Multiple interchanging of tissue samples in cases of breast cancer

Due to the suspicion of a gynaecologist, a pathologist was suspected of incorrect diagnoses in cases of breast cancer and the interchanging of tissue samples. Many women applied to the attorney's bureau to clarify the reproaches. The privately owned laboratory for pathology was searched and 926 histological slides, roughly the same number of paraffin blocks and about 20 formalin fixed tissue samples were confiscated. Together with other confiscated material, at least 1236 histological slides and additional 249 paraffin blocks had to be sorted. Histological slides and paraffin blocks were matched with patients as far as possible following the laboratory book. Many of the warranted samples which were diagnosed as containing the carcinoma by the pathologist were missing. A total of 160 samples were chosen and rediagnosed by two independent pathologists. The formalin fixed tissue was negative for DNA most likely due to storage in formalin for years. Most of the histological slides were positive for DNA. On the whole, 18 expertises about histological findings and the DNA results were given. In some cases only DNA results could be presented, as previous experts had only performed DNA examinations without controlling the histological diagnosis. In six cases a carcinoma could be confirmed and the DNA profile matched with patient's DNA; in seven cases a carcinoma was confirmed without match with the patient; in two cases the carcinoma could not be confirmed in the presented samples. A jurisdictional solution was impossible because the accused pathologist died during the investigation. In conclusion, it must be stated that a DNA examination of histological slides should never be performed without a rediagnosis of an independent pathologist and photographic documentation of the findings. Whenever possible, material should be left on the slide.     

The Democratic Quality of Institutional Regimes: a Conceptual Framework

Lijphart's spectrum of democracies – recently expanded by Jack Nagel to a sub-majoritarian sphere of pluralitarian systems which use disproportional electoral systems in order to manufacture majority governments from minorities in the electorate – is based on only one dimension: inclusion of preferences. Political scientists in the Lijphartian tradition wrongly assume that inclusion of preferences, which is an input characteristic, automatically leads to responsiveness, which refers to actual policy decisions and hence is an output characteristic. We therefore add 'responsibility' as a second input characteristic and employ it alongside the inclusiveness of institutional regimes. We argue that in representative democracies there exists a trade-off between inclusiveness and responsibility. This trade-off helps us to measure the democratic quality of institutional regimes. The now expanded spectrum of democracies based on these two dimensions shows that majoritarian democracy proper – in which governments represent a majority of individual preferences but not more than necessary – is the best possible combination of the two democratic values.     

Maneuvering with Crime. An Empirical Reconstruction of “Populist” Stances on Youth Crime in German Parliamentary Debates

Recent years have seen a wide discussion of populism in penal policy, which is internationally regarded as a strong drive for establishing punitive tendencies. Generally, “penal populism” is characterized by an extensive consensus across the most influential political parties, a punitive orientation, and the dismissal of scientific or professional expertise. Recent penal policy therefore appears to be a relatively unified practice strongly oriented toward punitive measures that primarily address the public and its perceived need for protection. Because analyses of Anglophone countries are predominant in this discussion, we contrast them with a reconstruction of debates on youth crime in German parliaments from 1970 to 2012. They exhibit a wide variety of populist articulations. Although they imply a strong punitive bias, they also encompass a very heterogeneous rhetoric of penal policy. In conclusion, we argue that penal populism can (and should) be described as a tactical practice, i.e., as political maneuvering employed to negotiate the prospects of punitive and other styles of politics.     

“The European Union, Vietnam, and Human Rights as Law: the case of the 1995 EU–Vietnam framework agreement and its human rights clause.”

The year 1995 marked a major watershed for modern Vietnam. It completed its post-Cold War strategy of “multilateralizing” its foreign policy by joining ASEAN, normalizing relations with the US, and signing a comprehensive framework agreement with the EU. All three are recognized as major accomplishments for modern Vietnamese diplomacy. However, in the EU–Vietnam framework agreement, Hanoi made an unprecedented concession when it agreed to the human rights clause in the treaty. For the very first time, Vietnam had accepted an explicit, legally binding stipulation on human rights in a bilateral treaty. This remarkable development resulted from the confluence of three major dynamics. First, Hanoi had committed itself to establish sound relations with all major economic centers-of-gravity at the time, ASEAN, the US, and the EU. Second, the EU also was keenly interested in stronger relations with Asian countries but was flexible about prioritizing any particular bilateral relationship. Third, Brussels’ diplomats had to work off a treaty template when negotiating fundamental bilateral agreements. The standard EU framework agreement at the time included a human rights clause. In 1995, the EU was insisting that any treaty with Vietnam would have to include a clause on human rights. Initially, Hanoi rejected such a treaty provision, and the negotiations stalled. However, when Hanoi realized that Brussels felt no urgency to complete the treaty and was unable to compromise on human rights, Vietnam’s leadership reconsidered. In order to complete the strategy of “multilateralizing” its international affairs, Vietnam had to accept the human rights clause in the treaty with the EU.     

Coordination Cannot Establish Political Authority

One of the most common arguments in favour of the state's authority is that without the coordinating hand of political institutions, we could not achieve important moral benefits. I argue that if we understand authority correctly, then coordination cannot even in principle establish that coordinators have political authority.     

Reconstruction of the sitting position in automobiles by microtrace analysis

Three car accidents are described in which microtrace analysis was of special significance in the clarification of the seating positions. In all three cases the occupants were under the influence of alcohol. In each case the accident occurred at night and without witnesses. The pattern of injuries in two cases was non-specific. In the first case, no fiber traces were visible to the naked eye; in the other two the fibers were recognizable to the naked eye after close examination. In all three cases, the seating position was ascertained by means of fiber trace analysis.