Women on the edge of crime: Crack cocaine and the changing contexts of street-level sex work in New York City

In this paper, we attempt to examine, engender and contextualize the theses that (i) women's emancipation escalates [women's] crime and violence and (ii) women's drug use escalates [women's] crime and violence, by drawing on ongoing ethnographic fieldwork in relation to women crack smokers and the changing contexts of street-level sex work in New York City. The paper attempts to illustrate how the position of women crack smokers can only be understood by locating their lives, their illicit drug use and their income-generating activities within the context of a specific set of localized socio-economic and cultural developments. We suggest that observations from our research refute the theses that women are becoming more criminal and/or violent in the context of either their consumption of crack cocaine or their alleged emancipation.An earlier version of this paper was presented by the first author at the Joint Meetings, Law and Society Association and Research Committee on the Sociology of Law of the International Sociological Association, Amsterdam, 26–29 June 1991.     

Human rights safeguards and international cooperation in extradition: Striking the balance

Conclusion It is necessary to strike the correct balance between safeguarding the rights of the individual and engendering mutually beneficial cooperation between states in extradition matters. In the absence of effective global international human rights enforcement mechanisms, many of the traditional safeguards still have a real role to play in extradition. This article reviewed five such safeguards and found that all but the nationality exception should be retained to ensure that international cooperation and individual protection are both safeguarded for the common good of society.This is a revised version of a paper presented at an international workshop on Principles and Procedures for a New Transnational Criminal Law, organized jointly by the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law and the Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Freiburg, Germany, May 21–25, 1991.LL.B., University of Exeter 1973; LL.M., Osgoode Hall Law School 1974; D. Jur., Osgoode Hall Law School 1976.     

European Editors of Economics Journals—A General Discussion

In a final inquiry at the end of the Conference on Editorial Policies the three editors, Bruno S. Frey (Kyklos), Manfred J. Holler (Homo oeconomicus), and Jürgen G. Backhaus (European Journal of Law and Economics), were asked to comment on their editorial policies. They answered by explaining the challenges they were or still are confronted with, which strategies they have already developed to go on and of course what they have learnt from the deliberations at this conference. In their statements they referred to their preceding paper presentations, and the contributions by Wolfgang Bergsdorf, who is the chief editor of Die Politische Meinung, and Peter Senn.     

The Council of Europe Laundering Convention: A recent example of a developing international criminal law

Conclusion With the Laundering Convention, the Council of Europe has contributed once again to the development of the international criminal law and to the promotion of international criminal law cooperation. The Council has shown that it is possible to elaborate a complex, highly technical convention within a period of less than a year so long as the political will exists. It is now a matter for the individual member states and other states to sign, if they have not done so, or to ratify, if they have already signed the convention. The future of the Laundering Convention lies in the hands of those states that have responsibility for its application. An efficient tool for international criminal law cooperation has been created-it must now be used.This is a revised version of a paper presented at an international workshop on Principles and Procedures for a New Transnational Criminal Law, organized jointly by the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law and the Max-Planck-Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Freiburg, Germany, May 21–25, 1991. The opinions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Council of Europe.Juris kandidat, Uppsala University 1979. The author was Secretary to the Council of Europe expert committee that elaborated the Laundering Convention.     

Corporate crime: State-owned enterprises in China

Conclusion A decade ago, the Chinese leadership frankly acknowledged that the model of a fully planned economy, with its system of state-owned and state-run enterprises, was what Lenin had called a bureaucratic dream. 86 Today, state-owned enterprises are enjoying far more freedom to operate, and the state is trying to control them with more law and fewer plans. The use of criminal law to confront corporate crime is part of the effort to import advanced management methods from the West. Nonetheless, in the context of state ownership and Party leadership, the appropriateness of this approach is questionable.The Company Law is a new instrument to bring about fundamental changes in China's system of business organizations. These changes will help determine the scope and limits of criminal law, as applied to corporate enterprises, in the next decade. In this context, I would suggest replacing the concept ofdanwei crime with the concept of corporate or company (gongsi) crime; distinguishing thosefaren that can independently bear criminal liability from those that cannot; and clearly defining the elements of corporate offenses. Corporate criminal liability is a concept applicable when the corporation not only commits the crime but also has the legal capacity to be liable in its own right. Individual liability is still the sole principle applicable to a government agency, even if the crime is collectively committed.Given the historic context of China's socioeconomic reform, criminal law reform can advance only gradually. To insure that Western concepts fit the Chinese setting, lawmakers must make certain that every new criminal statute or regulation is enforceable even where enterprises remain closely interconnected with the state and decision-makers in publicly owned enterprises are mainly appointees of the state.I gratefully acknowledge the invitation of Daniel Prefontaine, Director of the International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; and of the Hon. Josiah Wood of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, to present an earlier version of this essay at the eighth international conference of the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law, Hong Kong, December 4–8, 1994. Thanks are also due to Madeleine Sann, Director of Publication,Criminal Law Forum, for her excellent editorial comments.Postgraduate Diploma of Legal Studies, ECIPSL 1984, LL.M., Shanghai Academy of Social Science 1985; Ph.D. candidate, Simon Fraser University.     

