GlobaLawAndPolitics

We have moved !

2006-07-17T14:01:00.000+02:00

We have Moved!

We are now located at the new and improved Globalawandpolitics site: http://www.globalawandpolitics.org/

We will see you there.

Eleven years after Srebrenica – Karadžić and Mladić still at large

2006-07-12T14:22:00.000+02:00

On July 11, 2006, the international community commemorated the eleventh anniversary of the massacre of as many as 8,000 Bosnian Muslim men and boys in the small town of Srebrenica. The massacre— which the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) characterized as an act of genocide in Prosecutor v. Krstic—was carried out by a combination of irregular Serbian and Bosnian Serb forces led by ICTY indictee Ratko Mladic. The Srebrenica massacre marked the worst single massacre on the European continent since World War II.

Justice for the victims of the Srebrenica massacre is long overdue. Of the hundreds involved in carrying out the killings, the ICTY has sentenced only six people to date. The alleged masterminds of the massacre—Mladic, and Bosnian Serb wartime leader Radovan Karadžić are still at large. There are may rumours around why international community still has not managed to arrest the two war criminals, Karadžić and Mladić. One of them is that Karadžić signed at the time of Dayton agreement another clandestine agreement with US government that he will not be arrested if he gives up his functions as a leader of Bosnian Serbs. Events in last decade confirm that speculations since the UN and EU forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina have not showed any great effort in capturing Karadžić. Only twice a year SFOR forces stage a show for foreign TV crews at Pale, headquarters of Serbian part of BiH.

The denial of the Srebrenica massacre has continued in Serbia. Under the pressure of visual records displaying the perpetrators from Serbia and the victims from Srebrenica, the public in Serbia went silent and demonstrated its capacity for compassion and solidarity for victims of the other side.

At the same time, the truth about the events in Srebrenica has become impossible to deny, even in the RS. Acting under pressure from the Office of the High Representative, in December 2003 the RS National Assembly established the "Commission for Investigation of the Events in and around Srebrenica between the 10th and 19th of July, 1995." The Commission's final report prompted unprecedented official apologies from RS authorities. More recently, horrifying video evidence related to the massacre was introduced at the Milosevic trial in The Hague, and later televised in Serbia. Nevertheless, the truth has yet to be broadly accepted by a significant part of the Serbian public.

Svoboda slovenskih medijev: za koga?

2006-07-10T14:31:00.000+02:00

Pred kratkim smo naleteli na poročilo Mirovnega inštituta iz Ljubljane o delovanju RTV od začetka veljavnosti novega zakona novembra 2005 do maja 2006.

Strokovnjaki Mirovnega inštituta za svobodo tiska in medijev na splošno so v mesecu maju predstavili poročilo monitorinega delovanja RTV Slovenija. O svobodi medijev in tiska smo člani našega bloga pisali že obširno na tem in v drugih medijih, vendar se nam zdi potrebno osvetliti določene poudarke iz poročila Mirovnega inštituta. O samem poročilu ne bomo izgubljali preveč besed, saj veliko že pove dejstvo, da se ljudem iz Mirovnega inštituta ni zdelo pomembno pripraviti takega poročila že v prejšnjih letih pred sprejetjem zakona o RTVS. Njihovo poročilo se bere v skladu z delovanjem slovenskega varuha človekovih pravic. Ta se je prvič obregnil in omenil omejevanje svobode tiska v Sloveniji šele junija lansko leto po zamenjavi vlade, medtem ko v njegovih prejšnjih poročilih zaman iščemo omembo težkega stanja na področju svobode izražanja in svobode tiska. O strokovnosti poročila Mirovnega inštituta zaradi več razlogov ni mogoče govoriti. Je to presenetljivo? Mogoče. Že v sami predstaviti Mirovnega inštituta na njihovi spletni strani je mogoče prebrati, da se je stroga akademska perspektiva se je povezala s konkretno socialno in politično angažiranostjo. Kulturni boj se za nekatere še nadaljuje, človekove pravice obstajajo ob strani, razen takrat, ko pač ustrezajo cilju, ki ga je potrebno doseči.

V spodnjih vrsticah objavljamo nekatere poudarke iz poročila:

»Slovenski politični vrh združen v koalicijo Demos je takrat prvič pokazal, da se še kako zaveda pomena televizije in nadzora nad njo. Čeprav bi od Demosa, ki je poudarjal pomen demokracije in demokratičnosti, lahko pričakovali depolitizacijo osrednjega nacionalnega medija, se je zgodilo ravno nasprotno. Z zakonom je popolnoma podredil RTVS in osrednji organ odločanja svet RTVS svojim političnim interesom, druge (in tudi najpomembnejše) razsežnosti nacionalnega RTVS servisa: kulturno,izobraževalno in razvedrilno pa je kratko malo ignoriral. Po poročilih medijev iz tega obdobja naj bi vpliv«

V sklepnem delu poročila pa je mogoče prebrati: »Dosedanje kadrovske spremembe so na vodilne položaje na radiu in televiziji pripeljale kadre, ki ne glede na profesionalno kompetentnost ne morejo zanikati pridobljenega političnega blagoslova vladne koalicije k izvolitvi. V programskem in nadzornem svetu tudi namestniških funkcij niso pridobili kadri, ki bi bili kritično naravnani do vladne koalicije oziroma njenega videnja RTV Slovenija, kot je predstavljen v razpravi o novem zakonu.«

Temelj demokratičnega pravnega sistema je javna in odprta razprava o zadevah splošnega pomena, ne pa zamegljevanje ddejstev s politično preprogo. Takšen sistem omogoča spopad mnenj in tehtanje argumentov o vprašanjih, ki zadevajo vsakogar. Slovensko Ustavno sodišče je v odločbi U-I-226-95 zapisalo, da »soočenje nasprotujočih in različno motiviranih pogledov prispeva k bolj učinkovitemu in zanesljivemu procesu odločanja«. Udeležba v postopku omogoča ljudem, da prispevajo k odločitvam, ki jih zadevajo, hkrati pa odprtost in preglednost delovanja, zmanjšuje možnost zlorab. Če naj bo razprava res svobodna, je pravica posameznika, da izraža svoje mnenje, in je v načelu varovana, ne glede na to, ali je izjava groba ali nevtralna, racionalna ali čustvena, blaga ali napadalna, koristna ali škodljiva, pravilna ali napačna.

Poročilo Mirovnega inštituta vsekakor priporočamo v branje. Že zaradi njegove politične interpretacije svobode medijev in svobodnega delovanja nacionalne radiotelevizije. Obenem pa priporočamo v branje tudi spodnje strokovne publikacije za osvetlitev pravnih (in političnih) problemov na področju svobode izražanja in tiska v Sloveniji in drugod:

Revija Dignitas, št 25 http://www.nova-revija.si/knjiga.php?ida=010502505

Revija Dignitas, št. 13-14, http://www.nova-revija.si/knjiga.php?ida=010501302

Revija Dignitas, št. 11-12, http://www.nova-revija.si/knjiga.php?ida=010501102

Herdís Thorgeirsdóttir, Journalism Worthy of the Name, Freedom Within the Press and the Affirmative Side of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, , http://www.brill.nl/product.asp?ID=21273

Segerstedt-Wiberg and Others v. Sweden

2006-07-08T18:22:00.000+02:00

European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), June 6, 2006.

ECtHR recenly delivered decision in case of Segerstedt-Wiberg and Others v. Sweden regarding alleged violation of various Convention rights. The applicants are Swedish nationals who made unsuccessful requests to view records held on them by the Swedish Security Police. Their requests were refused on the ground that making them available might threaten national security or hinder police activities. The police and courts relied on Chapter 5, section 1(2), of the 1980 Secrecy Act. The applicants, relied on the following provision of European Convention on Human Rights: Article 8 of(right to respect for private life), Article 10 (freedom of expression), Article 11 (freedom of assembly and association) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy).

With regard to alleged violation of Article 8 and the storage of applicants’ information, the Court held that the storage of the information had a legal basis under the 1998 Police Data Act. In addition, the scope of the discretion conferred on the competent authorities and the manner of its exercise was indicated with sufficient clarity. The Court also accepted that the storage of the information in question pursued legitimate aims, namely the prevention of disorder or crime, in the case of Segerstedt-Wiberg, and the protection of national security, for the other applicants. The Court concluded that the continued storage of the information that had been released was necessary concerning Segerstedt-Wiberg, but not for any of the remaining applicants. In terms of the refusal to grant full access to the information, the Court held that Sweden was entitled to consider national security interests and the fight against terrorism over the interests of the applicants.

With regard to alleged violation of Articles 10 and 11, the Court considered that the storage of personal data related to political opinion, affiliations and activities that had been deemed unjustified for the purposes of Article 8 constituted an unjustified interference with the rights protected by Articles 10 and 11 concerning all the applicants, except Segerstedt-Wiberg.

Regarding violation of Article 13 and the applicants’ access to an effective remedy, the Court observed that the Swedish Parliamentary Ombudsman and Chancellor of Justice could receive individual complaints and had a duty to investigate them to ensure that the relevant laws had been properly applied. However, they lacked the power to render a legally-binding decision. Therefore, the court found neither remedy, considered on its own, to be effective within the meaning of Article 13 for all of the applicants. Under Article 41 of the Convention (just satisfaction) the Court awarded 3,000 EUR to Segerstedt-Wiberg, 7,000 EUR to Nygren and Schmid, and 5,000 EUR to Ehnebom and Frejd for non-pecuniary damage. The Court also awarded 20,000 EUR, jointly, for costs and expenses.

Decision is available here.

Quote and question of the Week

2006-07-03T23:37:00.000+02:00

“The army and people of the DPRK are now in full preparedness to answer a pre-emptive attack with a relentless annihilating strike and a nuclear war.”

— North Korea's state-run media in reaction to increased military pressure on North Korea, using the nation's official name Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and its leader Kim Jong Il stating that it would respond with an "annihilating strike and a nuclear war" to any U.S. preemptive attack on its missile program.

Here comes the question of this week. Can US missile defense handle threat from North Korea? Experts may say that shooting down a missile is no walk in the park. Recent US military tests in February 2005 confirm the above. Right?

US Supreme Court Holds Military Commissions Invalid - Hamdan v. Rumsfeld

2006-07-02T21:16:00.000+02:00

The US Supreme Court on 29 June issued its decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld and held that the Bush administration did not have authority to set up the war crimes tribunals and found the special military commissions illegal under both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the Geneva Convention. The decision is available here. Justice Stevens wrote the 5-3 opinion and was joined by Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter, and in part Justice Kennedy. Justices Kennedy and Breyer wrote separate opinions. Justices Alito, Thomas, and Scalia dissented and wrote separate dissenting opinions. Chief Justice Roberts took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

Here is a excerpt of the case holding that the Geneva Conventions apply to the conflict with Al Qaeda.

VI. ii.

The conflict with al Qaeda is not, according to the Government, a conflict to which the full protections afforded detainees under the 1949 Geneva Conventions apply because Article 2 of those Conventions (which appears in all four Conventions) renders the full protections applicable only to “all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties.” 6 U. S. T., at 3318. Since Hamdan was captured and detained incident to the conflict with al Qaeda and not the conflict with the Taliban, and since al Qaeda, unlike Afghanistan, is not a “High Contracting Party”-i.e., a signatory of the Conventions, the protections of those Conventions are not, it is argued, applicable to Hamdan.

We need not decide the merits of this argument because there is at least one provision of the Geneva Conventions that applies here even if the relevant conflict is not one between signatories. Article 3, often referred to as Common Article 3 because, like Article 2, it appears in all four Geneva Conventions, provides that in a “conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum,” certain provisions protecting “[p]ersons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by … detention.” Id., at 3318. One such provision prohibits “the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.” ....

iii.

Common Article 3, then, is applicable here and, as indicated above, requires that Hamdan be tried by a “regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.”... At a minimum, a military commission “can be ‘regularly constituted’ by the standards of our military justice system only if some practical need explains deviations from court-martial practice.”...

iv.

Inextricably intertwined with the question of regular constitution is the evaluation of the procedures governing the tribunal and whether they afford “all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.” 6 U. S. T., at 3320 (Art. 3, ¶ 1(d)). Like the phrase “regularly constituted court,” this phrase is not defined in the text of the Geneva Conventions. But it must be understood to incorporate at least the barest of those trial protections that have been recognized by customary international law. Many of these are described in Article 75 of Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, adopted in 1977 (Protocol I). Although the United States declined to ratify Protocol I, its objections were not to Article 75 thereof. Indeed, it appears that the Government “regard[s] the provisions of Article 75 as an articulation of safeguards to which all persons in the hands of an enemy are entitled.”...

