Cybercrime jurisdiction

The principles that govern a sovereign’s exercise of jurisdiction to prohibit conduct and to sanction those who violate such prohibitions are well-established as to conduct occurring in the real, physical world. These principles evolved over the last several millennia, as law increased in sophistication and life became more complex. Real-world crime is, almost exclusively, a local phenomenon; the perpetrator(s) and victim(s) are all physically present at a specific geographical point when a crime is committed. The principles that govern the exercise of criminal jurisdiction are therefore predicated on the assumption that “crime” is a territorial phenomenon. Cybercrime makes these principles problematic in varying ways and in varying degrees. Unlike real-world crime, it is not physically grounded; cybercrime increasingly tends not to occur in a single sovereign territory. The perpetrator of a cybercrime may physically be in Country A, while his victim is in Country B, or his victims are in Countries B, C, D and so on. The perpetrator may further complicate matters by routing his attack on the victim in Country B through computers in Countries F and G. The result of these and other cybercrime scenarios is that the cybercrime is not committed “in” the territory of a single sovereign state; instead, “pieces” of the cybercrime occur in territory claimed by several different sovereigns.     

Intimate femicide in Israel; temporal, social, and motivational patterns

This study investigated all (76) cases of intimate femicide (the killing of women by their intimate male partners) in Israel during the years 1990–1995. The analysis focused on temporal patterns, the representation of various population groups, and given motives. The findings show a relationship between the incidence of intimate femicide and a number of major events/processes experienced by Israeli society during the period investigated. Following the Persian Gulf War (in 1991), during which families were enclosed for lengthy periods in sealed rooms, there was a sharp increase in intimate femicide. On the other hand, the enactment of the Law for the Prevention of Family Violence in 1991 was followed by a sharp (though temporary) decrease in intimate femicide in 1992. New immigrants from the former Soviet Union and even more so, from Ethiopia were over-represented among intimate femicide offenders. In most cases, more than one motive is given for the intimate femicide, with 'possessiveness' being mentioned in the majority of cases usually in conjunction with other motives (such as argument/conflict between the parties, mental, drinking or drug problems of the offender). Here too, differences were found between the various population groups. The findings are discussed within the framework of a stress-support theoretical model which postulates that violence in society will be positively related to stress factors and negatively related to support systems.     

How can PhD research contribute to the global health research agenda?

We suggest that PhD and post-doctoral researchers are a strong, untapped resource with the potential to make a real contribution to global health research (GHR). However, we raise some ethical, institutional, and funding issues that either discourage new researchers from entering the field or diminish their capacity to contribute. We offer a number of recommendations to Canadian academic and non-academic institutions and funders, aiming to generate discussion among them about how to overcome these constraints. We need changes in the way graduate research is organised and funded, to create opportunities to work collaboratively within established low- and middle-income countries (LMIC)/Canadian research partnerships. We urge changes in the way that institutions fund, recognise, value, and support GHR, so that established researchers are encouraged to develop long-term LMIC relationships and mentor new Canadian/LMIC researchers. We ask funders to reconsider additional GHR activities for support, including strategic training initiatives and dissemination of research results. We also encourage the development of alternative institutions that can provide training and mentoring opportunities. GHR faces many challenges. If we address those that reduce our potential to contribute, we can become real partners in GHR, working towards equitable global health and solutions to priority health issues.