Competency Restoration: An Examination of the Differences Between Defendants Predicted Restorable and Not Restorable to Competency

According to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Jackson v. Indiana (1972), examiners must determine if a defendant has substantial probability of regaining competency through treatment in the foreseeable future. Previous research has indicated that, given the low base rate of defendants unable to be restored to competency, examiners are relatively poor at predicting which defendants will regain competency. Determining the characteristics of not restorable incompetent defendants and restorable incompetent defendants is a necessary first step toward improving examiners' ability to predict a defendant's likelihood of regaining competency. This study examined the competency evaluation reports of 468 defendants evaluated for competency to stand trial. Incompetent defendants significantly differed from competent defendants with regard to age, employment status, ethnicity, criminal charges, and psychiatric diagnosis. Few significant differences existed between defendants predicted restorable and those predicted not restorable by mental health examiners—the differences that did exist were related mainly to nonpsychiatric variables.     

Is there a “common law” of responsibility?

Contrary to common expectations and a good deal of legal folk wisdom, several surveys have failed to find group differences in the way people attribute responsibility and assign punishments. These nonfinding, suggest that there is a considerable degree of consensus about how to judge wrongdoing. The nature of this consensus is examined using survey data collected in two Japanese and one American cities. We examine the extent of group differences in the evaluation of inputs (here a set of hypothetical vignettes), decision rules, and punishments. The paper concludes with a discussion of the conceptual, theoretical, and methodological issues raised by these and similar findings of small group differences. Collectively, these three issues define, an agenda for future research on the nature and extent of a common law of responsibility.This is a revised version of a paper presented at the 1986 meeting of the Law and Society Association. The research was supported by seed funds from the Social Science Research Council and from the University of Michigan and by N.S.F. grant No. SOC 77-242918. Japanese data were gathered and analyzed with support from the Nihon Gakujutsu Shinkokai and Mombusho to the Japanese investigators: Yoko Hosoi, Zensuke Ishimura, Nozomu Matsubara, Haruo Nishimura, Nobuho Tomita, and Kazuhiko Tokoro. They have recently published a book on the project. (Ishimura et al., 1986).     

Continuing barriers to women's credibility: A feminist perspective on the proof process

This article is an expanded version of a paper presented at the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law Conference on Reform of Evidence Law, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, August 3–7, 1992.     

Explaining Controversial Organizational Decisions: To Legitimize the Means or the Ends?

We investigated the influence of information legitimizing the means—or decision procedures—versus information legitimizing the ends—or the decision outcome—on observers' reactions to an undesirable organizational decision. One hundred and sixty-one employees read an account of a company layoff occurring in a nearby city. The content was experimentally manipulated, such that participants either (i) did or did not receive information legitimizing the layoff procedures, and (ii) did or did not receive information legitimizing the layoff itself. Furthermore, participants received one of two versions of the manipulations, to assess the generalizability of the results across two operationalizations of the primary independent variables. Whereas both information legitimizing the means and information legitimizing the ends were necessary (and neither sufficient) to mitigate observers' judgments of outcome unfairness, procedural information was necessary and sufficient to influence evaluations of the organization. Overall, the data are consistent with the notion that the effectiveness of managerial accounts might be determined not only by information explaining why but also information explaining how decisions are made.     

