Criminal justice in the Middle East

Criminal justice in the Middle East conjures up images of severed hands, religious police, and qadi justice. Yet those seeking a more accurate picture find few sources. Conventional treatments of the region focus on Islamic law, although few Middle Eastern states actually base their legal systems on Islamic law. This article argues that in the Middle East as elsewhere, rulers use criminal justice to achieve two related ends: to maintain order generally, and to maintain a particular order — to preserve the regime in power and the interests and values of those who support it. A comparative historical analysis of the emergence of the police and judiciary links these two ends, and these two institutions.     

The Perceived Seriousness of Crime in the Middle East

This paper builds on previous work in examining the seriousness of criminal acts. The research was conducted to determine the seriousness of several criminal acts in the Middle East with the goal to determine whether certain characteristics of the respondents would be associated with different perceptions as to the seriousness of different types of crimes. The findings of this study differ significantly from previous research in finding Moral Crimes to be perceived as extremely serious, in fact, about as serious as violent acts. However, the rank order of violent, property and white collar crimes, when the moral crimes are eliminated, are consistently with previous research. Similar to previous research, no difference was found in the overall ranking of crimes by any of the subgroups analyzed. It was found that religiosity (Islamic Fundamentalism) was the best predictor of a respondent's overall perception as to the seriousness of crime.     

Legal Diversity in the Middle East: Some Comparative Research Horizons

This paper sketches the contours of Middle Eastern jurisprudence by focusing on the historical processes which gave rise to Islamic law and the four schools of justice which branched out from the seminal doctrines of Muhammad. Sources of case law and potential research horizons are discussed within the framework of comparative criminal justice.     

Policing terrorism in India

Policing terrorism in India is fraught with difficulty. India is a large, heterogeneous democracy that is surrounded by countries experiencing their own intense problems with terrorism. The legal structure, inherited from the colonial past, is struggling to cope with the demands placed upon it by a country of 1.1 billion. India is a federation and this also complicates the structures needed for counter-terrorism. Despite the democratic framework, policing in India is largely an inheritance from the non-democratic colonial past—a past that paid scant regard to the doctrine of separation of powers. Given these problems, India’s performance in policing terrorism has been mixed. We should not look for any early resolution of the problem of terrorism, either through preventive investigation or political amelioration of the issues that contribute to terrorism. But for all of that, India has done well to adhere to its basic democratic norms in the face of what is, by Western standards, a major terrorism problem.     

恐怖主义定义解读

科学界定恐怖主义的定义是研究恐怖主义问题的逻辑起点,也是确立对恐怖主义问题基本立场的前提。目前国内外关于恐怖主义定义的界定归纳起来有三种类型,即词典定义、政府界定、学者诠释。要准确界定恐怖主义必须全面把握恐怖主义的内在特征,确定恐怖主义内涵;了解恐怖主义历史演变并对定义外延作适当限定;正确认识当代恐怖主义与民族解放运动。     

Turkey, Water and the Middle East: Some Issues Lying Ahead

This article analyzes cross-border water disputes in Mesopotamiathat involve Turkey, Iraq and Syria. It focuses on the SoutheasternAnatolia Project (Turkish: Güneydou Anadolu Projesi (GAP))that is being undertaken by various administrations of the governmentof the Republic of Turkey in the last few decades and triesto shed light on some important legal issues surrounding it.On 3 October 2005, Turkey began negotiations with the EuropeanUnion (EU) for accession as a full member. Attention is alsogiven to the extent to which the matter may complicate Turkey'srelations with the EU during these negotiations. Water conflicts in the Middle East have recently become a popularsubject for international scholars.¹ Numerous writers, fromacademics to intelligence analysts, have contributed variousperspectives to the increasingly complex issues surroundingthe topic. Scholars who specialize in water problems in theMiddle East have devoted particular attention to the regionwatered by the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers, and their tributaries—anarea commonly known as Mesopotamia. Many of these publicationsare promulgated by two distinct (and opposing) party views:that of the Turkish government on the one hand, and that ofthe Syrian and Iraqi governments on the other.² Consequently,much of the work underpinning the growing body of scholarshipin this area reflects the biases of each position. In analyzing the longstanding conflicts over water rights inMesopotamia, this paper endeavors to accomplish several things.First, to give readers a more complete understanding of thecurrent dispute, a detailed account of the opposing views ofTurkey and Syria/Iraq is provided. Second, the merits of eachposition are weighed in light of the current state of publicinternational law, with particular attention given to Turkey'sdesire to exercise extensive control over the watercourses atissue. Lastly, the potential effects of the changing politicalclimate in the region—namely Turkey's accession talkswith the EU, Iraq's recent regime change, and the uncertaintyof Syria's political future—are considered and discussed.     

Meanings of terrorism

Terrorism is a notoriously plastic word, depending on user, audience, and political context. This paper focuses on shifts in its meanings since the early 1970s. As federal statutes made terrorism a criminal offense, common usage changed from a broad meaning to one that specified terrorism as a political crime. The argument is that the state shapes meaning and public discourse through law. Peircean semiotics and the semiotic philosophy of Russian linguist Vološinov provide a framework to explore relationships among politics, law, and civil life. Applied to the events of September 11, 2001 such an analysis further allows better understanding of certain interpreters of the September 11 attacks, notably Jean Baudrillard, Jacques Derrida, and Jürgen Habermas.     

