Challenging Corporate 'Humanity': Legal Disembodiment, Embodiment and Human Rights

This article interrogates the corporate use of human rightsdiscourse. It does so in light of concern surrounding corporatedistortion of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)paradigm,¹ and in light of the fact that corporations can claimshelter under human rights documents, particularly—asrecently discussed by Emberland²—the European Conventionof Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR). The authoroffers a critical exploration of corporate human rights claims(and some arguments advanced in their favour), and identifiesthe phenomenon of legal disembodiment (or ‘quasi-disembodiment’),linking it to both a genealogical account of human rights andthe nature of liberal legal personality. This reading of humanrights genealogy invites the reader to focus on a series ofparadoxes surrounding human rights, including their nature asa form of sacral construct, and locates human rights at an entrenchedand challenging interface between historical and contemporarypatterns of inclusion and exclusion. Quasi-disembodiment emergesfrom the analysis as a key conceptual conduit for the legalreception of corporate human rights claims. Linking the ECHRto the liberal human rights tradition, the author suggests thatnotwithstanding judicial protection of corporations as beneficiariesof ECHR protection, it remains essential to engage in a normativecritique of the very notion of corporate human rights. Beneathhuman rights law (and the related closures of legal discourse)it is possible to trace a human rights-oriented critique thatadopts human embodiment (and its quintessential link with humanvulnerability) as the ethical foundation of human rights.³ Emphasisingembodied vulnerability as the foundation of human rights yieldsa significant and ethically relevant distinction between corporationsand human beings—a distinction with intriguing possibilitiesfor the future theorisation of human rights—and one thatarguably problematises the corporate use of human rights discourse.     

Chechnya's Right of Secession under Russian Constitutional Law

This article was written in a period of time when the escalationof the armed conflict in Northern Caucasus and particularlyin Chechnya reached the zenith of violence and unpardonablehuman slaughter.¹ Although contemporary international law doesnot accept the separatist movement's claims to create its ownstatehood, we have to look at the constitutional proceduresfor the modifications of the Fundamental Law of the RussianFederation: At the same time, the political situation afterthe dissolution of the former Soviet Union, the strong presidentialpowers in the constitutional hierarchy of executive organs,and the evident tensions between them and the Russian constitutionaltraditions have to be taken into account. The ambiguous and complicated character of the Chechen conflictis due to the fact that the Russian Federation has tried tokeep this conflict from the attention of the international communityby claiming that the Russian-Chechen conflict is an entirelyinternal matter. It is doubtful in this case if the Russianleadership, who have continued their tough policy, will finda peaceful solution to the almost ten-year armed conflict inthe region. Footnotes ^*LLM, Sofia University "Saint Kliment Ohridski", Faculty ofLaw.     

US tax treatment of foreign grantor trust during the year of the Grantor's death

This article, specifically, addresses the US tax treatment ofa foreign trust that changes from a foreign grantor trust toa foreign non-grantor trust when the grantor (settlor) diesduring the year and how the trust accounts for its distributednet income and undistributed net income in the year of death.¹     

Assessing the Credibility of Refugee Applicants: A Judicial Perspective

The principal responsibility of refugee decision makers is todetermine those to whom refugee protection is owed. The mannerin which these decisions are to be made in Australia is thesubject of ongoing debate. However, that debate is not the subjectof this paper. The focus of this paper is on the credibilityassessment of refugee applicants and its principal purpose isinstructive. It is my hope that it will enhance the credibilityof credibility assessment within existing processes. Its secondarypurpose is to provide a basis from which policy makers may considerlegislative and other procedural change. It has been suggested that the ‘devil is in the detail’in refugee decision making. Working in a common law country,Australian refugee decision makers are afforded the (often binding)benefit of extensive judicial review of the refugee determinationprocess.¹ Thus, for Australian decision makers, the ‘devilin the detail’ is often to be found in a plethora of bindinglegal precedent. Accordingly, while the first part of this paperdiscusses selected matters which have facilitated the assessmentof the credibility of refugee applicants in Australia, as oneof the most authoritative domestic sources available, the secondpart of this paper principally focuses on the expressed viewsof Australian courts after examining credibility findings indecisions of the Refugee Review Tribunal.²     

Offshore IT Outsourcing and the 8th Data Protection Principle - legal and regulatory requirements - with reference to Financial Services