We agree with Justice Kennedy that the procedures adopted to try Hamdan deviate from those governing courts-martial in ways not justified by any “evident practical need,” post, at 11, and for that reason, at least, fail to afford the requisite guarantees. See post, at 8, 11-17. We add only that, as noted in Part VI-A, supra, various provisions of Commission Order No. 1 dispense with the principles, articulated in Article 75 and indisputably part of the customary international law, that an accused must, absent disruptive conduct or consent, be present for his trial and must be privy to the evidence against him. See § § 6(B)(3), (D). That the Government has a compelling interest in denying Hamdan access to certain sensitive information is not doubted. Cf. post, at 47-48 (Thomas, J., dissenting). But, at least absent express statutory provision to the contrary, information used to convict a person of a crime must be disclosed to him.

v.

Common Article 3 obviously tolerates a great degree of flexibility in trying individuals captured during armed conflict; its requirements are general ones, crafted to accommodate a wide variety of legal systems. But requirements they are nonetheless. The commission that the President has convened to try Hamdan does not meet those requirements.

Petnajst let samostojnosti Slovenije

2006-06-23T12:26:00.000+02:00

V nedeljo bomo praznovali petnajst let osamosvojitve. 25. junij 1991 ostaja najsvetlejša točka naše zgodovine, ki nas še vedno osrečuje in nas obenem navdaja s ponosom. Vsem nam se pa zastavlja pa se vprašanje ali je bilo teh petnajst let zgodba o uspehu? Ni dvoma da se v Sloveniji živi dosti bolje, kot se je živelo ob osamosvojitvi in da imamo veliko zgodbic o uspehu, s katermi se lahko hvalimo pred svetom. Tako lahko rečemo, da je bilo prvih petnajstih let zelo uspešnih, čeprav jih ne gre opisati kot odlične. Zato kaj takega bi se morali znebiti vseh čejev, ki spremljajo javno življenje slovenske družbe vse od osamosvojitve naprej. Prav ta težnja k odličnosti pa nam v slovenski družbi zelo manjka. Matej v svojem postu zelo dobro ugotavlja, da smo Slovenci trenutno na najvišji točki v vsej naši zgodovini, vendar ni razloga, da ne bi težili še k večji zrelosti naše družbe in njene konkurenčnosti navzven. Ko nas tujci povprašajo kako se živi v Sloveniji, se Slovenci radi pohvalimo, da je pri nas kvaliteta življenja zelo visoka. Da se da v enem dnevu smučati na Krvavcu in namakati v Jadranskem morju ter enako mogoče v istem dnevu osvojiti naše vršace v Julijcih in se potem namakati v termalnih vodah naših zdravilišč na drugem koncu Slovenije. Slednje verjetno drži, vendar se človek vpraša ali je to ista država in družba, kjer je bilo po podatkih iz zdravstvenega statističnega letopisa leta 2003 opravljeno 6873 splavov, pri čemer se je istega leta rodilo samo 17.066 otrok. Da ne začnemo razprave o samomorih, ki jih je bilo 562. Iz teh golih podatkov tako izhaja, da bi bila kvaliteta življenja pri nas ne more biti kdo ve kako visoka. Večina prebivalstva podobno kot v prejšnjih desetletjih in stoletjih trdo dela za svoj vsakodnevni kruh. Stanovanjsko vprašanje v mestih posebej še za mlade družine ostaja skoraj nerešljiv problem. Tretjina prebivalstva je v pokoju, kar povečuje pritisk na mlade generacije, ki so res nekakšno žrtveno jagnje za razvoj Slovenije, saj morajo loviti stik z Evropo, ki so ga stare generacije izgubile, ko so se klečeplazile pred totalitarnimi komunisti. Če k temu dodamo še povsod navzoče obtožbe o korupciji in nepotizmu raznih političnih, gospodarskih in družinskih kartelov, postane vsakomur jasno, da nas v tej prelepi deželici čaka še ogromno dela in točenja čistega vina, da prekinemo vezi in navade iz preteklosti, in zadihamo neobremenjeni in motivirani v prihodnost. Pravičnosti ne smemo nikomur odreči!

Nazadnje še, prijatlji,
kozarce zase vzdignimo,
ki smo zato se zbratli,
ker dobro v srcu mislimo;
dókaj dni
naj živí
vsak, kar nas dobrih je ljudi!; France Prešeren, Zdravljica, 8. kitica

Slovenia's 15th Anniversary of Independence

2006-06-22T14:53:00.000+02:00

This weekend Slovenian cities, above all the capital Ljubljana, will be wrapped into joyfull colors. Slovenia is celebrating the 15th anniversary of its independence won from Yugoslavia on the 25th of June 1991.

In many ways Slovenia in which we presently live is an utterly enjoyable place, with a great quality of life, green and unspoiled environment... For a visitor Slovenia is a marble bellow the Alps.

However, there is another darker side to it. As a legacy of the totalitarian regime and as a legacy of ever lacking genuine liberalism, Slovenia is a close-minded place, with monopolies ranging from all sides particularly hindering the development and welfare of its young generations.

It is the latter problem that Slovenia and its stakeholders will need to face and tackle seriously in order to make our Homeland a real flurishing place in all terms: social, intellectual and personal...

Long live Slovenia!

Celebrando el 'sí' en la Cataluňa

2006-06-19T16:15:00.000+02:00

Los catalanes han dicho "sí" a un estatuto que habla de nación en referencia a Cataluña. El 73,9 por ciento de los electores que acudieron a votar lo hicieron a favor del nuevo texto que ha supuesto un empeño personal de Maragall y del propio Zapatero. El "no" defendido por razones diferentes por el Partido Popular y Esquerra Republicana se quedó con el 20,7 por ciento de los votos.

Han dado un amplio respaldo al "sí" , un 73,9 por ciento de los catalanes ha votado a favor del nuevo Estatuto, aunque la participación no ha llegado ni si quiera a la mitad de los electores. Sólo un 49 por ciento han ejercido su derecho. Cifra que queda lejos de la anterior consulta del 79. Entonces casi un 60 por ciento de los votantes acudió a las urnas para refrendar el Estatuto de Sau. Más de un 20 por ciento de los catalanes ha dado la espalda al texto que les define como nación. Y cinco de cada cien han votado en blanco.

Texto aprobado por las cortes.

Texto aprobado por la Cataluňa.

What Future for Kosovo ?

2006-06-14T14:01:00.000+02:00

2006 is the year in which the final status of Kosovo is to be decided. Direct talks have begun between Belgrade and Prishtina to work towards a negotiated settlement covering aspects ranging from the protection of cultural heritage to local government reform which should empower Kosovo-Serb majority municipalities. Independence for the territory, however, seems to be a foregone conclusion.

German Law Journal’s November issue (Vol. 7, No. 11) will focus on a number of international legal issues connected with the final status determination of Kosovo, such as the legal capacity of the Security Council to impose territorial boundaries absent a negotiated settlement, the implications of Kosovo’s independence for the future of the law of self-determination, as well as problems related to the legitimacy of ‘guided sovereignty’.

Anybody interested? - Call for Papers

Football wars

2006-06-11T23:04:00.000+02:00

In last days our globe has been literally bombarded by football euphoria. Not that we would have anything against three world cup matches a day, to the contrary, it is entertaining to watch Angola play Portugal or Trinidad and Tobago drew with Sweden. For that fact, it is certainly better than what happened on July 14, 1969, when Honduras and El Salvador went to war because of football. The whole drama have been marvellously recaptured by Ryszard Kapuscinski in The Soccer War.

_________

The bitterly contested first match played at Tegucigelpa, Honduras saw the Hondurans beat the El Salvadorans during the last minute of play, giving them a 1-0 win. The populace went wild. Fights broke out between the respective loyalists. The stadium was set afire. Newspapers on both sides before the match waged a campaign of hate, slander and abuse, calling each other Nazis, dwarfs, drunkards, sadists, spiders, aggressors and thieves.

In the return match that took place in El Salvador, things got quickly out of control. The hotel where the Honduran team was sleeping was put to the torch during the early hours of the night. Luckily, everyone got out unharmed. After escaping from a burning hotel, the visiting team took to the field like a bunch of zombies. Needless to say, Salvador won the game.
After the game, cars were set afire in the streets. Store windows were broken. Local hospitals set new attendance records. Miraculously, the Honduran team slipped back across the border without actually losing a single man.

With Salvador and Honduras having won one game apiece, there were no illusions about what was going to happen when they met in Mexico City for the final confrontation. Radio, television and newspapers in both countries screamed for blood. In the end, that’s exactly what it turned out to be — a war.

Early on the morning of July 14, 1969, concerted military action began in what came to be known as the Soccer War. The Salvadoran air force attacked targets inside Honduras and the Salvadoran army launched major offensives along the main road connecting the two nations and against the Honduran islands in the Golfo de Fonseca. At first, the Salvadorans made fairly rapid progress. By the evening of July 15, the Salvadoran army, which was considerably larger and better equipped than its Honduran opponent, pushed the Honduran army back over eight kilometers and captured the departmental capital of Nueva Ocotepeque. Thereafter, the attack bogged down, and the Salvadorans began to experience fuel and ammunition shortages. A major reason for the fuel shortage was the action of the Honduran air force, which--in addition to largely destroying the smaller Salvadoran air force--had severely damaged El Salvador's oil storage facilities.

A ceasefire was called by the OAS the next day but El Salvador resisted the call and the war went on. Finally, with the Salvadoran army bogging down, a cease-fire was arranged on the night of July 18; it took full effect only on July 20.

The causal aspects of what is now called the Soccer Wars is complex but the manifestation took place in the most overtly nationalistic setting, a series of soccer matches between both countries. It was the effect of a deteriorating situation between Honduras and El Salvador that had gone on for a long time and involved the lack of land reform and trade imbalance, primarily on the part of El Salvador with its small size, high population density, and relatively developed economy. The fuedal structure of El Salvadoran society saw land in the hands of a few prominent families. The rest of the populace was largely landless. The years saw an influx of thousands of illegal Salvadorean immigrants into the border areas of Honduras where land was relatively unclaimed.

The 100 hour war took 6000 lives, 12,000 were wounded, and 50,000 people rendered homeless The cause was ostensibly the World Cup matches between Honduras and El Salvador qualifying for Mexico '70.

__________

Leaving the football war between Honduras and Salvador aside, we can now reveal our favourite for winning World Cup.

Vamos, vamos, Argentina... **

Vamos, vamos, Argentina,
vamos vamos a ganar...
que esta barra quilombera
no te deja
no te deja de alentar...

Vamos, vamos, Argentina,
vamos vamos a ganar...
que esta barra quilombera
no te deja
no te deja de alentar...

United States (CIA) and 14 European countries - ‘spider’s web’ of detentions and transfers

2006-06-07T17:59:00.000+02:00

The United States has progressively woven a clandestine “spider’s web” of disappearances, secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers – spun with the collaboration or tolerance of Council of Europe member states, the Legal Affairs Committee of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) said today.

The report by Swiss Senator Dick Marty follows a seven-month inquiry.

“It has now been demonstrated incontestably, by numerous well-documented and convergent facts, that secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers involving European countries have taken place, such as to require in-depth inquiries and urgent responses by the executive and legislative branches of all the countries concerned,” the committee said.

Read the full draft report here.

Can a cat own internet domain name?

2006-06-06T12:56:00.000+02:00

Very interesting blog Opinio Iuris recently discussed very bizarre internet domain dispute. The case involves a claim to the domain name "mymorganstanleyplatinum.com" brought by Morgan Stanley against respondent "Meow, Respondent Penelope Cat of Nash DCB, Ashbed Barn, Boraston Track, Tenbury Wells, Worcestershire, WR15 8LQ, Great Britain."

Below is the key section of the opinion holding that a cat cannot in good faith own a domain name that is confusingly similar to the name Morgan Stanley:

Respondent maintains that it is a cat, that is, a well-known carnivorous quadruped which has long been domesticated. However, it is equally well-known that the common cat, whose scientific name is Felis domesticus, cannot speak or read or write. Thus, a common cat could not have submitted the Response (or even have registered the disputed domain name). Therefore, either Respondent is a different species of cat, such as the one that stars in the motion picture “Cat From Outer Space,” or Respondent’s assertion regarding its being a cat is incorrect.

If Respondent is in fact a cat from outer space, then it should have so indicated in its reply, in order to avoid unnecessary perplexity by the Panel. Further, it should have explained why a cat from outer space would allow Mr. Woods to use the disputed domain name. In the absence of such an explanation, the Panel must conclude that, if Respondent is a cat from outer space, then it may have something to hide, and this is indicative of bad faith behavior.