Social justice and legal justice

The main aim of this paper is to challenge the validity of the distinction between legal justice and social justice. It is argued that what we usually call legal justice is either an application of the more fundamental notion of social justice to legal rules and decisions or is not a matter of justice at all. In other words, the only correct uses of the notion of legal justice are derivative from the notion of social justice and, hence, the alleged conflicts between criteria of social and legal justice result from the confusion about the proper relationship between these two concepts. Two views about the social justice/legal justice dichotomy are of particular importance and will provide the focus for the argument: this dichotomy is sometimes identified with a classical distinction between distributive and commutative justice and sometimes with the distinction between substantive and procedural justice.     

Terrorism and the law: Historical contexts, contemporary dilemmas, and the end(s) of democracy

Recent proposals by the G7 (and Russia) to clamp down on terrorists and terrorism do not define that which is prohibited. Instead, a threat is communicated which in turn allows, among other things, greater attention to be paid officially to camouflage charities and terrorist use of the Internet. Nevertheless, it is somewhat of a truism to note that terrorist violence is ultimately defined or characterized, for purposes of legal prohibition, within a highly politicized atmosphere. Starting with a short summary of anti-terrorist codification efforts made this century, this article examines some of the security interests cited by governments today in their respective struggles against terrorism. More specifically, it is argued that individual perceptions of personal and societal threat are heightened unnecessarily not only by a constant stream of governmental anti-terrorist rhetoric, but further, by an awareness of official and unofficial methods of anti-terrorist surveillance, and the use to which the information so obtained can be put.     

Comparing the Social Service Utilization, Exposure to Violence, and Trauma Symptomology of Domestic Violence Female “Victims” and Female “Batterers”

Although some authors have suggested that women batterers may really be self-defending victims, to date, no research has been initiated to empirically support this assertion. This paper describes the design and outcomes of a research project that investigated the similarities and differences between women adjudicated as domestic violence batterers and women identified as domestic violence victims. Findings indicated group similarities in the areas of exposure to violence and social service utilization. Although both groups reported high levels of trauma symptomology, victim scores were significantly higher.     

The New Water Legislation of Zimbabwe and South Africa – Comparison of Legal and Institutional Reform

Recently, several new pieces of water legislation have been promulgated in both Zimbabwe and the Republic of South Africa. The new acts are an attempt to correct injustices of a colonial past and to trigger development towards effective, equitable and efficient integrated water resources management influenced by the policy decisions in Agenda 21 and the need to respect economic and social human rights. This article aims at identifying and describing factors of prime importance in the process of legal and institutional reform. Major factors are earmarked and derived from the proceedings in Zimbabwe and are compared with the situation in South Africa. Thorough analysis by the author of proceedings, preambles, memoranda, legislation and addenda has induced roughly 5 major reform issues: The call for equitable water distribution based on a widely consented water resources management strategy; The need for effective and efficient integrated water resources management conducive to stakeholder participation through decentralisation processes; The redressing of legal shortcomings in former water legislation with the emphasis on the introduction of integrated approaches; The introduction of instruments of cost recovery for water resources management; The need to develop human resources capacity and institutional strength within the implementing agencies.For both Southern African states, these issues appear to be of comparable importance as major triggers for legal and institutional reform, although not always in the same sense.The resulting most important legal and institutional changes are presented, discussed and compared. Finally, prospects for and constraints on implementation of the new water legislation in these countries are compared.     

Saleem A. Shah

This article introduces a special section ofLaw and Human Behavior entitled Commenorative Articles in Memory of Saleem Shah. The six articles that it introduces describe Shah's lifetime contributions to the development of concepts and research in law and mental health, as well as his substantial influence on the quality of forensic mental health services nationally and internationally.     

“Staatswirtschaftslehre”—A Component of “Staatswissenschaften” Today and Tomorrow

The paper starts from problems of reorganization of the Welfare State. The second paragraph contains definitions and materials. The third paragraph turns to the development of Staatswissenschaften, especially to cameralistic views, public choice and deregulation. The fourth section deals with present Staatswirtschaftslehre as a component of Staatswissenschaften. The fifth paragraph is focussed on deregulation and reorganization of the state.The paper demonstrates: Staatswissenschaften and Staatswirtschaftslehre will be important academic disciplines also tomorrow, though the State will be reorganized by privatization, non-government-organizations and rearrangements of private and public sector activities under the conditions of new technologies and open markets.     