In the global sourcing world, particularly in financial services,offshore outsourcing and associated data transfers are commonplaceand increasing, searching out lower cost third countries, whichmay have even fewer data protections. In such an environment,the1998 Data Protection Act’s 8^th Principle and associated7^th Principle security provisions become critical protectionsfor UK data subjects. Yet the few statistics that exist indicate that unrestrictedtransfers appear to occur from several EEA countries. Furthercriticisms are that the UK 1998 Act does not fully align withthe EEA Directive, the Schedule 4 exceptions are overly wide,the country assessment process can be ignored with the InformationCommissioner’s ‘blessing’ and his powers andresources are limited. Financial Services may be a contrasting exception, where theindustry regulator, the FSA, ‘incidentally’ enforcesmany of the data protection requirements of overseas data transfers,has significant direct enforcement powers and a model ADR approachthrough the Financial Ombudsman. Although the UK banking lawand regulation meets many privacy requirements, it falls shortof the full data protection requirements, clearly illustratingthe value that data protection legislation brings. The alternative self regulatory approach exemplified by theUS Safe Harbor illustrates the weaknesses of pure self regulation,recognized by the US financial services which are moving towardscentralized data privacy supervision with the Gramm-Leach-BlileyAct, reinforcing the worldwide trend towards a more EEA-stylesupervised personal data protection world. In short, seven years after the 1998 Act was passed, we areready for an appropriate mid-course correction, with the 8thPrinciple (& 7^th Principle) needed more than ever in thegrowing outsourced world.     

Amendment to new regulations enabling exempt private trust companies to be established in the British Virgin Islands

The Financial Services (Exemptions) (Amendment) Regulations,2007 (the ‘Amendment Regulations’) were made bythe British Virgin Islands Cabinet on 27 December 2007.¹ The Amendment Regulations amend the Financial Services (Exemptions)Regulations, 2007² by extending until 31 July 2008 the periodduring which paragraphs (c) and (d) of Direction 7 of the Banksand Trust Companies (Application Procedures) Directions, 1991(the ‘Directions’) apply. The effect     

An Analysis of the Role of NGOs in the WTO

It seems that the WTO Secretariat has offered some room forNGOs to participate in both the policymaking and the disputesettlement in the WTO. The note points out the structural weaknessesin the ability of NGOs to do so. Following Richard Shell’s"The Trade Stakeholders Model", this note offers suggestionsfor making NGOs participation more meaningful so as to protecttheir interests. Footnotes ^*LL.B of Law School, Xiamen University, China; LL.M of Law School,Hull University, United Kingdom     

Protecting the Right to Housing in the Aftermath of Natural Disaster: Standards in International Human Rights Law

In 2006, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees reportedthat an average of 211 million people each year were directlyaffected by the accumulated impact of natural disasters.¹ Thisis approximately five times the number of people thought tohave been affected by conflict over the past decade.² It iscommonly expected that, as a result of climate change, populationgrowth and inappropriate urbanisation, the incidence, severityand impact of natural disasters will continue to rise. And yetwhile the obligations of states in situations of armed conflicthave been extensively debated, the applicability of human rightslaw in the aftermath of natural disaster has not been so widelyexamined by regional or international human rights bodies. Thispaper considers the obligations of governments in the aftermathof natural disasters, with a particular focus on the right tohousing. The applicability of human rights law (and specificallyeconomic, social and cultural rights) in the aftermath of naturaldisaster is considered in a general sense, followed by a discussionof the content of the right to housing, and the obligationsof governments to respect, protect and fulfil this right inthe course of responding to disaster. The question of whetherstates have an obligation to provide restitution, compensationor other form of reparation to those who have lost homes, landand property by reason of natural disaster is also discussed.The paper draws on examples from the Indian Ocean tsunami (2004),the Pakistan earthquake (2005) and the South Asian floods (2007),and identifies specific elements of government obligations thatare of particular importance in ensuring the right to adequatehousing in the aftermath of natural disaster.     

The Jean Mpambara Case: Outlining "Culpable Omissions" in International Criminal Law

The Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal forRwanda, through its judgment in Jean Mpambara case, outlinedthe significance of culpable omissions, outlining three broadoffences under which it could be used as evidence. While itis clear that an omission may be considered as evidence of aidingand abetting or joint criminal enterprise, it is still not clearwhether omission of failure of duty to prevent or punish willbe considered as part of Article 6(1) of the statute as doneby the other trial chambers,¹     

Clear, Simple, and Precise Legislative Drafting: How Does a European Community Directive Fare?

In 2001, Martin Cutts redrafted Toy-Safety Directive 88/378/EEC¹in plain language. He criticized the language of that Directiveas being archaic legalese.² He added that Directives, as a whole,were poorly drafted.³ The European Commissions Legal Servicerejected his criticisms. It stated that it had published theEuropean Commission’s plain language guidelines⁴ afterDirective 88/378/EEC had been drafted. In a previous articlein the Statute Law Review,⁵ Butt and Castle’s⁶ plain languageguidelines were explicated using examples from Directive 2002/2/EC.⁷In this article, their guidelines are applied to the whole ofthat Directive to see if its language is ‘clear, simple,and precise’.⁸ The criticisms made in the previous article,⁹combined with those made in this article, suggest that the draftersof Directive 2002/2/EC¹⁰ have not yet mastered the skill ofwriting in ‘clear, simple, and precise’ language.     