On the other hand, if Respondent’s assertion regarding its being a cat is incorrect, then Respondent has undoubtedly attempted to mislead this Panel and has provided incorrect WHOIS information. Such behavior is indicative of bad faith....

Respondent cites Morgan Stanley v. Michael Woods, FA 604103 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 16, 2005), in which the Panel found that Complainant had failed to prove bad faith registration and use. But that case must be distinguished from the present case, because in that case the Respondent was Mr. Woods, and not a cat or someone who has misled the Panel by pretending to be a cat.

The Panel finds that Respondent’s assertions that it is a cat provide sufficient evidence to conclude that the Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. And this despite the fact that the Panel, unlike Queen Victoria, is amused.

The backstory is that one Michael Woods, the owner of the cat, is a business consultant who does management seminars for small and medium-sized businesses regarding the failure by large companies to register obvious domain names. As the case notes, "[h]aving the domain name registered by me allows Mr. Woods to introduce some humor into his presentations."

Open Society and Its “Housewitzes” – in Defense of Democratic Realism

2006-06-05T21:31:00.000+02:00

“Housewitz” case can be seen as a symptom of ever recurring enemies of open society. Leaving free speech issues aside, central question remains how rigorously should state comply with the principle of neutrality between the different conceptions of the good and whether it may use its legal system to propagate certain values while hindering others. In aftermath of “Housewitz” I’m discussing here only a particular exemption of due neutrality principle, namely that of fostering patriotism, which includes promotion of civic-humanist values and national culture with language.

In response to my post, Avbelj takes a principled position: “Let the public discourse, free speech fully value laden and pursued by autonomous individuals striving for their conceptions of the good decide the course, the direction of our societies.” Noble goal, no doubt, but with a minor flaw: “Housewitz” is not merely a production of a student with too much time and bad taste respectively – it’s the repetition of a bad dream from deep beneath European subconsciousness. Repetition of a nightmare that is one of central experiences of today’s Europe, to quote Jürgen Habermas and Jaques Derrida in a rare joint public intervention, and an experience that at the same time binds us to reflect on moral basis of politics:

"Das heutige Europa ist durch die Erfahrungen der totalitären Regime des zwanzigsten Jahrhunderts und durch den Holocaust - die Verfolgung und Vernichtung der europäischen Juden, in die das NS-Regime auch die Gesellschaften der eroberten Länder verstrickt hat - gezeichnet. Die selbstkritischen Auseinandersetzungen über diese Vergangenheit haben die moralischen Grundlagen der Politik in Erinnerung gerufen."

Having this in mind, it is even more disturbing to see a recent increase in racial violence in many parts of Europe. One would like to think that Jörg Haider’s tremendous election success few years ago was more or less anecdotal and isolated event, but we have seen most recently huge problems and even violence linked to unsuccessful integration of large immigrant communities in France and Germany and other parts of Europe. This indicates fragility of European democracies, perhaps not yet an extreme fragility but certainly more serious as we liked to believe. Even European Constitution referendum campaigns that took place last year turned in many EU member states into platforms for far right and far left demagogies to which not insignificant parts of population are becoming increasingly vulnerable. It’s a European weakness on at least two levels: on one level we have seen difficulties of social cohesion while on the other chauvinist forces of both left and right persuasions are sporadically gaining momentum using economic uncertainty as a launching pad.

The ontological argument, regarding the factors that account for social life shows that, at least in contemporary European democracies, patriotism must be an exception to due neutrality of the state. European states are not only entitled to, but simply must propagate democratic values as well as historical set of institutions, national culture and language. A principle, even a neutrality principle is not an idée fixe, to quote from Philip Selznick. It is not an instrument of ideological thinking; not a prejudice; not a rule to be applied mechanically. It belongs to a larger whole, which includes textured meanings and concrete understandings as well as abstract ideas. Only if that whole is implicated there can be genuinely principled judgment.

Learning from the Weimar experience, postwar European policy makers understood this very well. They knew that rhapsodizing about neutrality and moral autonomy is not enough. Not just by reading Machiavelli, they also learned from experience that in democratic politea patriotism provides for the necessary strong allegiance from its citizens while in tyranny a raw force is sufficient. In free society something more than Habeas Corpus or Bill of Rights is needed. Since such a society relies on this allegiance there must be identification around the sense of common good - or around democratic values vested in the Constitution if you will. After the war, it was natural for democracies to give incentives to newly found democratic cultures. At the same time it was self-evident that it is not always necessary to tolerate intolerance. Typical examples of such sound democratic realism are two landmark cases by German Bundesverfassungsgericht, namely SRP-Verbot (BVerfGE 2, 1) and KPD-Verbot (BVerfGE 5, 85) in which postwar(!) German communist party and nazi party were banned due to their authoritarian agendas. No particular violent actions were required to justify the ban - an abstract “fundamental and longstanding tendency to fight free democratic order” was sufficient for the Court.

As regards to necessary civic allegiance to free society, strict neutrality may be applicable in USA where there has always been enviable, almost exact fusion between nation's democratic values and free institutions. In such a stable environment there is much smaller threat to civic values even if society has moved more towards procedural form of liberalism. But in Europe, with its dark past and in many respects troubled present, this is not the case. Sometimes lawmaker or courts must intervene in order to secure democracy. There is nothing paradoxical in this - if we only understand a simple truth pointed out by Richard Rorty, saying that due »respect for difference« does not require you to »respect every human being, and every human culture - no matter how vicious or stupid«.

Zbor za boljso Ljubljano

2006-06-05T13:04:00.000+02:00

Zbor za Ljubljano je v sredo, 24. maja 2006 predstavil izjavo "Skupaj za boljšo Ljubljano" in s tem stopil na pot k spremembam v glavnem mestu Republike Slovenije. Izjava Zbora za Ljubljano je dostopna tu.

Podpisniki deklaracije se zavzemajo:

da Ljubljana končno postane enotno mesto, ne pa sestavljanka iz petih delov;

da Ljubljana postane center evropske regije in bolj konkurenčna Trstu in Gradcu, torej prestolnica v Evropi;

da Ljubljana uveljavi sodoben gospodarski koncept, ki naj privede do »na znanju temelječe družbe«, ne pa da se utaplja v netransparentnosti in korupciji;

da Ljubljana razvozlja nemogoč prometni vozel, uredi svoje industrijske predele, se razvije v mesto z upravno-gospodarskim delom in postane prijetno, kulturno ter čisto bivalno okolje z visoko življenjsko ravnijo. V Ljubljani ne sme biti ne socialnih ne verskih getov! Zato spoštujemo kulturno in versko svobodo in sožitje;

da se v Ljubljani opravi kvalitetna ekološka sanacija – ohraniti moramo dobro pitno vodo, odvesti odpadne vode na neoporečen način, trajno rešiti problem odpadkov ter poskrbeti za kvalitetno in racionalno ogrevanje;

da Ljubljana dobi čim prej sodobno avtobusno in železniško postajo;

da Ljubljana zlasti mladim zgradi dodatno športno in rekreacijsko infrastrukturo ter posodobi obstoječo;

da Ljubljana postane bolj varno mesto in napove boj preprodaji drog in kriminalu;

da mestna oblast končno prisluhne svojim prebivalcem in oblikuje mesto v naš skupen, prijeten in varen dom!

Essay Competition on Population Politics and Human Rights

2006-06-05T13:02:00.000+02:00

An International Working Paper/Essay Competition and Workshop of the Irmgard Coninx Foundation, the Social Science Research Center Berlin and Humboldt-University Berlin February 15th – 20th, 2007.

Workshop Participation in Berlin, February 15th – 20th. Successful applicants to the competition will be invited to Berlin to discuss their research and ideas with prominent scholars at one of Europe's leading research institutions. Deadline for incoming papers: July 30, 2006.

Something is rotten in the state of Denmark

2006-06-03T18:26:00.000+02:00

"Your uncle?" Horatio said, startled by his friend's words. "Murdered his own brother? I don't believe it."

"You didn't believe in ghosts either," Hamlet said. "But there are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy. I tell you, something is rotten in the state of Denmark."

It sounds as if Prince Hamlet’s remark about his native kingdom is ringing true, especially in the last decade. Having known Denmark in its society in the last five years, one cannot escape from commenting on the present wealth and health of Danish society and nation. On this blog, we already dealt with the foolishness of cartoon controversy, which was triggered by free speech demagogy by Danish daily Jyllands Posten. In the country where police randomnly stops cars only because of the skin colour of its drivers, one cannot high expectations with regard to human rights. In the country, where asylum under 1951 Refugee convention is as difficult to obtain as now to buy Danish diary products in the United Arab Emirates, human rights are left hanging in the dressing room. Danish politicians say since the respect for human rights is so high, that does not need to ponder about them anymore. Denmark as one of Nordic good Samaritan abroad has a self-image and also international reputation of excellence. Or at least it had such a reputation. One may acquire a refugee on the basis of humanitarian standard and get permission to stay only if one has one of life-threatening diseases. Last year Danish government provided temporary protection to certain individuals who fall outside the definition of the 1951 UN convention and the 1967 protocol and provided protection to approximately 315 persons during the year. So that one can die here in Denmark and not at home. Most of refugees travel rather over the Oresund to Sweden, which only in the last year admitted more than 46.000 of them, either on refugee convention basis or on the humanitarian basis. Another fact is that. Danish governement and its prime minister never apologised for xenophobic cartoons and their aftermath. Beyond daily politics and criticism of few academics, it appears that no one really gives much attention to what is going on with health of Danish society. It appears that majority of people has an excellent living standard and they do not want to bother with miseries of minorities of Danish nation who struggles alongside them.

New technology for security or interference with privacy rights?

2006-06-03T18:18:00.000+02:00

Scandinavian airlines plan to introduce the technology know as biometrics later this year, first in Sweden and later at other Scandinavian airports. This technology means that when you check your baggage, you will be asked for your fingerprint. The distinguishing print features will be then temporarily stored in digital form. At the boarding gate, your fingerprint will be verified and matched against the data on your checked baggage. After the aircraft departs, the digital data will be erased.

The process has been approved by the Swedish Data Inspection Board. However, the question remains whether such a process is necessary in democratic society?

Peter Handke's Play Retracted from Comédie Française Theatre Programme

2006-06-02T21:47:00.000+02:00

World class Austrian author makes headlines again. The director of Comédie Française retracted Handke's play titled "Das Spiel vom Fragen oder Die Reise ins sonore Land" from theatre program, due to Handke's role in Milošević's funeral. Handke delivered a eulogy there. The premiere of the new play was planned for January 2007.

In Slovenia, Peter Handke is - beside his plays - best known for his Slovenian ancestry (his mother is Slovene), his opposition to Slovene independence in 1990, his funny affection to former Yugoslavia, his passionate siding with Yugoslav forces during the war in Bosnia and his adoration for Slobodan Milošević.

In short: for his art and for his irrational politics.

Here's a brief report by German paper Die Welt:

Die Comédie Française hat ein für Anfang 2007 geplantes Stück von Peter Handke vom Spielplan genommen, weil der österreichische Schriftsteller zum Begräbnis des ehemaligen jugoslawischen Präsidenten Slobodan Milosevic eine Rede gehalten hat. Handkes Stück "Das Spiel vom Fragen oder Die Reise ins sonore Land" sollte im Januar und Februar 2007 aufgeführt werden. "Peter Handkes Anwesenheit bei Milosevics Beerdigung ist eine Beleidigung der Opfer", sagte der Verwaltungschef des Theaters, Marcel Bozonnet, der Zeitung "Le Monde" zur Begründung. "Selbst, wenn Handkes Stück kein Propagandawerk ist, so verschafft es dem Autor öffentliche Aufmerksamkeit. Ich hatte keine Lust, ihm diese zu geben."

A Remark on “Housewitz” Case Advocacy

2006-05-27T13:58:00.000+02:00

A Dutch student was sentenced recently to 40 hours of community work for perverse depiction of Auschwitz concentration camp by making a dance internetclip titled “Housewitz”. A video used images of the Auschwitz death camp, turning the infamous slogan "Arbeit Macht Frei" into "Tanzen Macht Frei". The clip announced DJs with Sieg Heil, and spoke about “seven million party people, set their body’s on fire”, and said the dresscode was “skinny Jew." Similarly, English historian David Irving was sentenced to a 3-year prison sentence few months ago by Austrian court for his notorious and long standing denial of holocaust. Not just far right bigots, many legal theorists too in a warm hospitality of their campuses voiced their skepticism by what is supposed to be an apparent free speech infringement. Further, many good hearted citizens, who justly think of themselves as democrats are convinced that such laws are terribly outdated and have no place in a free society. If society is association of individuals, each of whom has a conception of good or worthwhile life, then facilitation of these goods by society should not be discriminatory. They argue that any view endorsed by society as a whole would be that of some citizens but not others. Those who see their views hindered by the state would not be treated with equal respect in relation to their compatriots advocating the established view.

