Designer Psychostimulants in Urine by Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry,

Designer psychostimulants are known by recreational drug users to produce a complex array of adrenergic and hallucinogenic effects. Many of these drugs are not targeted during routine toxicology testing and as a consequence, they are rarely reported. The purpose of this study was to develop a procedure for the detection of 15 psychostimulants in urine using liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC‐MS/MS), specifically 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐bromophenethylamine (2C‐B), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐chlorophenethylamine (2C‐C), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐methylphenethylamine (2C‐D), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐ethylphenethylamine (2C‐E), 2,5‐dimethoxyphenethylamine (2C‐H), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐iodophenethylamine (2C‐I), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐ethylthiophenethylamine (2C‐T‐2), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐isopropylthiophenethylamine (2C‐T‐4), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐propylthiophenethylamine (2C‐T‐7), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐bromoamphetamine (DOB), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐chloroamphetamine (DOC), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐ethylamphetamine (DOET), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐iodoamphetamine (DOI), 2,5‐dimethoxy‐4‐methylamphetamine (DOM), and 4‐methylthioamphetamine (4‐MTA). Analytical recoveries using solid‐phase extraction were 64–92% and the limit of detection was 0.5 ng/mL for all drugs except 2C‐B (1 ng/mL). The assay was evaluated in terms of analytical recovery, precision, accuracy, linearity, matrix effect, and interferences. The technique allows for the simultaneous detection of 15 psychostimulants at sub‐ng/mL concentrations.     

Challenges and constraints for post-Soviet committees: exploring the impact of parties on committees in Ukraine

This study focuses on the impact of parliamentary parties on committees' structure and activity in the post-Soviet context. Through a case study of committees in Ukraine's Rada, the paper demonstrates that weak, fluid parties can act as a barrier to committees' efficacy by shaping their structure, leadership and by blocking ameliorating reforms. Although Ukraine's committees were formally allocated a significant role in the law-making process, in practice the realisation of this function was constrained by parties and also by context of the wider institutional uncertainty.     

Revisiting the Instrumentality of Voice: Having Voice in the Process Makes People Think They Will Get What They Want

Research on procedural justice has found that processes that allow people voice (i.e., input) are perceived as fairer, and thus elicit more positive reactions, than processes that do not allow people voice. Original theorizing attributed these effects to beliefs that the provision of voice enhances people’s sense of process control, which people were assumed to value because it impacts their perceived likelihood of receiving desired outcomes (the instrumental perspective of procedural justice). Subsequent research questioned this perspective, arguing that outcome expectations do not account for the effects of voice. However, this subsequent research failed to directly examine the interplay of voice, outcome expectations, and reactions. The current studies revisit and extend research on this topic by asking whether manipulations of voice act as shared circumstance effects. Confirming an untested implication of the instrumental perspective, we show that giving everyone voice increases their belief, ex-ante, that they are likely to win an upcoming competition. However, this instrumental belief accounts for only part of the effects of voice on perceived procedural fairness and on general reactions to outcomes. Results suggest that voice does indeed have instrumental significance, an implication not adequately recognized in current justice theorizing. However, this instrumentality does not, by itself, explain why people value having a voice in processes that affect them.     

A Mace to Swat Two Blow‐Flies: Interpreting the Fitzpatrick and Browne Privilege Case

It is not widely remembered that on 10 June 1955 two men, Raymond Edward Fitzpatrick and Frank Courtenay Browne, were sentenced to gaol for three months on a vote of the Commonwealth House of Representatives for contempt of parliament. Two parliamentary officials, Frank Green and Harry Evans, have dominated scholarly attempts to explain this unusual event. To the former, the privilege case largely reflected the animus of Prime Minister Menzies towards Browne and his desire for revenge. To the latter the matter was a genuine case of contempt. This article revisits the 1955 Bankstown Observer privilege case with the benefit of recently released archival material. It seeks to understand why two citizens were deprived of their liberty without legal representation or redress and to find some compromise between the divergent interpretations proffered by Green and Evans.     

Combating terrorism in Russia and Uzbekistan

This article aims to offer a preliminary assessment of Russian and Uzbek attempts to combat terrorism after 9/11. While both cases fit into the larger post-Soviet political narrative, itself shaped by strategic realignments following the events of 9/11, relatively little work has been undertaken to analyse how terrorism and law enforcement have intertwined in order to generate military, legislative and police responses in these countries. Thus, while recognizing how security policies changed in Russia and Uzbekistan immediately after 9/11, this paper argues that policy reactions to home-grown terrorism have, for the most part, continued to be the main driving force behind attempts to combat terrorism. Equally, however, the latter part of this paper argues that a more nuanced account of security in the North Caucasus and Central Asia is needed in order to study terrorism effectively. In particular, the emergence of suicide terrorism in Russia and Uzbekistan raises important issues, not just about post-9/11 law enforcement, but also identity politics, illustrating how diverse local, regional and international forms of identification shape International Relations theory.