The Scots Statute Style and Substance

New or renewed legislatures afford opportunities for reassessingold legislatures, and introducing new and improved forms oflegislative composition. Thus the North American experience,derived from the breakaway Colonies, came down heavily againstreferential legislation, the Australian and New Zealand experienceimplemented many Benthamite reforms ahead of the Old Country,and the tabula rasa afforded generally by Colonial and Commonwealthlegislation at first enabled, and eventually enforced on itsparent legislature, an explicit and consistently adhered tosystem of textual amendment. In view of the opportunities affordedby Scottish Devolution, what innovations may we expect of thenew Scottish statute? Thanks to the earlier work of Coode,¹to the continuing surveillance of the Statute Law Society,²to the committed enthusiasm of parliamentary counsel such asDriedger,³ Dale,⁴ and Bennion,⁵ and especially to the seminalwork of linguistic analysts such as Plowden,⁶ Mellinkoff,⁷ Frye,⁸and Bowers,⁹ new theories, practices, forms, and precedentsabound as never before for statute law. Nevertheless, thereare also questions of tradition, culture, and national identityat issue—especially for a restored or reborn legislaturesuch as the present Scottish Parliament.¹⁰ This paper examinessome of the issues, both in terms of legislative style and legislativesubstance, which pertain to the new Scottish statute.     

The ongoing design duty in Universal Music Australia Pty Ltd v Sharman License Holdings Ltd Casting the scope of copyright infringement even wider

The Australian Federal Court case of Universal Music AustraliaPty Ltd v Sharman License Holdings Ltd (‘Sharman’)¹is the latest in a series of peer-to-peer (P2P) filesharingcases from various jurisdictions that has found the softwaredistributor/technology provider liable for copyright infringement.² Sharman followed a few months after the groundbreaking US SupremeCourt case of MGM Studios v Grokster Ltd ³ (‘Grokster’)that had acknowledged the Sony safe harbour for technology providersbut also introduced an inducement of infringement doctrine todeal with reprehensible conduct of infringers. While both cases involved similar technology and shared a numberof similarities on the facts and legal principles⁴, a closerexamination of Sharman shows that the net of copyright infringementin P2P filesharing is cast wider than that in Grokster. The effect of Sharman is an increased burden on the technologyprovider and the potentially tremendous consequences on innovationdue to the lack of a clear safe harbour as well as the wideningof the design obligation.     

Market Failure and Non-Standard Contracting: How the Ghost of Perfect Competition Still Haunts Antitrust

Modern antitrust policy has a ‘love hate’ relationshipwith non-standard contracts that can overcome market failure.On the one hand, courts have abandoned various per se rulesthat once condemned such agreements outright, concluding thatmany non-standard contracts may produce benefits that are cognizableunder the antitrust laws.¹ The prospect of such benefits, itis said, compels courts to analyze these agreements under theRule of Reason, under which the tribunal determines whethera given restraint enhances or destroys competition.² At thesame time, courts, scholars, and the enforcement agencies haveembraced methods of rule of reason analysis that are undulyhostile to such agreements.³ In particular, courts and othersare too quick to view such agreements and the market outcomesthey produce as manifestations of market power. This articleseeks to explain why these agreements are still the object ofundue hostility.     

Pepper v Hart: A Footnote to Professor Vogenauer's Reply to Lord Steyn

This Note is intended to stand as a short supplement to thecompelling article by Stefan Vogenauer entitled, ‘A Retreatfrom Pepper v Hart? A Reply to Lord Steyn’ published inthe Journal at the end of 2005.¹ In his article, Professor Vogenauercalls in question the argument advanced by Lord Steyn in hisarticle in the Journal, entitled ‘Pepper v Hart: A Re-examination’.²In that article, Lord Steyn called for a retreat from the decisionof the House of Lords in Pepper v Hart³ concerning the circumstancesin which reference may be made to Hansard as an aid to statutoryconstruction and for a reinterpretation of the decision in linewith a theory that a Minister speaking in Parliament who givesan explanation of the meaning or effect of a clause in a Billshould be taken to create a binding legitimate expectation thatthe executive will apply the provision, once enacted, in thatsense. In this Note, I express my agreement with Professor Vogenauer’sargument, and seek to support it with some additional pointsunder three heads: (1) the proper interpretation of Pepper vHart and its status as authority; (2) the basis in principlefor adhering to that interpretation; and (3) conceptual difficultiesattached to Lord Steyn’s legitimate expectation thesis.     