In their advocacy zeal (cf. questioning whether it is appropriate to ban or hinder Housewitz interenetclip or the propagation of holocaust denial) the aforementioned views simply ignore ontological questions, regarding the factors that account for social life. I may not agree with severity of criminal justice retribution, especially not in the Irving case, but it follows from ontological argument that state is entitled to endorse or hinder particular set of values and particular worldview. Why?

In his Liberalism and Limits of Justice Michael Sandel argues convincingly that the way we live together in the society does not amount to an atomist model in which the self and identity is supposed to be unencumbered but much more to a holist model in which one’s identity and self is situated in various communities (family, cultural, local community etc.). A view that demands unconditional neutrality of the state simply overlooks that sustaining specific historical set of institutions and forms is and must be socially endorsed common end since it encourages the willing identification with the polis on part of the citizens. This need for the identification of citizens with the common goals of the polis is simply overlooked by unreflective procedural liberalism that excludes the socially endorsed conception of the good. Every democratic society, even a more libertarian one (i.e. governed by the difference principle), presupposes high degree of solidarity among its citizens through a strong sense of community. In a culture heavily infected with atomistic prejudices this awareness is often lost.

One of the crucial elements that form modern democratic European mindset is a phenomenon of a totalitarian state with its systematic, institutionalized, carefully planned and legally unrestrained use of physical and psychological violence. Its paradigmatic expression is a concentration camp, so accurately depicted by Hannah Arendt as a “world utterly devoid of thinking, feeling, judgment, personal identity, privacy and all else that distinguishes human existence”. Places like Auschwitz or vast and hidden GULAG archipelago, eerie events like silent mass killings of tens of thousands of Slovene and Yugoslav anticommunist POWs and civilians on Slovenian soil by Titoist special divisions immediately after the Second World War or massacre of 9000 Muslims in Srebrenica, Bosnia in summer of 1995 before the eyes of international community, may all very well be absurd. But they might just as well not be. They are the sad reminders for sure but as such they are also founding stones of united Europe and a part of European identity. The founding stones because they say unto us: Never again. In this way democratic societies are more than entitled to care for the objective depiction of events in the dark European 20th century.

It can be a matter of debate whether criminal law is appropriate means to tackle these issues but legal system latu sensu certainly cannot ignore them. What judges in Irving and “Housewitz” cases did was to remove the sneering mockery which disturbed the peace above the graves, thus enabling the victims to tell us their story again. A free society relies on a strong allegiance from its members and is based on the identification around the sense of common good – and around the knowledge of past evils.

Grant v. United Kingdom

2006-05-25T13:29:00.000+02:00

The European Court of Human Rights has on Tuesday delivered its judgement in the case of Grant v. the United Kingdom.

Ms Grant, is a 68-year-old British national who lives in St Albans (the United Kingdom). She is a post-operative male-to-female transsexual. Ms Grant’s birth certificate showed her as male. She served in the army for three years from age 17 and then worked as a police officer. Aged 24, she gave up attempting to live as a man, and had gender reassignment surgery two years later. She has presented as a woman since 1963, was identified as a woman on her National Insurance card and paid contributions to the National Insurance scheme at a female rate . In 1972 she became self-employed and started paying into a private pension fund. The applicant applied for a State pension to start on 22 December 1997, her 60th birthday. On 31 October 1997 her application was refused on the ground that she would only be entitled to a State pension when she reached 65, the retirement age applicable to men. She appealed unsuccessfully.

On 12 July 2002 she requested that her case be reopened in the light of the European Court of Human Right’s Grand Chamber judgments of 11 July 2002, Christine Goodwin v. the United Kingdom and I. v. the United Kingdom In those two cases the ECtHR found the British Government’s continuing failure to take effective steps to effect the legal recognition of the change of gender of post-operative transsexuals to be in breach of Article 8 of the Convention. On 14 August 2002 the applicant was informed that she had been granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal. However, on legal advice, she decided not to pursue her appeal.

The ECtHR found that Ms Grant was in an identical situation to the applicant in the Christine Goodwin case; as a post-operative male-to-female transsexual, Ms Grant might claim to be a victim of a breach of her right to respect for her private life contrary to Article 8, due to the lack of legal recognition of her change of gender.

The ECtHR noted that, while it was true that the Government had had to take steps to comply with the Christine Goodwin judgment, which had involved drafting, and passing in Parliament, new legislation, which they had achieved with laudable expedition, it was not the case that that process could be regarded as in any way suspending her victim status. Following the ECtHR’s judgment in Christine Goodwin, there was no longer any justification for failing to recognise the change of gender of post-operative transsexuals. Ms Grant, as such a transsexual, did not have at that time any possibility of obtaining such recognition and could claim to be prejudiced from that moment. Her victim status came to an end when the Gender Recognition Act 2004 came into force, thereby providing her with the means on a domestic level to obtain legal recognition. Consequently, in so far as the applicant complained about the refusal to accord her the pension rights applicable to women of biological origin, she might claim to be a victim of that aspect of the lack of legal recognition from the moment, after the Christine Goodwin judgment, when the authorities refused to give effect to her claim, namely, from 5 September 2002.

The European Court of Human Rights therefore found that there had been a breach of the Ms Grant’s right to respect for private life contrary to Article 8.

Symposium on international law this Wednesday at University of Edinburgh

2006-05-23T12:28:00.000+02:00

University of Edinburgh, School of Law will be holding a symposium on international law for PhD students on Wednesday 24 May 2006.

The theme of the symposium is recent decisions of international courts, tribunals and organisations in any field of international law. The topic is designed to allow as many people as possible to discuss what impact recent developments in international law have had on their areas of research.

More info is available at: http://www.hss.ed.ac.uk/symposium/. You are very welcome to attend!

Rémi Brague v četrtek v Ljubljani

2006-05-22T21:05:00.000+02:00

Nova revija vabi v četrtek, 25. maja 2006, ob 19. uri v Klub Cankarjevega doma, kjer bo imel francoski filozof Remi Brague predavanje z naslovom »Je evrocentrizem evropski?«.

Slovenski bralci Bragua poznajo predvsem po delu Evropa, rimska pot, pri Novi reviji pa so o njem pred predavanjem zapisali naslednje:

»Rémi Brague se uvršča med najvplivnejše evropske intelektualce. Kot profesor antične in srednjeveške filozofije predava na Sorboni ter na münchenski univerzi (kot naslednik Romana Guardinija). Pred tem je gostoval na številnih evropskih in ameriških univerzah. Objavil je številne filozofske študije, ki tematsko posegajo na vsa področja razvoja duha. Slovenskim bralcem je znan predvsem po prevedenem delu Evropa, rimska pot, v katerem razpravlja o konstitutivnem smislu evropskosti. Pri tem se opira na svoje bogato poznavanje antične in srednjeveške misli, kulture ter zgodovine.V predgovoru k slovenski izdaji je med drugim zapisal, kako je v tej knjigi »skušal pokazati, da je bil ključ evropskega kulturnega dinamizma priznavanje drugotnosti v odnosu do kultur, ki so občutene kot viri: v veri Stara zaveza, v svetni kulturi antična Grčija«. Pred kratkim je izšlo njegovo delo Modrost sveta. Zgodovina človeškega izkustva univerzuma.

V četrtkovem predavanju bo Rémi Brague obravnaval vprašanje, kaj pravzaprav menimo z oznako »evrocentričnosti«, ki pogosto nastopa v postmodernih kulturoloških študijah, in kaj kultura kot center sploh pomeni.«

B-16 Extols Separation of Church and State

2006-05-20T22:18:00.000+02:00

Last week Pope Benedict XVI described separation of Church and state as »great progress for humanity«. In a news bulletin by zenit.org, B-16 is quoted saying there is a fundamental

"distinction between what belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God, in other words, the distinction between Church and state, or the autonomy of the temporal sphere."

It may be added here, that one of the origins of a later notion of civil society and one of the roots of western liberalism is an idea, developed in the early Middle Ages, that society is not identical with its political organization. This notion that took place in Latin Christendom was followed by a crucial differentiation - political authority was now its own organ and Church was a societas which was independent from the authority. Pontiff is clearly appreciative of a conception in which Church is simply a part of civil society, participating in common discourse:

"[W]ithout doubt, a healthy laicism of the state ensures that temporal matters are dealt with according to their own norms; to this, however, are associated ethical concerns that have their foundations in the very essence of man and that therefore, in the final analysis, can be traced back to the Creator. [...] In current circumstances, by recalling the value for public and private life of certain ethical principles rooted in the great Christian heritage of Europe, and in particular of Italy, we commit no violation of the laicism of the state, Rather, we contribute to guaranteeing and promoting the dignity of the person and the common good of society."

Thorough acknowledgment of separation principle by Catholic Church can be found in the Pastoral Constitution Gaudium et Spes and most recently in B-16's own Encyclical Letter Deus Caritas Est.

Racial and religious tensions continue in the United Kingdom

2006-05-19T17:39:00.000+02:00

Yesterday an excellent student and a promising footballer has been stabbed to death in north-west London. The pupil had been involved in what police described as an altercation with another boy outside the gates of the London Academy in Edgware. You may read the whole story here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4996626.stm

It is no clear yet if the attack was racially motivated but it is already a second murder of pupils in four days after teenage Irish pupil was murdered in Northern Ireland by peers from IRA sympatizing families.

When will those kind of attacks cease if ever ? Is this the price we need to pay for living in free and liberal societies?

Music list

2006-05-18T17:15:00.000+02:00

English daily newspaper The Independent published on this Tuesday a list of ten favorite songs of Condi Rice, argubly the most powerful women in the world. Here is the very sophisticated list.

1. Mozart - Piano Concerto in D minor
2. Cream - 'Sunshine of Your Love'
3. Aretha Franklin - 'Respect'
4. Kool and the Gang - 'Celebration'
5. Brahms - Piano Concerto No 2
6. Brahms - Piano Quintet in F minor
7. U2 - Anything by U2
8. Elton John - 'Rocket Man'
9. Beethoven - Symphony No 7
10. Mussorgsky - Boris Godunov

Blues for Allah, pt.2

2006-05-17T22:32:00.000+02:00

In Matej's post of May 10th, the letter to George Bush by Iranian president Ahmadinajad was quoted, along with the proposition to continue the debate on »liberalism, atheism, religion and public reason«, issues already debated here. Although Ahmadinajad's letter is hardly an appropriate reason for a debate [since a) letter was clearly just a stunt to boost pan-Arabic public opinion and b) it's hard not to agree on Ahmadinajab whatever he says], the proposed subject is important on its own.

Incited by the letter Avbelj asks, rhetorically I think, “should the world really adopt a religious discourse?” Since it seems that somewhere in this question mark a bumper sticker “Support Denmark” is hidden, I have to point to my position on the dialectic between faith and reason stated very clearly in my “Slavoj Žižek Delivers a Sermon in NY Times” post and in subsequent debate with our reader Luka Lesjak, and in some of my other posts as well.

Moving to the next point, Avbelj concludes that certainly “the greatest value we have to defend is the INDIVIDUAL and his GENUINE LIBERTY”. Once again this could sound as a debate non-starter, since it is exactly the idea of the individual’s supreme worth that is indisputable basis of our culture, expressed already by the Renaissance humanists, for whom the dignity of man was a favorite theme, most notably in the writings of Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola. They of course “stood on the shoulders” of Judeo-Christian tradition grafted on Greek-Roman roots. There are very few modern thinkers who have rejected this notion of individual’s supreme worth, perhaps some late romantics, Neo-Hegelians, fascists and Marxists-Leninists. Certainly not a very pleasant crowd. But a problem of GENUINE LIBERTY is far more interesting.

Since I mentioned Ahmadinajab and Žižek I will try to discuss question of liberty by slowly moving to the infamous case of Danish cartoon controversy. The idea of freedom is itself very old, but the modern or liberal idea of freedom emerges with the notion of rights of the individual. Modern language of rights provides for precise instrument for finding and sorting out the demands of justice. But it can also very easily become a hindrance to a clear thought when the question is: What are demands of justice? What were demands of justice during the cartoon controversy? Famously Ronald Dworkin treats rights as “individuated political aims” which are not subordinate to conceptions of “aggregate collective good” or the “general interest” or “general utility”. But Dworkin himself puts limitations to this view:

"I must not overstate the point. Someone who claims that citizens have right against the government need not go so far as to say that the state is never justified in overriding that right. [A]lthough citizens have a right to free speech, the Government may override that right when protecting the right of others […]."

