Scanning Electron Microscopy–Energy‐Dispersive X‐Ray (SEM/EDX): A Rapid Diagnostic Tool to Aid the Identification of Burnt Bone and Contested Cremains

This study investigates the use of Scanning electron microscopy–energy‐dispersive X‐ray (SEM‐EDX) as a diagnostic tool for the determination of the osseous origin of samples subjected to different temperatures. Sheep (Ovis aries) ribs of two experimental groups (fleshed and defleshed) were burned at temperatures of between 100°C and 1100°C in 100°C increments and subsequently analyzed with the SEM‐EDX to determine the atomic percentage of present elements. Three‐factor ANOVA analysis showed that neither the exposure temperature, nor whether the burning occurred with or without soft tissue present had any significant influence on the bone's overall elemental makeup (p > 0.05). The Ca/P ratio remained in the osseous typical range of between 1.6 and 2.58 in all analyzed samples. This demonstrates that even faced with high temperatures, the overall gross elemental content and atomic percentage of elements in bone remain stable, creating a unique “fingerprint” for osseous material, even after exposure to extreme conditions.     

A new method for the recovery and evidential comparison of footwear impressions using 3D structured light scanning

Footwear impressions are one of the most common forms of evidence to be found at a crime scene, and can potentially offer the investigator a wealth of intelligence. Our aim is to highlight a new and improved technique for the recovery of footwear impressions, using three-dimensional structured light scanning. Results from this preliminary study demonstrate that this new approach is non-destructive, safe to use and is fast, reliable and accurate. Further, since this is a digital method, there is also the option of digital comparison between items of footwear and footwear impressions, and an increased ability to share recovered footwear impressions between forensic staff thus speeding up the investigation.     

DATA REGULATION IN THE INTERNET OF THINGS

The reflections on data regulation in the internet of things (IoT) in this paper provide an overview of the different conceptions and legal problems of “data property rights.” Beginning with an overview of the existing and possible applications of the future IoT (in particular, smart cars), this paper describes the legal concerns that may arise because of increased commercialization of object-generated data. The author uses German and European Union law to illustrate the legal complexities, solutions, and shortcomings. He demonstrates how and to what extent these issues are covered by traditional data protection regulations and highlights the conceptual blind spots of these regulations. He then contrasts the data protection paradigm (de lege lata) with the idea of a general erga omnes data property right (de lege ferenda) and describes the most common understanding of such a right, that is, a data producers’ property right. Against the background of the possible economic advantages of general data property rights, the paper discusses conceptual problems and constitutional concerns. In conclusion, the author rejects the idea of a general data property right.     

The Organization of Purchasing at German Universities: An Empirical Investigation

The objective of this article is two-fold: first, it studies how German universities organize their purchasing activities, and, second, it identifies patterns in the structure of the purchasing function and analyzes factors that influence the design of purchasing. For this purpose, the article develops an analytical framework based on ideas of contingency and organization theory and presents the results of an empirical study which analyzed the purchasing organization of 65 German universities. The results of the study indicate that German universities use a medium level of centralization and specialization to organize their purchasing activities, and that the purchasing process is highly formalized in most universities. As to influential factors of the structure of purchasing, the study indicates that the number of employees, the number of employees with purchasing-responsibility, the purchasing volume, and the number of students enrolled at the university influence the structural variables.     

Unpacking the ‘Coalition of the Willing’: A Comparative Analysis of Norms in British and Polish Press Debates on the Iraq Invasion

Abstract

The study focuses on collective norms concerning the use of force to inform the analysis of national and European security and defence policy. In particular, it aims to shed some light on the question of why members of the US-led ‘coalition of the willing’ in Iraq subsequently supported further steps towards an autonomous and effective European Security and Defence Policy. We analyse collective defence norms in Britain and Poland by means of a qualitative analysis of press debates before, during and after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Our findings indicate that the salience and vigour of the debates varied strongly and so did the areas of normative contention. In the British press, debates centred on normative conflicts surrounding the relationship with the US, international authorisation, and the legitimacy of regime change as a goal for the use of force. In Poland, debates were far less intense and centred on the need to show solidarity with a trusted ally in need. We conclude that strategic norms, in particular revolving around the attachment to the US as a security partner, have become less of a problem for the evolution of ESDP but for different reasons in each case.     

The Electoral Connection: How the Pivotal Judge Affects Oppositional Success at European Constitutional Courts

Constitutional courts are often considered to be ‘veto players’ or ‘third chambers of parliament’. However, no attention has been paid to the composition of European constitutional courts and how they make decisions. Do European judges exhibit political preferences as their US counterparts do? If so, it is important to know who selects the judges as the selection determines the outcome. This article analyses the composition of the German Bundesverfassungsgericht and the French Conseil constitutionnel. It tests the correlation between the party affiliation of the pivotal judge and oppositional success empirically for all abstract reviews filed between 1974 and 2002. In both countries the likelihood of an oppositional victory or defeat varies with the ideological position of the pivotal judge. This leads to the conclusion that European judges decide on the basis of their political preferences like their US counterparts.     

