Economics in the UK.

Despite plentiful discussion at various times, the personal victim has traditionally been afforded almost no formal role in the criminal justice process. Victims' rights have always met with stout opposition from both judges and the Lord Chancellor, who have guarded defendants' rights; the maintenance of professionally-controlled and emotionally unencumbered trials; and the doctrine that crime is at heart an offence against society, State, or Sovereign. Constructing Victims' Rights provides a detailed account of how this opposition was overcome, and of the progressive redefinition of victims of crime, culminating in 2003 in proposals for awarding near-rights to victims of crime. Based upon extensive observation, primary papers, and interviews, Paul Rock examines changes in the forms of criminal justice policy-making within the New Labour Government, observing how they shaped political representations and activities centred on victims of crime. He reveals how the issues of new managerialism, restorative justice, human rights, race and racism (after the death of Stephen Lawrence), and the treatment of rape victims after the trial of Ralston Edwards came to form a critical mass that required ordering and reconstruction. Constructing Victims' Rights unpicks and explains the resultant battery of proposals and the deft policy manoeuvre contained in the Domestic Violence, Crime, and Victims Bill of 2003. This, the solution to a seemingly intractable problem, was a work of finesse, proposing on the one hand, the imposition of statutory duties on criminal justice agencies and the granting of access to an Ombudsman, and on the other, a National Victims' Advisory Panel that would afford victims a symbolic voice, and a symbolic champion: a Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses.

This volume addresses the role of the judge and the parties in civil litigation in mainland China, Hong Kong and various European jurisdictions. It provides an overview and an analysis of how these respective roles have been changed in order to cope with growing caseloads and quality demands. It also shows the different approaches chosen in the jurisdictions covered.

Mainland China is introducing far-reaching reforms in its system of civil litigation. From an inquisitorial procedure, in which the parties play a relatively minor role, the country is changing to a more adversarial system with increased powers for the parties. At the same time, case management and the role of the judge as it is understood in mainland China remains different from case management and the role of the judge in Western countries, mainly as regards the limited powers of individual Chinese judges in this respect. Changes in China are justified by the ever-increasing case load of the Chinese courts and the consequent inability to deal with cases in an adequate manner, even though generally speaking Chinese courts still adjudicate civil cases within a relatively short time frame (this may, however, be problematic when viewed from the perspective of the quality of adjudication).

Growing caseloads and quality concerns may also be observed in various European states and Hong Kong. In these jurisdictions the civil procedural systems have a relatively adversarial character and it is some of the adversarial features of the existing systems of procedure which are felt to be problematic. Therefore, the lawmakers have opted for increasing the powers of the judge, often making the judge and the parties mutually responsible for the proper conduct of civil cases.

Starting from opposite directions, mainland China and the various European states and Hong Kong could meet half way in their reform attempts. This is, however, only possible if a proper understanding is fostered of the developments in these different parts of the World. Even though in both China and Europe the academic community and lawmakers are showing a keen interest in the relevant developments abroad, a study addressing the role of the judge and the parties in civil litigation in both China and Europe is still missing. This book aims to fill this gap in the existing literature.

This study proposes a multilateralist method of choice of law in order to alleviate the great disarray that currently exists in American choice law. In the early 20th century, there was a fairly-uniform multilateralist method of choice law. In the 1920s and 30s, however, scholars adn courts began to reject this method. Viewed as too mechanical the method sometimes resulted in the choice of law of a state with only a tenuous connection to the controversy. Currently, state courts use four different approached to choice law with numerous material variations. This study rejects these approaches on normative, constitutional, and practical grounds. Instead, it advocates that courts adopt a multilateralist approach to choice of law that is forum- and content-neutral and that respects the rights of both individuals and states. The study also argues that such an approach should satisfy a constitutional standard that requires a court not choose one state's law when another state has a significantly closer connection to controversy.

The proposed method consists of two parts. The first part determines the states that have created legal relations applying to the dispute. When more than one state has created a legal realtions applying to the dispute. When more than one state has created a legal relation that applies to the controversy, the second part adopts the law of the state that had the closest connection. The study then applies the suggested method to numerous choice of law problems.

This book provides the first in-depth analysis of a wide variety of legal problems and policy issues that directly involve the judiciary, together with a discussion of the historical context of these issues and their current implications. The methods of nominating, appointing, and electing justices, and the provisions and prohibitions governing judicial compensation, are first examined. Grounds for judicial disqualification are presented, and the regulation of political activity on the part of judges and judicial candidates is considered. Three chapters relating to judicial discipline deal with removal and other disciplinary actions, as well as the criminal and civil liability of judges. The authors focus on both the grounds for imposing discipline and the various methods employed to evaluate and punish alleged misconduct.

The effect of modern and communication technology on civil procedure first appeared on the agenda of the conference organized by the International Association of Procedural Law in 1999, verifying Lord Woolf's statement from the 90's, that "IT will not only assist in streamlining and improving our existing systems and process; it is also likely, in due course, itself to be catalyst for radical change as well...."

At the conference in Pecs in the autumn of 2010 participants from three continents and twenty-five countries examined all aspects of the impact of modern information technology on civil procedure beginning with the electronic submission of the application, ranging from electronic service of documents and electronic means of proof supported by modern information technology. In addition to the practical issues they discussed the possible impact of electronic procedures on traditional principles of civil procedure. The conference book contains seven main reports and eleven correferates, the foreword was written by Prof. Peter Gottwald, the President of the International Association of Procedural Law.

Prized by practitioners since the first edition appeared in 1998, "Dispute Resolution in Asia" provides a much wider spectrum of Asian laws and approaches to dispute resolution than is traditional in comparative studies. It examines arbitration, litigation, and mediation in thirteen countries, with detailed practical essays each written by a senior lawyer with vast knowledge and experience of dispute resolution in his or her own country. Contributions vary in style and content and thus reflect the diversity of legal systems and cultures in Asia. The third edition of this popular book has been expanded by the inclusion of a chapter on Korea and a discussion of investment treaty arbitrations. All chapters have been revised and updated to incorporate recent developments, such as the enactment of relevant new legislation in Malaysia. Statistics on arbitration centres in Asia are also included. As a comprehensive practical guide to the practice and procedure of dispute resolution in the important trading countries of Asia, this book will be of great value to corporate counsel and international lawyers and business people, as well as to students of dispute resolution.

This book presents a hotly debated issue concerning the ownership of trust property in China. The book describes various conventional interpretations of Chinese Trust Law submitted by legal scholars and compares diverse approaches regarding the ownership of trust property provided by jurisdictions globally. The book does not directly answer the question "Who is the owner of trust property in China?" Instead, using a social capital perspective, it develops a more practical perspective to explain why Chinese trust business has grown rapidly even in lack of legal certainty regarding the location of ownership of trust property. The book also further predicts under what conditions is the time ripe to clarify the location of the ownership of trust property in China. By employing those sociological concepts often used to depict and analyze society, this book outlines the structure of the Chinese trust business and related social relations in different stages, i.e., the current rapid development stage, and the possible transitional stage in the near future. The focus is on how the social network structure affects the behavior of actors (such as the settlor, the trustee, and the beneficiaries, and/or their potential candidates) within the relevant section of Chinese society. The book provides readers with an intensive analysis of the impacts of historical, cultural, and social elements on the legislation and development of trust law in China. It will appeal both to lawyers interested in the Chinese trust business and to comparative law researchers and social scientists.