However, in the case of Danish cartoon controversy Dworkin took the side of cartoonists, though somewhat reluctantly. I think he was wrong.

In different approach to the problem John Finnis defines modern Human Rights documents as a way of sketching the outlines of the common good, the various aspects of individual well-being in the community. What Human Rights documents, Slovene Constitution included, really say is that each and everyone’s well-being , in each of its basic aspects must be considered and favored at all times by those responsible for coordinating the common life.

This concept of common good is of course a part of every legal order, in Slovene constitutional case law for instance it’s known as ordre public, public order. Still, one cannot say that rights are subject to the common good, for the maintenance of human rights is a fundamental component of the common good. But we can say that human rights are subject to or limited by each other, and by other aspects of common good, subsumed under conception of ordre public. In the case of Danish cartoon controversy the well-being of European Muslims in democratic community was infringed. Unjustified suppression of religious language and sentiments in public discourse is in my view one of the reasons for the general insensitivity and incompetence of European states to detect outlines of common good in this and similar cases.

Leaving aside Ahmadinajab, both an islamist and a funny guy (if you live outside his police state), the reaction of European press to the cartoon controversy was simply wrong, since by insulting Muslim citizens it infringed the common good in a democratic state and thus well-being of its citizens. The exercise of a right to free speech in this case was not a expression of GENUINE LIBERTY but of a mere free speech fundamentalism.

Or is there something else to find in Justice’s robes?

A Criminal Justice or Victor's Justice?

2006-05-16T12:53:00.000+02:00

Joseph Berry Keenan, Chief of Counsel for the United States at the Tokyo War Crimes Trial after World War II, commented some years after II world war:

“World society acting through the Allied Powers, clearly had the right to try persons for war crimes and punish tem if they were guilty. This right of world society is innate and inalienable. General MacArthur, the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers in the Pacific, acted on behalf of world society in accepting the delegation of authority to implement the Instrument of Japanese Surrender, and in exercising the power he received. Tokyo trials were founded on the basis of Christian-Judaic absolutes of good of evil. Principles upon which this trial rests may never be available as precedent for any nation which has espoused antithetic standards and norms.”

The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMFTE) also known as the the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal, was convened to try the leaders of the Empire of Japan for three types of crimes: war crimes, crimes against peace, and crimes against humanity, committed during World War II, including some incidents such as the Rape at Nanjing.

Radhabinod Pal, the Indian justice at the IMTFE, argued in his dissenting opinion that Japan was innocent. He wrote, "If Japan is judged, the Allies should also be judged equally." However, his opinion was not shared by the majority of the justices at Tokyo. The restriction of trial and punishment by the IMTFE to personnel of Japan has led to accusations of victor’s justice and that Allied war crimes could not be tried for henious crimes such bombardment of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Ooh Yeah – Eurovision Song Contest Strikes back

2006-05-12T19:36:00.000+02:00

It is always painful, embarrassing and most of all very hilarious to watch one’s own country and other countries participating in the Eurovision Song Contest, especially if one carefully reads very thougthful and deep lyrics of the most participating countries. This year is (alas) no exception. The Slovenian entry for 2006 is a song entitled “Mr Nobody” performed by a very good young singer Anžej Dežan. Leaving the performer aside, we feel that is a great need to concentrate more on lyrics of the Slovenian entry itselfl. Indeed, it is very difficult to surpass this year Maltese entry and its lyrics “I do I do I do I do I do love you like a fool” as Justin rightly suggests at his blog http://www.neebother.blogspot.com/.

However, we will let to our readers to judge if lyrics of Slovene song are any good. So we ask you to consider, read carefully and discuss appropriately the lyrics of Slovenian song. Thereafter, you may feel to compare those lines with one of the poems “In Silver Moonlight” of one of the most essential Slovenian poet, Srečko Kosovel.

More on this year Eurovision may follow in next days. You may watch an listen to all entries at http://www.eurovision.tv/english/index.htm.

MR NOBODY

YOU, YOU CAME TO ME ONE NIGHT,
JUST LIKE A RAY OF LIGHT,
I THOUGHT WE'D BE FOREVER
NOW, IT'S SO CLEAR TO ME,
I'M PART OF HISTORY,YOU'RE LEAVING ME IN SORROW

SO DEEPLY,
SO BADLY,
YOU'RE HURTING ME

TELL ME,
WHO'S THAT LUCKY HERO,
SLEEPING
TIGHTLY ON YOUR PILLOW,
TELL ME,
WILL IT BE FOREVER

'CAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT ME,
I'M MR NOBODY,
IT'S JUST A GAME YOU PLAY,
CAN'T LET YOU WALK AWAY

LIKE A STRANGER PASSING BY,
WITH NO MORE TEARS TO DRY,
YOU'RE LEAVING ME IN SORROW

Srečko Kosovel, In Silver Moonlight

A dark boat floats
in silver moonlight,
from the green harbour
a boatman set sail,
- from the green crystal
of a silent heart.
From the heart of midnight.

The leaves did not move
as if still in a dream,
alone by the shore
green they lean.

Each night on a silver ocean
the young boatman
dreams to and fro,
but back to the harbour
he'll never go.

Demise of Liberalism Revisited

2006-05-10T18:53:00.000+02:00

"Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems. We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point – that is the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is : Do you not want to join them?"

Mahmood Ahmadi-Najad President of the Islamic Republic of Iran (excerpt from his letter to President Bush of the USA, which is in its entirety available here.)

The debate on liberalism, atheism, religion and public reason already figured on the agenda of this blog. Now the Iranian President has tossed the ball again back to us. What is he saying? Is he right? Are his contentions perverse in the light of his actual deeds? How to draw the line between the values of liberty and the abuses committed by those who enjoy this liberty? What about those who do not enjoy the liberty at all? Should the world really adopt a religous discoure? What would that mean?

In our eyes Iranian letter is an extremely well thought tactical move inspired by the very same criticism that is waged against liberalism, human rights etc. by the nihilist western left, with a single exception that Iran is not offering atheism as a model of discourse, but religion. But in essence, there is the same red line combining the two approaches. Both are intolerant: a comprehensive doctrine should trump the public discourse and hence the individuals' liberties, their rights to decide about their life on their own following their religious convictions that they share, whatever might those be, provided that they do not inflict pain on the others and on what is defined as public interest.

This, in my view, unprecedented letter will stir a lot of controversies and rightly so: but my standing is clear: this letter and the ensuing discussion will certainly show that the greatest value we have to defend is the INDIVIDUAL and HIS GENUINE LIBERTY. And this is what I have been defending in my previous posts on liberalism opposing some other contributors whose turn is now to raise their voice.

Membership of the new UN Human Rights Council

2006-05-10T17:56:00.000+02:00

Yesterday the United Nations Assembly elected 47 members of the UN Human Rights Council. It is reported that first signs from the election of the 47 members of the Council are very encouraging for the future of this new body. Slovenia failed to secure a seat in the Council, but we will no go into the reason for that at this point. The membership of the Council is quite impressing; however the likes of Cuba, Pakistan and China still managed to be elected in the Council. The revolution must go on…

Membership of the Human Rights Council is available here:
http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/membership.htm

Slovenia: Diversity to Discover

2006-05-08T22:59:00.000+02:00

You can check the Diversity here.

Mysterious ways of British politics – Tony Blair’s night of long knives

2006-05-08T11:42:00.000+02:00

Would now be the right time for Tony Bair to hand over his position as incumbent UK prime minister to a fellow Scot, Gordon Brown, Labour party vice-chairman and acting Chancellor of Exchequer, or not ?. The answer is far from being straight-forward but it became very relevant after the Labour party suffered a heavy defeat in local elections in England.

On last Friday Tony Blair executed the most extensive overhaul of his cabinet since wining power in 1997, in order to refresh the momentum of his government after Labour’s party drubbing in the local election. One may describe as an act of Blair’s determination to stay in Downing Street. However, a poor election result triggered an immediate call from fifty prominent Labour MPs who demanded that Blair sets a date for his departure.

Blair in his purge sacked Charles Clarke as a home secretary (after a week of disastrous publicity to over his department’s failure to detain, deport or keep track of foreign former prisoners), moved Jack Strew to post of Commons leader and took away departmental responsibilities of deputy prime minister and daily icon in British tabloid press after his affair with 25 younger secretary, John Prescott.

What does that mean for Mr Gordon Brown? In British press it is widely seen that reshuffle means a significant boost for Mr Brown’s allies since they gained more important positions in the government.

A cabinet reshuffle was clearly one the last cards remaining in the hand of Mr Blair whose authority is visibly frying. Beneath the talk over sex scandals, loans-forpeerages and missing foreign convict lies doubts about the character and competence of Mr Blair’s government. It is a bit peculiar BUT for the first time in nine years voters have a genuine alternative in David Cameron’s Conservative party. On last Thursday local election the Conservative party won 40 per cent of the vote. Gordon Brown described the results as warning shot and said that renewal of New Labour must begin immediately.

But do you find any similarities with Slovenian political scene?

"Be not Afraid"

2006-05-05T21:54:00.000+02:00

"There is another reason we can have confidence in the future of democracy. Individual rights, self-determination, and respect for the dignity of each person are consistent with our nature as human beings. We are created in the image and likeness of God, and He has planted in our hearts a yearning to be free. And because of that immutable truth, the idea of liberty will always stir men and women to action. So to those who struggle to secure their freedom, let us offer the same support we would ask for ourselves, and the same words of encouragement once given by Pope John Paul II to an afflicted Europe: 'Be Not Afraid.'"

Dick Chaney, Vice President of the USA in his recent speech in Lithuania, particularly critical of Russia and its treatment of democracy and freedom. (available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/04/world/europe/04cnd-cheney-text.html)

Outrageous

2006-05-05T21:40:00.000+02:00

Slovenian Student Association has crossed the Rubicon. They have announced another protest on the eve of the ex-socialist Day of Youth. Not just students, but also high-school pupils and their PARENTS are to be invited, presumably again escorted by the biggest Slovenian Trade Union.

The lesson is: if you can not exact from the government the impossible, go to the streets and you'll get it there. Following this logics every social group, whenever dissatisfied, should go to the streets and protest, even if against the bad weather.

The student life in Slovenia, and especially of those self-proclaimed leaders of a Student organization with a highly dubious pedigree, is uncomparably luxurious in comparison to anything else I've seen around Europe and in the United States where I studied. N0body anywhere is eating 30% priced food in the posh restaurants subsidized by the state, nobody is working instead of studying, and nobody has a free public transport...

Excursus: Graduate Education is not the Right it is the Opportunity -- that the State encourages for the well-being of the society. But everything has its limits. Even stupidity as the time will show.

These demands really sound like a joke, a bad one though. But the best is the aggrieved claim: due to the new tax 150.000 students and high-school pupils will remain unemployed, i.e. without job. I really did not know that all those guys were actually employed- who the f... is studying then? It seems that we have again 150% rate of employment in Slovenia.... No wonder there is never a single free parking spot in the faculty-neighborhoods in Ljubljana. Btw: the State should also pay for the gas to the poor students who are otherwise not able to attend the lectures... That they in any case don't.

The clearly politically affiliated leader of the Slovenian Student Association should stop vasting the student money, paid by the state by the way, for his political projects. In modern democracies the politics is not done or imposed in the streets, but in the parliament. He should go and stand for elections if he likes as any other citizen, yet not backed up by the state money... But above all, at his age many would be ashamed to be an under-grad student...

I suggest: Return to the books and stop using the taxpayers money for street-parties.

Addressing human rights violations in the Basque country - independent report by the Australian television SBS

2006-05-05T16:09:00.000+02:00

With the help of our Basque friends, we are hereby presenting the independent report of the Australian television SBS about the grave human rights violations in the Basque country.