Just 'Cause You're Smarter than Me Doesn't Give You a Right to Tell Me What to Do: Legitimate Authority and the Normal Justification Thesis

Joseph Raz's famous theory of authority is grounded in threeclaims about the nature and justification of authority. Accordingto the Preemption Thesis, authoritative directives purport toreplace the subject's judgments about what she should do. Accordingto the Dependence Thesis, authoritative directives should bebased on reasons that actually apply to the subjects of thedirective. According to the Normal Justification Thesis (NJT),authority is justified to the extent that subjects are morelikely to comply with right reason by following the authority'sdirectives than by following their own judgments about whatright reason requires.¹ In this article, I consider a number of ways in which NJT mightbe construed as a justification for authority. First, I evaluateNJT construed as a principle that would provide a practicaljustification for an individual to accept or recognize a particularperson or persons as a preemptive authority. Second, I evaluateNJT construed as a principle that describes the conditions underwhich a state or legal system is morally legitimate. I arguethat NJT is true under none of these interpretations.²     

The Lion, the Dragon and the Wardrobe Guarding the Doorway to Information and Communications Privacy on the Internet: A Comparative Case Study of Hong Kong and Singapore - Two Differing Asian Approaches

Almost a decade ago, the electronic commerce revolution began,led by such companies as Amazon.com and Ebay.com. These companieshave grown into the internet business giants they are today,diversifying in the products they sell, the services they provideand the jurisdictions they conduct business in. However, asidefrom these rare examples, most medium and small internet-basedbusiness enterprises have grown with the dot.com bubble anddissolved when it burst mid-way through the decade. Now, atthe 10th Anniversary of Electronic Commerce, after we have seenthe dot.com way of doing business launch like a rocket and plungelike a comet, subsequently emerging into a more cautious, butno less potential, avenue of doing business, other challengesnow face the industry as a whole to retain and obtain customers.Internet users are becoming increasingly wary of online transactions.²The irony is that as internet users become technologically savvy,they also become more aware of the dangers which connectivityentails and this inhibits their online behaviour. Chief amongthese concerns, and second only to cybercrimes, is the maintenanceof privacy in the context of the protection of personal information,particularly from the unsavory elements trawling the cyberworld.For cyber-trade and the e-commerce market to grow, and for thecontinued efficiency and utility of the internet for G2C andB2C transactions,³ governments and industries must re-instillthe trust and confidence of internet users both in commercialand non-commercial interaction.⁴     

The Concluding Observations of United Nations Human Rights Treaty Bodies

The seven principal United Nations-sponsored human rights treatiesstipulate that States Parties submit periodic reports to therespective treaty monitoring bodies (or ‘committees’)¹on the implementation of their treaty obligations. Followingthe review of a report, the treaty body in question issues aset of ‘concluding observations’, containing itscollective assessment of the State's record and recommendationsfor enhanced implementation of the rights in question. Arguably,the issuance of concluding observations is the single most importantactivity of human rights treaty bodies. It provides an opportunityfor the delivery of an authoritative overview of the state ofhuman rights in a country and for the delivery of forms of advicewhich can stimulate systemic improvements. Its significanceis all the greater now that the only accounts of the reviewof periodic reports which appear in the annual reports of thetreaty bodies are the adopted concluding observations.² Thisarticle seeks to test key aspects of the quality of concludingobservations. The analysis is set within the framework of reviewof the development of the practice.     

Can We Protect How We Do What We Do? A Consideration of Business Method Patents in Australia and Europe

In the long history of monopolies, business method patents area novel and recent edition. In the Digital Age, where time ismoney and speed is everything, innovative methods for undertakingbusiness are as important to a business as the products or servicesit provides to its clients. In recent years several reviews,conducted in both Australia and internationally,⁴ have questionedthe appropriateness of patenting business methods. This paperreviews the availability of business method patents in Australiain light of the 2006 decision of the Full Court of the FederalCourt in Grant v Commissioner of Patents,⁵ which confirmed theneed in Australia for a ‘useful product’ to issuefrom the working of a method (business or otherwise) in orderfor the method to be patentable. This paper will review argumentsboth criticising and defending business method patents and considerwhether business methods warrant special treatment.     

Which law applies? A reply to Professor Torremans

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

‘A book may be good for nothing; or there may be onlyone thing in it worth knowing; are we to read it all through?’(Samuel Johnson) This section is dedicated to the review ofideas, articles, books, films and other media. It will includereplies (and rejoinders) to articles, the evaluation of newideas or proposals, and reviews of books and articles both directlyand indirectly related to intellectual property law.

In a recent article,¹ Professor Torremans argues that the countryof origin (sometimes called the lex originis) should be thelaw applied to authorship and ownership of copyright.² There is no doubt that several countries do apply the countryof origin to initial ownership and authorship of copyright works.Citing both the Austrian and Belgian Codes on Private InternationalLaw as examples,³ Professor Torremans also mentions the decisionof the US Second Circuit of Appeals in . . . [Full Text of this Article]