The Protection of Geographical Indications After Doha: Quo Vadis?

During the last twenty years the international protection ofgeographical indications (GIs) has experienced a worldwide resurgencespurred by both the greater need and the additional opportunitiesoffered by the global marketplace for the diversification ofagricultural products and foodstuffs. The Doha Ministerial Declarationlends support to developing countries that are seeking formsof knowledge less than high technology that they have the capacityto exploit. June 2005 saw the European Communities submit aradical proposal, designed to also meet the needs of developingcountries that would amend the Trade-Related Aspects of IntellectualProperty (TRIPS) Agreement in favour of a mandatory multilateralsystem of registration for all products. Yet, World Trade Organization(WTO) Members are as divided over their capacity to take advantageof GI protection no less than they are as to the means of regulation.To date, no ready solution to the further global harmonizationof GIs has been found. This paper examines the two major regulatorymodels advanced by the European Union and the United Statesof America for the protection of GIs. In the light of the DohaDevelopment Agenda, the authors argue in favour of an incrementalapproach that would allow developing countries the flexibilityto adjust additional protection in accordance with their levelof economic development.     

Is the ICC Still Having Teething Problems?

The world community had, and still has, high expectations forthe impartial rendering of justice by the International CriminalCourt (ICC) which, unlike other international criminal tribunals,bears a universal scope and is charged with administering justicein a non-selective manner. However, the first situations broughtbefore the Court and their handling by the Prosecutor give riseto a number of concerns. The practice of self-referrals by statesinvolved in civil wars, who tend to accuse their rebel enemies,may cause misgivings. In addition, the overly cautious attitudeof the Prosecutor with regard to the situation in Darfur, referredto him by the UN Security Council, cannot fail to baffle allthose who take the cause of effective and expeditious justiceto heart.     

The Carhart case and late-term abortions -- what's next in Australia?

A recent case in the United States Supreme Court has indicated a change in course on the issue of abortion rights. In Gonzales v Carhart 127 S Ct 1610 (2007), the Supreme Court, in April 2007, upheld federal legislation banning a particular late-term abortion procedure with no exceptions (even to preserve the mother's life). This column examines the case in the context of recent Australian cases involving abortion issues. It extrapolates from Carhart to consider the potential for the Australian High Court to disrupt access to safe, medically supervised and performed abortion.     

The first mail bomb?

A news item in the newspaper, the Evening Star, for the Country, October 18, 1833, probably is the first report of a mail bomb in the United States. It is also likely to be the first defusing of a mail bomb. The device appeared to be extraordinarily sophisticated and would have likely worked had it not been for suspicions of the recipient of the bomb.     

The Situation in Libya and the ICC’s Understanding of Complementarity in the Context of UNSC-Referred Cases

The PTCI’s decision on the admissibility of the case against Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and the subsequent AC Judgement are the first expressions of the ICC’s understanding of complementarity in Article 13(b) cases. Admissibility decisions display how the ICC attempts to strike the balance between international justice and states’ right to exercise their territorial criminal jurisdiction. In relation to cases triggered by UNSC referrals, these decisions also mark the delicate moment in which the ICC’s interaction with the politics UNSC is unveiled. In the case against Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi the ICC seems to have taken deferent approach toward the highly authoritative mechanism that triggered the case. Legally speaking, these decisions might appear as a missed opportunity. They fail to provide a conclusive clarification of the parameters of the ‘same case’ test. First, the AC did not subscribe to the offence-specific interpretation of the ‘same conduct’ test embraced previously by PTCI and, in the name of consistency with the Court’s previous case law, reverted to the incident-specific approach adopted in Lubanga. However, the case-by-case approach adopted by the AC undermines the legal certainty that the AC meant to achieve in the definition of the admissibility test. Moreover, the AC has failed to appraise the PTCI’s conclusion that domestic implementation of international crimes is not necessary for the purposes of successfully challenging the admissibility of a case. Finally, in light of the constraints imposed by Article 17(2) on the relevance of due process violations, the PTCI’s decision to reject on the grounds of ‘inability’ as opposed to ‘unwillingness’, which again the AC did not consider, could be seen as evidence of a deferent stance toward the UNSC.     

The crime of the century? The case for the Holocaust

With the twentieth century now ended the Holocaust is surelya leading contender for the title of ``The Crime of the Century.'Although a massive literature exists on the Holocaust, very littleof this literature has been produced by criminologists. Somereasons for this relative neglect are identified and a case ismade for the claim that criminology can contribute to anunderstanding of the Holocaust and that the Holocaust cancontribute to the development of a more profound criminology. Thispaper draws upon an integrative criminological approach toconstruct a framework for understanding the Holocaust. This multi-disciplinary framework links philosophical, sociolegal,sociological, behavioral and criminological dimensions todiscriminate between unique and non-unique aspects of the Holocaustas a case of genocide and as crime. The paper closes with someobservations on the relevance of the Holocaust for challengesconfronting a twenty-first century criminology.     

Superior Responsibility under Article 28 ICC Statute: For What Exactly is the Superior Held Responsible?

Superior responsibility is a concept for attributing criminalliability to military commanders and other superiors that isemployed with some frequency in the ad hoc international criminaltribunals. Nevertheless, it remains unclear for what the superioris actually blamed. The author argues that with respect to superiorresponsibility as construed in Article 28 ICC Statute the answerto this question depends on the form of superior responsibilityfor which the accused is found guilty. If the superior is heldresponsible for not having prevented or repressed the subordinate'scrime even though the superior knew of the crime, he or shecan be blamed for both, the criminal conduct of the subordinateand the wrongful consequence caused by it. For all other formsof superior responsibility, the superior can only be blamedfor his or her failure to exercise control properly, which resultedin a wrongful consequence, but not for the criminal conductof the subordinate.     

Digital identity – The legal person?

This paper examines the concept of digital identity which the author asserts is now evident in the United Kingdom as a consequence of the Identity Cards Act (UK) 2006 and the National Identity Scheme it establishes. The nature and functions of the concept, particularly the set of information which constitutes an individual's transactional identity, are examined. The paper then considers the central question of who, or what, is the legal person in a transaction i.e. who or what enters into legal relations. The analysis presents some intriguing results which were almost certainly not envisaged by the legislature. The implications extend beyond the United Kingdom to similar schemes in other jurisdictions, and to countries, like Australia, which may implement such a scheme.     

The End of the Beginning? The Freedom of Information Bill 1999

With the publication of its plans for a Bill on Freedom of Information, the new Labour government has been accused of abandoning its promise of greater openness in the way government is conducted in this country and its proposals are seen as a departure from the highly applauded contents of the White Paper published in December 1997. The draft Bill has been pilloried by friend and foe alike. It is seen as a litmus test of Blair's government and where it really stands on the citizen/state relationship and how the future balance will lie between the executive and Parliament. The authors examine the events surrounding the publication of the Bill and its scrutiny by the pre-legislative select committees in the Commons and Lords. The Home Secretary has hinted at possible concessions in the light of fierce criticism. Is this a Bill worth saving and how can it be improved to capture a more appropriate balance between confidentiality, secrecy, and openness in the conduct of modern governance?     

The nanny state or responsible government?

The use of statutory regulation of medical treatments is always contentious. This is particularly so in the case of assisted reproductive technologies (ART), and the treatments offered through IVF and related procedures. These technologies challenge traditional understandings of the family and motherhood, but also raise questions about the status of the human embryo and how it should be treated. This article argues that governments do have a role to play in the regulation of ART, in addition to the professional guidelines governing such treatments. It looks at three different types of statutory regulation in the Australian context.