The almost half-hour TV report may be viewed here:
http://news.sbs.com.au/dateline/index.php?page=archive&daysum=2006-04-05

As we portrayed in our previous pots the Spanish government presents the whole Basque opposition as terrorist and implement anti-terrorist measures in the two directions that we have explained previously. It accuses Basque citizens of “being terrorists”, without any evidence and without a fair trial. At this stage, they have implemented counter terrorism mechanisms in flagrant opposition to the international human rights, using incommunicado detention, which allows the existence of torture, denying a fair trial in the Special Antiterrorist Court (Audiencia Nacional), where statements taken under torture are sufficient to find the suspect guilty …. The last (E/CN.4/2002/76/Add.1) report submitted by the Special Rapporteur on Torture, Theo van Boben, to the UN Commission on Human Rights, acknowledged the existence of 58 cases of torture denounced by Basque suspects during the year 2000. Second, political and social organizations that until now were working in a public, legal and free manner, are now being accused of being terrorists. By doing
so, they have violated the freedom of association, freedom of expression and opinion. There are, nowadays, two possibilities to allow the ilegalization of political and social organisations. There amany attempts to damage the political activity of the political party Batasuna. One of them comes from the intervention of judge Baltasar Garzón, examining magistrate of the Special Antiterrorist Court. He has decided that all the Basque social and grassroot organisations, political groups and even the media, included Batasuna, belong to ETA, and, therefore, they are against the law. He can take special pre-trial measures and, as a cautionary step, suspend the activities of these organisations. No substantial evidence is provided. More than 200 people are implicated in this process.

Another approach takeen by Spanish authorities consists in reforming the Parties Act and considering that the parties that do not agree with the “constitutional principles” are operating outside the Spanish law. The decision will be taken by the Special Court in the Supreme Tribunal. There will be no evidence either, but a media campaign which will have to convince Spanish public opinion. The activity of Batasuna will have been suspended for many years, with all the obvious consequences for both, the party and its electorate. In last decades there has been a serious record of violations of public freedoms and the lack of guarantees in the promotion and protection of human rights. It’s important to raise the voice of alarm in an attempt to prevent this situation from being translated into other political contexts, wherever they may occur.

It takes E.R. to draw attention to a humanitarian crisis in Darfur

2006-05-05T12:46:00.000+02:00

The humanitarian disaster unfolding in Darfur received yesterday its most prominent exposure so far on American television. It was episode (and next episodes) of hospital drama E.R., which has brought to light the tragedy taking place in the Darfur region of war-torn Sudan, where upwards of 400,000 people are believed to have been killed in attacks by ethnic Arabs against black Africans. 2 million more were driven from their homes in the western Sudan province since 2003.

The three mayor American network evening newscasts devoted less than a combined 10 minutes so far this year to the political and ethnic conflict in Darfur

Resources on humanitarian crisis in Darfur:
http://hrw.org/doc?t=africa&c=darfur

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darfur_conflict

Which country is shortchanged on bank holidays?

2006-05-03T15:37:00.000+02:00

The Guardian, g2, Monday, 1 May 2006.

“This year, according to European parliament, every country in the EU will enjoy more public holidays than England, Scotland and Wales. By the time 2006, is out, the Slovenians will have treated themselves to 18 extra days off, scattered thoughfully and evenly throughout the year…To risk being teenage about it: it’s so unfair. Especially as, due to loophole in UK law, employers are allowed to subtract bank holidays from statutory 20 days of annual leave.”

Great Britain has only eight public holidays a year.

Croatia faces a bizarre case due its even more bizarre Penal Code

2006-05-03T11:41:00.000+02:00

According to the Croatian web-news provider http://www.index.hr/ the co-ordinator of autonomous women house (NGO in Zagreb) was indicted by the president of the District court in Zadar, Croatia, for "exercising pressure on the judge by commenting on the trial and decision of the court before the finality of the judgment."

Believe it or not, Croatian Penal Code in its Article 309, Par. 2 provides the following (mine translation, supplemented by original in Croation for those who understand):

"Who during the process before the court, but before the final judgment has been rendered, in public media, at a public assembly or in front of the group of the people, presents his opinion on how the justice affairs official would need to act or decide in this particular case, is to be punished by a pecuniary fine of 150 daily incomes or imprisoned up to 6 months…
The act is not incriminated if conducted by the defendant or his lawyer if they presented their opinions after the official statement given by the state attorney or the judge in this respective case. "

"(2) Tko za vrijeme postupka pred sudom, a prije donošenja pravomoćne sudske odluke, u javnim sredstvima priopćavanja, na javnom skupu ili pred skupinom ljudi, iznosi svoje mišljenje o tome kako bi u tom slučaju pravosudni dužnosnik trebao postupati ili kakve odluke donositi, kaznit će se novčanom kaznom do stopedeset dnevnih dohodaka ili kaznom zatvora do šest mjeseci. (3) Nema kaznenog djela iz stavka 2. ovoga članka ako njegovo zakonsko obilježje ostvari optuženik ili njegov branitelj, ako su iznijeli svoje mišljenje nakon službenog priopćenja za javnost od strane državnog odvjetnika ili suca glede određenog slučaja."

It is indeed striking that this kind of provision, clearly a dead hand of the past, still exists in contemporary Croatia since it is on its face contrary to the European Convention for Human Rights (trials are to be conducted in public, which entails their commenting and discussing in public) and since it straightforwardly breaches also the right to free speech as embedded in Croatian constitution.

Waiting for Ratko Mladic

2006-05-02T18:12:00.000+02:00

It is over ten years since Ratko Mladić was on 21 July, 1995, indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and accused of genocide, crimes against humanity, and numerous war crimes(including crimes relating to the alleged sniping campaign against civilians in Sarajevo). On 16 November 1995, the charges were expanded to include charges of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes for the attack on the UN-declared safe area of Srebrenica in July 1995. Mladić is also responsible for the taking of hostages amongst UN peace-keeping address personnel.

He is suspected to be hiding either in Seriba or the Republika Srbska, but more likely around the major area of Belgrade. Serbian government in late March promised to hand over Mladić by end of April. That has not occurred. Therefore today the European Union suspended its negotiations with the Serbian government.

Carla Del Ponte, Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, confirmed the reluctance of cooperation of Serbian government in her address to the United Nations Security Council on 15 December 2005. She inter alia submitted the following:

“Until recently, there was no political will on either of these parties to go aggressively after Karadzic and Mladic. At the rhetorical level at least, this has changed now, and there are numerous statements by Serb and Bosnian Serb political and even religious leaders saying that Karadzic and Mladic must be brought to The Hague. These intentions at the top have, however, not necessarily filtered through all the layers of the institutions involved. To sum up this most crucial issue, my main partners in the hunt for Karadzic and Mladic are now the Governments of Serbia and Montenegro and the relevant authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The international community, through conditionality, is providing political incentives for the local authorities to arrest these indictees. On operational issues, however, the involvement of the international community has been minimal, at least over the past two years.

Serbia and Montenegro’s cooperation has, unfortunately, deteriorated in the past months. There is no serious, well-articulated action plan on the fugitives. Moreover, there is a lack of co-ordination between the State Union authorities and the two Republic’s Governments, and the rivalry between the involved agencies is palpable. The information passed to my Office is scarce and unconvincing. The Army of Serbia and Montenegro continues to hamper, both actively and passively, the co-operation of Serbia and Montenegro with the ICTY. Serbian civilian authorities admit today that the Army as an institution was protecting Ratko Mladic until as late as at least May 2002.”

Slovenia Celebrates 2nd Anniversary of EU Membership

2006-05-01T09:01:00.000+02:00

In these days Slovenia celebrates the 2nd anniversary of the membership in the European Union. The membership has brought many positive changes; above all the change in the public discourse. Especially among the young people old ideological Kultur-kampf is not taking roots, despite its great support in the media and by some opposition figures. However, Slovenia has not yet burried all of its dead siblings from the WWII since the ideological stands are still too strong. And this undermines the country in a civilizational sense.

Nevertheless, the future seems to be promissing. Slovenia is going to adopt Euro with 1st of January 2007, it is going to preside the Union in 2008 and the domestic economy reforms in pursuance of Lisabon strategy are envisaged to be implemented in the same years.

What Slovenia would deserve most, however, is the opening of the intellectual and public domain, fresh winds, demise of arrogant and ideological parlance and ever-repeating Kultur-kampf. The country needs optimism, the life has to be, literally, infused into it - since the birth-rate has been in a persistent decline for more than 25 years now. It is easy: it is all about the perception and the image Slovenian reality would have in people's eyes - if we shared a feeling of mutual co-operation full of incentives for a better tomorrow instead of fights over the ideological picture of the past; if we got rid of proverbial envy, provincialism and of self-destructive attitude we would flourish.

Slovenia would not be just "a diversity to explore", a magnificent country with white mountains, blue sea and the green plains where our eyes can rest, it would be also an intellectual oasis where our hearts and minds would thrive. Non vedo l'ora...

Slovenska medijska realnost - Labodji spev suznjev

2006-04-30T18:47:00.000+02:00

Besede so lahko odvec pri razumevanju zadnjih dveh dosezkov slovenskega zurnalizma. Razredni boj se za nekatere pac ne more kar tako prenehati. Ali pac?

1. Sobotna priloga Dela, 29. april, www.delo.si, zlasti:

Sasa Vidmajer, 21. stoletje?, Sobotna priloga Dela,

Petek Kolsek, Ali si že pospravil kovčke, Peter? – Ne še. – Pospravi jih!

2. Knijga mene briga - Marksizmi in jezikoslovje: Bathin / Volosinov, Stalin, Williams, RTV Slovenija, 27. april, www.rtvslo.si

Justice in Robes

2006-04-29T14:35:00.000+02:00

Being used to the intellecutal confines of the sub-Alpine beauty, it is really a reward to spend a Saturday morning at Ronald Dworkin's lecture. One of the greatest legal philosophers of our era stopped at the European University Institute, Florence, to interact with law professors and researchers in the field of legal theory and to - indirectly - present his most recent book: Justice in Robes.

For those interested in legal theory this is certainly a must read. Especially, since Dworkin has (slightly) reviewed his points made in the past and clarified some of his positions. The house of law that he has built now stands on four pillars: four distinct concepts of law: doctrinal, sociological, taxonomix and aspirational. This distinction enables Dworkin to once again show the weakness of the alleged neutrality thesis of legal positivists. If there is a genuine dispute between the two schools, then they have to use the same, i.e. doctrinal concept of law (unless they just talk past each other and there is no dispute), and since the doctrinal concept of law is an interpretive concept, positivism is just one interpretation of it - i.e. another exercise in political morality.... Indeed, this poses another, refurbished and fresh challenge to the so called Archimedeans.

A first case against any blogger that has gone to trial and resulted in a liability verdict.

2006-04-27T16:35:00.000+02:00

Attorney Rafe Banks III sued political activist David Milum for statements made on his website on local politics in Forsyth County, Georgia, United States, aboutforsyth.com. Several postings on the site alleged that Banks had delivered bribes from drug dealers to a now-deceased judge. After a four-day trial and six hours of deliberation, the jury awarded Banks $50,000 in compensatory damages, but no punitive damages. Banks had sought between $400,000 and $2 million in damages. After the verdict, Milum said that someone else was taking over the web site.

The whole story is available at http://www.forsythnews.com/news/stories/20060129/localnews/61856.shtml.

More information on media law and also blogs is available here: http://www.medialaw.org/.

Columnist suspended for posting anonymous blog comments

2006-04-27T16:05:00.000+02:00

The Los Angeles Times suspended the blog of one of its top columnists on 20 April 2006, saying he violated the paper's policy by posting derogatory comments under an assumed name.

Read the whole story here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/20/AR2006042002375.html.

Law, Criticism and the Courts

2006-04-25T11:31:00.000+02:00

One of the flawed, but very persistent, dogmas in Slovenia is that the pronunciations of the courts, of whichever instance, but especially of the highest courts, should not be commented on, rather they should be taken for granted. It has been even claimed, most recently yesterday by the top Slovenian politian, that this is to be a fortiori observed by lawyers.

If we followed this kind of reasoning we would end up in a paradoxical situation where the essence of law, i.e. legal reasoning would be banned out of the law's realm. All judicial decisions have to be reasoned precisely because they are to be assessed for their correctness and persuasiveness. Of course, final decisions of the highest courts are presumed to be correct and should stay and be obeyed as they are. HOWEVER, it is the DUTY of law academics and practitioners to assess and analyze these judgments for their argumentative persuasiveness, for their fit with all things considered. Those who argue the opposite have simply missed the point and committed a category error.

"Let's Fu..." - NOT ON THIS BLOG!

2006-04-24T22:48:00.000+02:00

It has been noticed that the decision to block the primitive, deplorable, humiliating comments on a personal basis, as opposed to argument-based comments, from this blog has annoyed their dispatchers to such a degree that they are spreading their anger elsewhere.