The impact of human rights principles on extradition from Canada and the United States: The role of national courts

Conclusion Throughout this article, the primary emphasis has been on how the courts in Canada and the United States have decided to apply international human rights standards, many of which have been incorporated into national constitutions, in extradition cases. The emphasis on national courts reflects the particular North American experience, where only limited jurisdiction in these matters exists in the relevant international forum, the UN Human Rights Committee. Accordingly, resort must be made to domestic constitutional rights.In order to give practical effect to international human rights obligations in Canada and the United States, courts can play a useful role, in addition to the role exercised by the executive branch of government. The ambit of this role depends upon the point at which judicial interference is viewed as necessary to protect fundamental rights and override considerations of international cooperation. In Canada the point has been located where there is a risk of treatment that is simply unacceptable178 or that would shock the conscience. In the United States, courts have in the past demonstrated a degree of willingness to probe into potential violations that would be expected if extradition were to be granted and that would offend a federal court's sense of decency.¹⁸⁰ However, there is dispute about the propriety of this encroachment on the rule of noninquiry. Recently, the pendulum has begun to swing toward applying the rule of noninquiry more stringently and, at present, U.S. courts play a very limited role in examining the motives behind an extradition request and the procedures or punishment that likely await an individual upon return to the requesting state.While there are many differences between the constitutional regimes of protection in Canada and the United States as compared with the multilateral treaty protection of the European Convention, there appear to be a number of parallels in interpretation and application. Continued scrutiny of the jurisprudence from both sides of the Atlantic could benefit each jurisdiction.This article was originally prepared for an international workshop on Principles and Procedures for a New Transnational Criminal Law, organized jointly by the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law and the Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law, Freiburg, Germany, May 21–25, 1991. The views expressed herein are those of the authors themselves and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Canadian Department of Justice.B.A., University of Winnipeg 1975; LL.B., University of Manitoba 1978; LL.M., University of Toronto 1980.LL.B., University of Manitoba 1980; B.A., University of Manitoba 1986; Dip. Soc. Sci., University of Stockholm 1988; M.A., University of Toronto 1989.     

How Large Should the Strike Zone Be in “Three Strikes and You're Out” Sentencing Laws?

So-called three strikes and you're out sentencing laws for criminal offenders have proliferated in the United States. The laws vary considerably in their definitions of what constitutes a strike. This paper adapts the classic Poisson process model of criminal offending to investigate how varying sentence lengths and definitions of what constitutes a strike affect the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these sentencing laws. In particular, it asks whether, by using different definitions for the first, second, and third strikes or different sentence lengths, one can make the resulting incarceration more efficient in the sense of incapacitating more crimes per cell-year served.     

The relationship of the outcome and procedural fairness: How does knowing the outcome influence judgments about the procedure?

Justice theories distinguish between fair procedures and fair or favorable outcomes. However, it is not clear whether people can clearly separate judgments about procedures from knowledge of the outcomes of those procedures. Two experiments are reported which address that question. In both studies respondents evaluate the fairness of decision-making procedures. In one case those evaluations occur prior to knowing the outcome of the procedure (behind the veil), while in the other the outcome is known before the procedural evaluation (in front of the veil). Two hypotheses about outcome influence are tested: that knowing the outcome changes themeaning of procedural fairness and that knowing the outcome changes theweight given to procedural fairness. Findings of both studies suggest that prior knowledge about the outcome does not change the way people define the meaning of the fairness of a procedure. However, people place less weight on their judments about procedural fairness when evaluating the decision maker if they make those judgments already knowing the outcome of the procedure.     

Everyday Life and Legal Values: A Concept Paper

This concept paper emerged from a Law and Human Behavior (LHB) Workshop, that was called by the journal's Editor, Richard Wiener, and held at St. Louis University on March 19–21, 1999. This workshop, which brought together 22 scholars and researchers in legal psychology, was part of James Ogloff's Presidential Initiative Project for the American Psychology/Law Society, and was supported by St. Louis University and an NSF grant. Prior to our arrival, each participant answered queries from the Editor about LHB and the field of psychology and law, and each was asked to offer five topics that were underrepresented in the journal or that we would like to see addressed in future issues. At the workshop, we were assigned to small groups, and the authors of this paper constituted one such group. The charge for all groups was to develop plans for encouraging submissions in areas of psycholegal scholarship that continue to be infrequent topics of investigation, and then to develop a concept paper. The direction our group took is captured by our title, Everyday Life and Legal Values, and within this paper we explicate the topic, identify a number of underrepresented research areas, suggest some research paradigms for investigating them, and present this within a perspectival directions frame that ties established lines of research to the newer ones we propose.