Arab Defamation Laws: A Comparative Analysis of Libel and Slander in the Middle East

Nations in the Arab world are known for their restrictions on press freedom, with public officials often using defamation laws to hinder good journalism. To promote reform, this article analyzes defamation laws of six Arab countries – Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya and the United Arab Emirates – and compares them to international norms. In areas with strong press protections, three characteristics related to defamation law were identified. First, defamation cases should be handled by civil lawsuits rather than police complaints, so journalists are not threatened with jail for their reporting. Second, the law must afford greater scrutiny for public figures than for private individuals so that the powerful cannot stifle public debate. Third, truth must be an absolute defense against allegations of defamation, so that people cannot protect an undeserving good reputation. The analysis reveals that defamation provisions in these countries are not in alignment with international norms.     

Dealing with non-Palestinian Refugees in the Middle East: Policies and Practices in an Uncertain Environment

Despite the relevance of the issue in Middle Eastern politics,the study of non-Palestinian refugees and their treatment inthe region is a subject that has received little attention inthe academic community. This paper attempts to fill this gapby examining the evolution of refugee policies in the MiddleEast between two of the major events that have characterizedthe region in the last decade, the 1990-1991 and 2002-2003 ‘GulfCrises’, and by critically analysing the factors thathave influenced these developments. In mapping the legal andadministrative provisions that Middle Eastern governments havedevised to address the issue, I observe that no substantialbreakthrough in formal policies has occurred. Overall, refugeepolicies in the region remain far from the standards of theinternational refugee regime. In turning to the ‘politics’of refugee policy in the region, however, I show that this areahas been more dynamic than the sole focus on formal aspectswould indicate. This is apparent if we look at the issue ofrefugees in the Middle East from the perspective of the relationsbetween local authorities and UNHCR, the main players involvedin this policy area. Despite the difficult environmental conditions,negotiations have been ongoing throughout the 1990s, and theyhave led to some limited improvement in the treatment of refugees.Yet, with the deterioration of the regional and internationalpolitical context, such promising developments have recentlycome to a standstill and this fact is reflected in the generalworsening of the condition of refugees in the area.     

反恐立法述评

为了打击恐怖主义犯罪,世界上已有一些反恐立法,其中包括联合国、有些国际组织和国家对反恐所作的规定。中国当前也有反恐立法,内容涉及参加国际条约而承担的反恐义务、刑法中直接与反恐有关的一些罪名和刑法中间接与反恐相关的罪名等。综观中国现行的反恐立法,还有可完善的地方,主要是:确定恐怖主义犯罪的概念、制订专门的反恐法律和规定专门的反恐机构和监督反恐的机构等。     

Contentious Politics in the Courthouse: Law as a Tool for Resisting Authoritarian States in the Middle East

Under what conditions will individuals mobilize law to resist states that operate above the law? In authoritarian countries, particularly in the Middle East, law is a weapon the state wields for social control, centralizing power, and legitimation. Authoritarian legal codes are overwhelmingly more deferential to state authority than protective of citizens' rights. Nevertheless, people throughout the Arab world deploy law to contest a broad array of state abuses: land expropriations, unlawful arrests, denials of jobs and welfare, and so on. Using detailed interviews in Jordan and Palestine, I outline a theory of law as a tool for resisting authoritarian state actors. Integrating qualitative insights with survey experiments fielded in Egypt and Jordan, I test this theory and show that aggrieved individuals mobilize law when they expect courts are powerful and attainable allies in contentious politics. My results further demonstrate that judicial independence does not uniformly increase authoritarian publics' willingness to access courts.     

Post-9/11 International Artist Exchanges Between the United States and the Middle East

Since 9/11, the U.S. government has gradually increased its budget for cultural exchange to improve its estranged relationship with Middle Eastern ¹ 1. The Middle East, or the greater Middle Eastern region, is frequently labeled with distinctive titles. For example, the State Department identifies the region as the “Near East,” and “North Africa and the Middle East” is broadly utilized by the grant-related organization, the Foundation Center. Additionally, the term “Arab” refers to someone who uses the Arabic language and whose cultural background is Arabic. Thus, to promote consistency and to prevent unnecessary confusion, “the Middle East” will be utilized in this article. countries. However, U.S. private foundations have been reluctant to sponsor international artist exchanges with the region. This article describes the funding trends of both public and private sources; explains the consequences and coping strategies of U.S. arts presenters through a case study of the Kennedy Center's 2009 Arabesque Festival; and examines the effects of the new laws and regulations created after the terrorist attacks that seem to be influencing the activities of private funders.     

The ARAB Spring’s Constitutional Indigestion: Has Democracy Failed in the Middle East?

In 2013, 3 years after the advent of the ‘Arab Spring’, there is still no single unifying political reform narrative in the Arab World. The unprecedented opportunity for reform and state building appears to have stalled with Islamist movements more concerned with questions of Islamic identity and religious ethics rather than constitutionalism. Incoming governments have lapsed back to the use of police power to curb dissent and protest thus raising the crucial questions: Have post-revolution events proven that the Middle East is incompatible with democracy? Is entrenching democracy in the Middle East failing?     

中国与北非中东变局中的国际法

北非中东一些国家的形势突变,反映了西方国家正在努力构建有利于己方价值观的世界格局,也表明在构建国际秩序方面,除了经济、政治及军事因素以外,还有"人道"和"人权"的考量。联合国安理会关于利比亚问题的决议与国际法的新走向,反映了国际关系中新的价值取向。然而,国际法规则存在于多个领域,有多种视角和原则。在这些领域,不同的规则有不同的的考量:基于一定价值理念的"人权"或"人道",与国家主权原则等国际法其他规则之间存在冲突。当今国际社会对是否要对叙利亚局势予以干涉的博弈,反映了国际法规则在国际秩序形成过程中的重要性。所以它不仅事关叙利亚国家和人民,也关乎整个世界局势的走向与发展。中国在联合国安理会合理运用国际法,体现了她作为大国对国际责任的坚持。