Something should be, however, clear: Global Law and Politics is devoted to harsh, but always decent discussions. We are here to criticize and to be criticized, but not on a personal basis, but on the level of arguments and compelling reasons. We are devoted to liberal values, to a free speech and freedom of conscience. However, SINCE THIS IS OUR BLOG, we define the terms. No, primitivism, no humiliation, nothing below the threshold of minimum decency should be posted on our blog. In a liberal democratic society everyone can decide not to engage into discussions with those who do not concede to the very kern of what a discussion is. And that is the respect for the interlocotur.

WWW provides ample space for those who fail to meet these minimum standards of decency, as the angry and bad-tempered dispatchers know that very well. However, Global Law and Politics provides none. And rightly so.

Taking Criminal Justice Seriously - Crimes against humanity after Second World War in Slovenia

2006-04-24T20:58:00.000+02:00

On 21 April 2006 Supreme State Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Slovenia eventually filed an indightement before the District Court in Ljubljana against Mr Mitja Ribicic for the crimes against humanity committed on the territory of Slovenia just after Second World War. Mr Ribicic is a former deputy of Secret police during totalitarian Communist regime. This indightment marks a symoblic step in bringing prepetrators of henious crimes and blatant human rights violations on the Slovene territory to justice. Mr Ribicic is said to be in a good health and ready to face the trial. One needs to wait and see if criminal proceeding against Mr Ribicic will ever begin. Some of you remember Mr Pinochet who faked his medical condition in order to escape extradition to Spain and now six years after the event in London still enjoy the freedom in Santiago. In Slovene case there have been many speculations throughout the years whether the defendant will try to contemplate this option as well. The forthcoming month will bring answer to those speculations.

In the following section we reproduce a small passage from one our previous posts.

Slovenia is a small, beautiful and picturesque country, where one can ski in the morning and surrender oneself to the luxury of the Adriatic Sea in the evening. There are many lakes, steep mountains, woods and forests in Slovenia - covering more than sixty per cent of the country. But it is deep in those woods and forests where the darkest side of Slovene history lies. In the months following the of Second World War the Slovene Communists brutally massacred twenty thousands of fellow Slovenes, who chose not to join Resistance movement led by Slovene Communist Party, and over two hundred thousand of Croats and Serbs. Their remains are spread all over Slovene hills and valleys, so far more than four hundred sites, where slaughters took place, were found. Perpetrators, who ordered and controlled those heinous crimes against humanity, still roam freely on Slovene streets. Others who were indirectly involved are nowadays denying any knowledge of crimes ever being committed or they attempt to justify them as just another aspect of victor’s justice. When one addresses the crimes of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity in Slovenia, impunity is still the norm.

To be continued in next weeks and months..

Editorial policy of Globalawandpolitics

2006-04-24T20:34:00.000+02:00

Globalawandpolitics has a policy that the integrity, independence and freedom from bias of Globalawandpolitics must be upheld at all times.

We are committed to publish the facts and in all situations avoid the use of emotive terms. The only exception is when we are quoting someone directly or in indirect speech. We aim to report and commentate objectively actions, identity and background and pay particular attention to all our coverage in extremely sensitive regions.

We do not take sides and attempt to reflect in our stories of our posts. We are not in the business of glorifying one side or another or of disseminating propaganda.

The contents of this section are going to make us unpopular with some blog "true-believers" who look at blogs. But that is their problem -- and their issue. We have to follow our principles, even if we are using a different means of communication. We have to misquote one of Milos Forman's movies -- if you do not like Globalawandpolitics then do not read it and go yawn somewhere else.. But if you do, or if you have constructive suggestions about topics or thoughts about posted then we would love to hear from you. This blog was created on initiaive of the members of this blog and not anybody elses, and editorial policy is our to form. And also no public fund from any country on this planet is shareholder in our blog.

We receive many e-mails each week and it is not possible to send reply. But we do welcome views submitted by email or snail mail on how we could improve our postings and our blog.

Saturday afternoon in Slovenia

2006-04-22T19:02:00.001+02:00

Saturday supplement of Leading Slovenian Newspaper Delo (Work):

Marko Pecauer (Mr. 800.496,64 SIT): "Nevertheless, it is a fact that Slovenia drifts towards a totalitarian state. This is not a defamation or an insult"

It is not for Mr Pecauer to say that is not a defamation or an insult what he wrote in his previous sentence. If he claims that Slovenia is a totalitarian state, he has to prove that his statement is true at least by giving some examples.

Neutral observer can simply write down that is more like that any newspaper, which calls itself Work and publishes that kind of articles has totalitarian approach to journalism and longs after the years where journalists did not anlyzise or research news and they published everything what their Masters told them. And this only for the sake of living misarable working life, going for holidays to neigboring Croatia, and maybe every fourth year getting a chance to report from Olympic games.

Saturday morning in Slovenia

2006-04-22T10:06:00.000+02:00

Intro in Sobotna priloga, of the Delo, Slovenian newspaper:

"Vendar je dejstvo, da Slovenija polzi proti totalitarni državi."

"Nevertheless, it is a fact that Slovenia drifts towards a totalitarian state."

Disillusion of an old man

2006-04-22T09:44:00.000+02:00

Die Zeit verrint --- und einige Menschen sind in Slowenien die Geschichte geworden. The old man has voiced his propaganda again: Slovenia needs no reforms; the government is pursuing private instead of public interests; Partnership for development was imposed on the political parties by the vicious of them all... And his association is stigmatized as Jews in the WWII.
Ja, naturlich: Herr ex-President: wenn die Entaeuschung kommt, insbensonders wenn das Volk so entschieden hat, muss man das akzeptieren, und nicht leiden wie ein junger Werther. Es is endlich Zeit eine neu Realitat fur alle zu bilden. Und wir konnen und wollen mit unsern einigen Kopfen denken.

El Pentágono hace públicos los nombres de los 558 presos de Guantánamo

2006-04-20T14:29:00.000+02:00

El gobierno americano ha hecho pública la identidad de las 558 personas que están o han estado detenidas en la base de Guantánamo (Cuba) en el marco de la guerra contra el terrorismo. Bajo la condición de combatientes enemigos, figuran presos de 40 nacionalidades, entre los que destacan 132 procedentes de Arabia Saudí, 125 afganos y 107 yemeníes.

El gobierno americano, al que un juez federal había ordenado someterse a este esfuerzo de transparencia tras una demanda de la agencia americana de noticias Associated Press, había rechazado hasta ahora publicar las identidades de la totalidad de detenidos de Guantánamo.

Lista de los detentidos en Guantanamo:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/guantanamo_names.html

Diametralno videnje istega dogodka

2006-04-19T16:12:00.002+02:00

Spori med Slovenijo in Hrvasko glede ozemlja ob reki Dragonji, ki si ga katastrsko lastita obe drzavi, so ze dobro znani. Danes je zgodba dobila svoje nadaljevanje, ki ga vsaka stran intepretira popolnoma nasprotno. Poglejmo:

vir: http://vijesti.hrt.hr/ShowArticles.aspx?ArticleId=8967
"JORAS PONOVNO IZAZVAO INCIDENT
19. travnja - Kontroverzni Joško Joras, samozvani "borac za južnu slovensku granicu", ilegalno je pokušao prijeći hrvatsko-slovensku granicu na prijelazu Plovanija, u čemu ga je spriječila hrvatska policija. Priveden je na obavijesni razgovor u policijsku graničnu postaju. Joras se odupirao privođenju pa su ga hrvatski policajci prenijeli do postaje.
Prije ovoga dogodio se još jedan incident, čije je sudionik također bio Joras. Joško Joras tužio je vlasnika kasina zbog nepropisno sagrađenog parkirališta, zbog kojeg se slivne vode slijevaju u njegovo dvorište i kuću. Iako se kuće nalaze u Hrvatskoj, tužbu je podnio okružnom sudu u Kopru koji se proglasio nadležnim. Prema nalogu koparskog suda na teren je danas izašao sudski vještak iz Kopra. Hrvatska je policija zabranila vještačenje jer slovenski vještak nije imao dozvolu za rad u našoj zemlji. Nakon policijskog upozorenja, sudski vještak mirno je napustio Hrvatsku."

Vir:http://www.mzz.gov.si/index.php?id=13&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=10996&tx_ttnews[backPid]=6&cHash=88d5e22e5b

"Sporočilo Ministrstva za zunanje zadeve
Ljubljana, 19. aprila 2006 - Ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve Republike Slovenije je bilo danes s strani Operacijsko-komunikacijskega centra pri Ministrstvu za notranje zadeve Republike Slovenije obveščeno, da so hrvaški policijski organi 19. aprila 2006 dopoldne v bližini doma na naslovu Sečovlje 1 na grob način aretirali slovenskega državljana Joška Jorasa ter ga nekaj časa zadrževali na začasni hrvaški kontrolni točki Plovanija. Hrvaški organi so prav tako neupravičeno omejevali in onemogočali prosto gibanje še enemu slovenskemu državljanu. Oba slovenska državljana sta bila ves čas na slovenskem državnem ozemlju.
Ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve se je nemudoma odzvalo in se povezalo s hrvaškim Ministrstvom za zunanje zadeve in evropske integracije. Ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve RS je izrazilo odločen protest proti navedenemu ravnanju hrvaških policistov in zahtevalo, da se slovenskima državljanoma takoj omogoči prosto gibanje. To se je po navedeni intervenciji Ministrstva za zunanje zadeve tudi zgodilo.

Ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve je hrvaškemu veleposlaništvu v Ljubljani hkrati izročilo protestno noto, v kateri je izrazilo najodločnejši protest zoper opisano hrvaško ravnanje. Poudarilo je, da takšno hrvaško ravnanje pomeni še eno v vrsti enostranskih dejanj, s katerimi skuša Republika Hrvaška prejudicirati rešitev mejnega vprašanja med Slovenijo in Hrvaško. Takšno hrvaško ravnanje je v nasprotju z obveznostjo spoštovanja stanja na dan 25.6.1991, ki izhaja tudi iz Skupne izjave o izogibanju incidentov.

Ministrstvo za zunanje zadeve je izrazilo pričakovanje, da se bodo hrvaški državni organi v skladu z mednarodnopravnimi obveznostmi in evropskimi načeli, ki jih morajo upoštevati države kandidatke za članstvo v Evropski uniji, vzdržali vseh dejanj, ki posegajo na državno ozemlje Republike Slovenije."

Ontologija spora je predolga, da bi jo ponavljali na tem mestu, saj smo o tem ze podrobneje pisali v clanku The Conundrum of the Piran bay, dostopnem na tem blogu. Zanima pa nas komentar bralcev glede izjemno nasilnega ravanja, ki so se ga ob Jorasovi aretaciji posluzili hrvaski policisti. Menimo, da je kljub spornosti obmocja, ki si ga, kot receno, lastita obe drzavi, taksno ravnanje popolnoma in v celoti nesprejemljivo in v nasprotju z minimalnimi standardi postopanja uradnih organov. Vec si lahko ogledate na posnetku, dostopnem na: http://www.rtvslo.si/modload.php?&c_mod=rnews&op=sections&func=read&c_menu=1&c_id=106435

Urangst von den Slowenen or Bananazing the Austrian (anti)policy towards national and ethnic minorities

2006-04-19T15:49:00.000+02:00

On this blog we already dealt with insanity of legal position Slovene minority in Austria. (See http://globalawandpolitics.blogspot.com/2006/02/haider-as-jewel-for-slovene-minority.html).

As we discerned it comes eventually down with most of issues concernig Slovene Minority in Austira to what Joerg Haider does or says. We can only repeat that he is known for his dubious statements about Jews and Slovene minority in Carinthia, his praise of Nazism, his embrace of former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, and for his personal charisma at least for Austrian people. He is a notorious follower of mockery and represents everything what Carinthia and Austria may be ashamed of. Facing political demise, only hate speech and hate action against Slovene minority in Austria may keep him in contention for Austrian election in September.

In February Matej wrote that By denying the right to bilingual signs they are denying to Slovenian minority the right to be seen. In other words: they can exist, but they should not be visible.

Haider has again today stated that Slovenia has banana minority policy towards minorities on the Slovene territory. Further, he submitted that his Carinthia may be a role model for Slovene minority politics. Haider’s disregard and contempt for national and international human rights standards is known worldwide and Austria may be an example for countries worldwide how not to deal with their national or ethnical minorities. He referred to European standards, which are respected by his regional government. It appears that Haider does not remember how his incumbent Government violates the rights of Slovene minority. If we refer only to European context, we can establish that Carinthian government in Austria violates not only the OSCE standards, but also COE Framework convention for the protection of National minorities and other COE documents, leaving aside the European Convention on HR and Fundamental Freedoms.

Situation of national and ethnic minorities in Slovenia is far from being perfect, but it cannot be compared and contrasted with totalitarian policy of Haider and his followers.