Bypassing Germany's Reformstau: The Remarkable Rise of Renewable Energy

For the past 20 years, Germany has witnessed a remarkable expansion in renewable energy production due to the introduction and further development of a feed-in-tariff model (FITM). This comprehensive and rapid policy change is surprising given the many veto points in Germany's political system and the fact that a powerful alliance objected to an expansion of renewable energy (RE). To explain this puzzle, this study relies on insights from historical institutionalism and policy analysis. I argue that historical contingency and critical juncture opened a window of opportunity for the pro-RE alliance in the late 1980s. Policy entrepreneurs subsequently used the opportunity to advance the FITM. Once introduced, this institution developed a self-reinforcing economic dynamic. Policy entrepreneurs in the parliament and the Ministry for the Environment translated economic gains into political leverage, which was crucial to defend the FITM from counterattacks in the following years.     

The United States naval blockade of Iraq: a foreign policy and international law analysis

This is the second of a two part essay by Commander Rosen into the causes of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the modern law of blockade, the political wisdom and the lawfulness of imposing a limited blockade of Iraq. Defects in the current regime of blockade were explored.

In part II, Commander Rosen closely explores the legal justification for the U.S. use of force in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. It is frequently overlooked that the U.S. naval blockade (it was called a “naval interdiction”) was a U.S.-only operation from August 12th until August 25, 1990. As a pedagogical exercise, this period is extremely important because the U.S. use of force (by its naval units), in response to a written request by deposed Emir of Kuwait, must be justified under the U.N. Charter to be proper under international law. Once the U.N. Security Council authorized the use of force on August 25, 1990 to enforce the U.N. embargo, then the operation became one in which the U.N., as a corporate body, was acting. Since most low intensity conflicts since 1945, have involved lawful use of force issues outside of Security Council purview, the U.S. unilateral military action (blockade) against Iraqi shipping must be analyzed. It is reasonable to anticipate that future controversies of this sort will occur because of philosophic divisions among the U.N. Security Council permanent members or because there is anaequate time for the U.N. “Security Council to meet and obtain the forces required to insert into a region of conflict. Resurrection of the moribund U.N. Military Staff Committee might be one of the lessons learned from this particular episode.

The United States had the benefit of a U.N. resolution on August 25, 1990 to justify its naval action. Before that date, the legal issue arises whether, in the early stages, national self-defense grounds permitted the use of force against Iraq (blockade) since deprivation of assured access to critical materials (oil) can be considered an act of aggression under some theories of international law. Commander Rosen concludes that the low intensity blockade was probably not authorized, under a theory of national self-defense, because the U.S. had no hard evidence on August 12, 1990 (the day the blockade commenced) that Saddam Hussein would deprive the U.S. of access to Gulf Oil supplies. But, because of the pervasive interdepencies of world economies, world food supplies, and petroleum access, the case was extremely close.

The customary international law of intervention (protection of nationals or humanitarian) and the law of collective self-defense was explored relative to the U.S. imposition of a limited naval blockade. Commander Rosen concludes that intervention theory will not support the limited naval blockade since there was insufficient evidence that U.S. citizens were in imminent danger (as in Grenada) and the blockade operation was too limited and indirect in scope to produce the type of rapid results which have come to be associated with a humanitarian intervention (as in the Congo). But, since Kuwait’s territorial sovereignty had been grossly violated as a result of illegal aggression, Kuwait was privileged under the U.N. Charter to request and receive defense assistance from the United States under Article 51 to recover lost territory. Arguments that the right to act in collective self-defense under Article 51 is limited to the nation which itself is attacked (or a nation closely aligned with the victim) are rejected as contrary to the U.N. norms of promoting community resistance to illegal aggression.

While the Persian Gulf dispute has resulted in open hostilities, international law issues existed whether, in the early stages, the blockade was militarily necessary and whether the blockade could be extended to the Jordanian port of Aqaba, because of conflicting reports as to Jordan’s adherence with the U.N. embargo, were explored. International law would probably not support an extension of the blockade to Aqaba because it would be seen an improper interference with Jordan’s neutrality. Similarly, forbidding the passage of U.N. medical and food convoys into Iraq was seen as a breach of international law provided such shipments were specifically authorized and supervised by the U.N. security council (to ensure that the food was only distributed to civilians).     

Analysing the application of Brussels I in regulating e-commerce jurisdiction in the European Union – Success,deficiencies and proposed changes

This article analyses the regulatory framework of e-commerce jurisdiction in the European Union (EU). Firstly, it discusses and analyses the current regime under the Brussels Regulation, highlighting its success in consumer protection and the deficiencies for e-commerce jurisdiction, which need to be addressed. Secondly, the article compares the EU regime with that of the United States (US). It is argued that the US courts follow uncertain and distinct approaches compared to the clear rules of the Brussels Regulation. Their present approach of minimum contacts analysis as followed in the Yahoo! case poses problems for a transnational EU litigant in similar cases. Thirdly, the article examines the recent proposals adopted by the European Commission to remedy the deficiencies in the Regulation. The most important change proposed is the inclusion of third-state defendants within its ambit. It is argued that the changes to be adopted by the European Parliament are insufficient, and the author therefore provides recommendations. Lastly, the article highlights the inability of the proposed changes to address the deficiencies identified by the discussion.