Gangs in the DRC and El Salvador: towards a third generation of gang violence interventions?

The phenomenon of gangs in El Salvador and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has already been researched, but a comparative study of gangs and gang policies is lacking. In this paper we discuss several gang violence prevention initiatives regarding the Mara Salvatrucha and Barrio 18 in El Salvador, and the kuluna and bashege in Kinshasa, DRC. In order to analyze the different gang interventions, we implement the typology of first and second gang violence prevention initiatives (Rodgers et al. 2009), and propose the evolution towards a third generation of gang violence prevention interventions. While first generation initiatives are security and law-enforcement driven, and second generation initiatives socio-preventive driven, third generation initiatives are more politically driven. The latter indicates a shift towards a vision of dialogue and negotiations to deal with gang violence. However, the different generations are not predefined within time and third generation initiatives can also be followed up by first generation initiatives, which was for example the case in the gang truce in El Salvador. Also, comparative gang research includes challenges, especially when the gang phenomenon in one country is better researched and documented than in other countries. As such, we were unable to identify politically-driven initiatives in the DRC to compare with the ones in El Salvador. Further research is thus required. With this paper we not only aim to contribute to the literature on gang violence prevention and reduction initiatives, we also want to push researchers, practitioners and policymakers to look beyond the borders when setting up gang (violence) prevention and rehabilitation projects, and to learn from other regions where similar initiatives have been implemented to deal with comparable issues of gang violence.     

DNA analysis and the Freedom of Information Act: information or invasion?

This note explores the possibility of release of an individual's DNA analysis to any person who requests it through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), after an individual's post-aircraft accident DNA profile has been developed by the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI). It analyzes whether the request would fall under the FOIA's 552(b)(6) exemption, which weighs a person's privacy interest against any public interest in such information, or if the release would constitute a "clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."     

Removing the barriers; adolescent coping and attitudes towards mental health services in custodial settings – Can we improve services?

Young people in custodial care are known to have high levels of mental health and emotional problems, and recent policy and service developments have sought to improve their access to services. However, little is known about how they cope or about what would increase their uptake of services (when such services are available). This study aimed to develop, validate and use a standardised measure to examine the coping, help-seeking and attitudes of a larger cohort of young people in custody. There was a marked reluctance to seek help for any but the most serious of problems, but there were also indicators of what would make services more acceptable to this population, with implications for both commissioning and delivering services. In particular, greater involvement of parents and carers, offering a wider range of interventions and offering them more flexibly, and challenging stigma within the secure environment may increase uptake of services.     

Punitive attitudes and causal attribution of crime among Israeli police officers: is there a gender gap?

Policy-makers and researchers have long been interested in the punitive attitudes and causal attribution of crime of police officers. Understanding the punitive attitudes and causal attribution of crime of those who enforce the law is necessary for both theoretical and practical reasons. The current study examines gender differences in punitive attitudes and causal attribution of crime among police officers at the beginning and at the end of their academic studies. One hundred and one police officers (47 policewomen and 54 policemen) participated in this study. The main results indicate that (a) policemen held more punitive attitudes than policewomen, (b) there were significant gender differences in the first year of academic study, with stronger support of classical theories (more punitive) among policemen compared with policewomen, but no gender differences were found in the last year, (c) police officers tended to attribute classical theories (more punitive) to the causes of crime regardless of gender and year of study, and (d) belief in individual positivism (less punitive) was greater among policemen than policewomen, and among the men, it was greater in the last year of studies than in the first year. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

Law Enforcement and the Rights of the Accused: Are the Police Getting a Bad Rap?

Nationwide, law enforcement professionals have endured increasing scrutiny regarding their treatment of custodial suspects and their alleged abridgement of suspects’ Constitutional rights. At the same time, in the interests of community safety, many members of the public fully expect police officers to function efficiently in arresting and facilitating the prosecution of likely perpetrators. These perspectives reflect due-process and crime-control models respectively. Very little is known, however, about how law enforcement professionals actually view the rights of the accused when not acutely immersed in the cross-currents of public opinion. Using an anonymous survey, the current investigation addresses both Miranda rights as well as the European Union’s (EU) much more comprehensive approach to the rights of the accused. In general, this sample of 209 urban police officers favored protections of criminal suspects that went considerably beyond Miranda safeguards.     

A law for need or a law for greed?: Restoring the lost law in the international law of foreign investment

The 1990s brought about a change in the international law of foreign investment due to the primacy achieved by the tenets of neo-liberalism. They drove concerns about the environment and poverty away from the concerns of the law and gave priority to the interests of multinational corporations by enhancing their ability for movement of assets and the absolute protection of these assets through treaty rules. The regime created by this law was operated through secure systems of dispute settlement through arbitration which also enabled the stabilization of these rules. In the process, private power of a section within the hegemonic state was able to subvert international law through the use of low order sources of the law and secure a system of investment promotion and protection. The restoration of the more universal themes of environmental protection and poverty alleviation is necessary. This paper outlines the developments that accentuated the sectional interests of multinational capital and explores the means by which a change that reflects the global interests could be effected.

Child-related leave and women’s labour market outcomes: towards a new paradigm in the European Union?

The current European Union (EU) legislative framework on child-related leave is facilitating an imbalance in the take-up of leave by women over men. There is a consolidated EU right to maternity leave for mothers but there is no parallel EU right to paternity leave for fathers. The EU right to parental leave is for both working mothers and fathers, but its design does not encourage an equal take-up by women and men. The aim of this article is to gain insight into the effects of child-related leave on women’s labour market outcomes. On the one hand, it reviews and analyses economic literature which points to the adverse consequences of leave on women’s earnings, and even on women’s labour market participation when the absences from work are very prolonged. On the other hand, it underlines the new direction followed by the European Commission towards greater equality between men and women at home and at work.     

FDA preemption of drug and device labeling: who should decide what goes on a drug label?

The Supreme Court decided an issue that is critical to consumer health and safety last year. In April 2009, the Supreme Court held that extensive FDA regulation of drugs did not preempt a state law claim that an additional warning on the label was necessary to make the drug reasonably safe for use. Thus, states--and even courts and juries--are now free to cast their vote on what a drug label should say. This is in direct contrast to medical devices, where the federal statute regulating medical devices expressly provides that state regulations are preempted. This Article discusses basic preemption principles and drugs, and explores the policy ramifications of pro- and anti-preemption policy in the healthcare industry.     

Should preemption apply in a pharmaceutical context? An analysis of the preemption debate and what regulatory compliance statutes contribute to the discussion

Should the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s determination that a product is safe negate a private litigant's cause of action under state law in all circumstances, unless the FDA determines that the manufacturer withheld relevant information regarding the safety of the product? This Note concludes that such federal preemption is proper because the FDA is fully capable of making a determination regarding the adequacy of the information disclosed by a pharmaceutical manufacturer without state interference. Additionally, such interference on the state level hinders the FDA's objectives and effective functioning. Thus, determinations about the adequacy of the information provided to the FDA should remain in the Agency's sound discretion and not be questioned at the state level.