Now, it s necessary again to reiterate that is not for any state to decide what is minority/or who fulfils criteria for minority. It is up to minorities to identify themselves as a minority. Again, it is not for the state to say whether or not the rights of minorities are ensured, respected, fulfilled and promoted. Country which plans to hold the referendum on which the majority would decide on the constitutional right of the minority to bilingual signs takes us back to period, so deeply longed after by Haider.

Slovensko novinarstvo - se zadnjic

2006-04-16T14:16:00.003+02:00

V zadnjih nekaj dnevih smo na spletni strani nasega bloga kar nekaj prostora namenili stanju novinarstva v Sloveniji. Z dobesedno objavo komentarja Petra Jancica, glavnega in odgovornega urednika slovenskega najvecjega casopisa Delo (vir: http://www.delo.si/index.php?sv_path=43,50&id=74d4503444017b21c884b08f6d9a9e2804&source=Delo), zakljucujemo to razpravo.

Menimo, da je prav, da zadnjo besedo dobi nekdo, ki se je sam na svoji kozi soocil s stanjem, kakrsno trenutno vlada v slovenskem novinarstvu.

Peter Jancic: Hoja po robu stolpnice, v Delu Sob 15.04.2006:

"Z Delom se te dni ukvarjajo vsi v državi. Aktivi novinarjev konkurenčnih časopisov, kot sta Večer in Dnevnik, skušajo uredniku, ki vam piše to kolumno, pomagati pri sestavljanju uredniške ekipe in zahtevajo, da mora biti Ervin Hladnik Milharčič tudi še po prvem maju urednik prestižne Sobotne priloge. Še nekaj manjših aktivov se oglaša z idejami, kakšne kvalifikacije morajo imeti uredniki Dela in kako so se ne Delo menda infiltrirali politiki.

Majhen in bolj strankarski časopis je nevoščljiv, kakšne plače tukaj prejemajo uredniki in novinarji, pa objavlja netočne podatke o tem. Poslanko Majdo Potrata z leve je zmotilo, ker objavljamo oglase za tednik Mag. Z desne še ni protestov, kako si drznemo objavljati oglase za Mladino. So pa tam občasno zgroženi, ker jih pogosto razglasimo za odgovorne za vse dobro in slabo v državi. Kar je – ker ima oblast veliko moč – pač realnost.

Kar se aktivov novinarjev in protestov v prid Milharčiča tiče, niso čisto samoiniciativni. Dogajanje je sprožil izvršilni odbor aktiva novinarjev Dela, ki že dolgo slovi po tem, da rad razpošilja dopise drugim časopisom, kako je na Delu vse narobe. Vsak pameten urednik na Večeru ali Dnevniku je tega pisanja vedno vesel. Takoj pridobijo še odzive tistih, ki jih je ta odbor trenutno napada, in to objavijo kje na prvih straneh. Dobro se bere in koristno je, če v časopisu objaviš zmerjanje novinarjev in urednikov konkurenčne hiše. Padla jim bo branost in naklada. Pa še sami s(m)o si krivi.

Malo me je, kako se je začelo, tudi šokiralo. Za dopis, ki ga je kot predsednik aktiva podpisal Jože Poglajen, sem namreč prej kot od novinarjev Dela, ki so ga napisali, izvedel od odličnega novinarja Večera Boruta Mekine, ki sem mu bil nekoč urednik. Storil je, kar smo prej skupaj: takoj je poklical za odziv. Enako so ravnali z Dnevnika. Uporniki na Delu si svojemu uredniku niso upali na podoben način pogledati v oči. Nič me niso vprašali po razlogih ali čem podobnem niti me niso osebno obvestili o svoji odločitvi, da mora Milharčič za vsako ceno ostati urednik. So me pa po elektronski pošti zaprosili, ali bi njihova stališča objavil v časopisu.

Odločil sem, da lahko v Delu svoje pisarije objavijo, če bodo plačali oglas, ker sem se hotel izogniti javnemu razčiščevanju internih stvari. A ker so vihar v državi že dvignili, bom pa tudi javno povedal: časi se spreminjajo in ta urednik Dela na najvišje uredniške položaje ne bo postavil nikogar, ki nima izobrazbe, potrebne, da bi se človek lahko zaposlil vsaj kot novinar. Pri tem mi ni veliko mar, kako je v drugih časopisnih hišah, ki zaposlujejo manj novinarjev in si včasih tudi ne morejo privoščiti izobraženih. Avtonomija pa je med drugim v tem, da me nihče ne bo izsiljeval.

Bilo mi je skrajno nerodno, ker so to razpravo zunaj hiše sprožili, saj je Milharčič sicer primer odličnega novinarja, ki je ponos Dela. Niti malo si nisem želel javno razlagati o njegovi izobrazbi in se prepirati o tem ali čem podobnem. Razpravo so sprožili na način, ki je zadnje čase žal za novinarstvo značilen: diskvalificirali so me, češ da izvajam politične čistke, se spravljam na drugače misleče in kar je še tega.
Razprava, ki so jo sprožili, je lahko koristna za novinarsko skupnosti – kaže namreč, kako neresno novinarji jemljejo profesionalnost in kako podli so lahko. Si predstavljate, da bi skupine sodnikov pozivale k uporu, ker minister za pravosodje ne soglaša, da bi bil za šefa sodišča imenovan nekdo, ki nima univerzitetne izobrazbe, češ da s tem izvaja nasilje nad drugače mislečimi? Niti na misel jim ne pride. Kdo bi pa še verjel, da pravično sodijo. In malo me skrbi, ker si ugled s takšnim ravnanjem zapravljajo najpomembnejši pisci Dela.

Pa ne le oni. Oglasila se je vrsta novinarskih aktivov, ki bi morali prvi skrbeti za spoštovanje visokih profesionalnih standardov, kar dokazuje, da je zavest o novinarstvu kot profesiji na daleč najnižji točki v zgodovini te države. Profesija ni le v tem, da imaš veliko plačo in privilegij pisati v najbolj uglednem časopisu v državi. Potrebna je tudi izobrazba. Logika, da je nekaj let prakse več kot diploma dobre fakultete, velja za obrtne dejavnosti. A to ima tudi posledice: obrtniki praviloma ne morejo imeti milijonske plače.

Povrhu se zdi, da aktivisti iz drugih medijev zahtevajo, da ne smem upoštevati kriterija izobrazbe, ker so bržčas sami v hudi stiski, in to kaže stisko celotnega ceha, saj je izobrazba v novinarstvu pač še problem. In v največjem časopisu postavljamo standarde za vse. Česa vas je strah, gospodje?

Kar se pa plač na Delu tiče, bom v naslednjih letih skušal doseči, da bodo imeli res visoke tisti, ki dobro in trdo delajo. Kot denimo v zadnjem tednu Boštjan Videmšek, Jure Eržen in Barbara Šurk, ki na Bližnjem vzhodu tvegajo največ, kar je mogoče, tudi življenje, da bi ljudje v Sloveniji dobili popolno in celovito sliko o dogajanju.

Nič me ni in me ne bo sram, če bo plačilo takšnih novinarjev višje od plače šefa vlade ali kakšnega podobnega politika, dokler bo delo opravljeno tako, da bo ta časopis tisto, kar mora biti: ogledalo in ponos te države. Kar se najvišjih šefov uredništva Dela tiče, pa bodo pač morali imeti končan vsaj kak faks.

Pa če so novinarske organizacije, sindikalisti in aktivisti postavijo na glavo."

"Awakening of Fascism in Slovenia"

2006-04-14T09:20:00.000+02:00

Commentator of the leading Slovenian newspaper "Delo" (www.delo.si) has in its Saturday Edition in a response to the Slovenian government's withdrawal from the biggest Slovenian super-market chain which resulted in the change of those in the managerial positions; and in a response to the envisaged comprehensive reform of the Slovenian economy, published an article titled "As if the Germans had won." We quote here just a short, but the most provokative excerpt. The innocent reader who is not acquainted with the prevailing mindset in Slovenia will have some problems understanding it, for which we apologize. But, to be frank, we understand it either, since it is beyond comprehensible. So it goes (the article is available at http://www.delo.si/index.php?sv_path=43,6528&id=ce21045a2c16de7ec5af3cbff03f30f704&t=html&p=1, by Ervin Hladnik Milharcic)

"The present government has with the projects of rehabilitation of fascism reopened a comfortable discussion about the past and it is on its best way to prove that Slovenia ended up in the WWII - in this great war - on the side of losers. With its hastened and under-developed plan of economic reform of the society it has over night created general polemique about the welfare that has in its entirety taken place in the close-future tense. The reform program is based on a simple and logic kern: »If the WWII had been won by the Germans and Slovenia conducted its reforms, we would be all driving in Mercedes... The acts of the government are damaging. The case of the [biggest super-market chain] speaks too much for itself. The state sold its shares under the price. Its financial funds have out of mere political calculation produced an apparent loss that can be measured by the pricing trends of shares at the Stock Market. This has resulted in direct deprivation of pension fund and denationalization fund. In both cases the government could remedy this by accelarated privatization of the health sector and by limiting the rights of the unemployed. Traditionally it has been dealt with losses to a disadvantage of the interests of the weakest..."

To conclude - according to the Slovenian leading newspaper, in Slovenia we, first, have the government that will do anything to deteriorate the position of its electorate and second: the Germans are still the villains...who, good for them and bad for us, drive Mercedes...
It is sad, that the leading newspaper does not see that we are in the year 2006, that Germany is our closest ally in the EU, with which we will also, in a way, co-preside in the EU and that this is the high time that real and comprehensive reforms were conducted in Slovenia for the general well-being of us all.

But as we could observe at the National TV, the other day, the envisaged reforms would increase even the prices of funeral services... So, the economists would add: it is not opportune to die anymore. And actually this is the only way to maintain to populace of Slovenia, which has one of the lowest birth rates in Europe and the highest suicide-rate.... What a sound society.

Prebujanje ideološkega novinarstva v Sloveniji

2006-04-13T17:12:00.000+02:00

V najnovejšem romanu pisatelja Alojza Rebule Zvonovi Nilandije (Mohorjeva družba, 2005) agenti tajne službe komunističnegara režima zaradi nepoznavanja antične in rimske zgodovine zasledujejo in nadzorujejo pisatelja Anda Krilnika. Krilnik piše roman o rimskem pesniku, Vergiliju Maronu Publiju, (70-19 pr.n.š.), ki je bil največji pesnik Avgustovega časa in predstavnik patetično-retorične poezije. V Rebulovem romanu pisatelja Krilnika nadzorujejo na vsakem koraku, doma, v tujini in na počitnicah na morju, prav zaradi suma tajne službe, da pripravlja roman o Vergilu Polarniku, povojnem oporečniku, ki ga je komunistična partija odstranila zaradi njegovega javnega nasprotovanja totalitarnemu režimu. Prav ta binom Vergilij-Vergil spravlja tajno službo totalitarnega režima ob pamet in hkrati upravičuje permanentno nadzorovanje pisatelja.

V zadnjem času ponovno opažamo prebujanje ideološkega novinarstva v Sloveniji. No verjetno do sedaj sploh še nismo bili priča njegovemu zatonu. Ob branju slovenskih časnikov se človek prej ali slej vpraša v katerem letu v Slovenji pravzaprav živimo. V uvodniku Kot če bi zmagali Nemci zadnje številke Delove Sobotne Priloge je njen urednik Ervin Hladnik Milharčič presegel vse meje dobrega okusa in hkrati posegel po že znani totalitaristični metodi: najprej diskvalifikacija potem pa likvidacija. Za ponazoritev njegove metode vam podajamo nekaj vrstic iz omenjenega uvodnika:

» Ljudje, ki so preživeli njegovo celotno zgodovino (op.p.zgodovino totalitarnega režima), opozarjajo, da jih (op.p. sedanje obdobje) spominja na njegova slabša obdobja. Vprašujejo se, ali je sedanji položaj pametneje primerjati s petdesetimi ali sedemdeseti leti prejšnjega stoletja.
....
Sedanja vlada je s projekti rehabilitacije fašizma (!) ponovno odprla udobno diskusijo o preteklosti in je na najboljši poti, da dokaže, kako je bila Slovenija v veliki vojni na strani poražencev«.

Gospodu Milhračiču pa odgovarjamo nasljednje: Za našo mlado generacijo so takšne besede pesek v oči k prizadevanju neštetih generacij slovenskega naroda za resnico in pomirjenje v Sloveniji, četudi so bile omenjene osebe mišljenje zgolj kot vaš labodji spev.* Diskusije o dogodkih (množični poboji po drugi svetovni vojni, desetletja naših staršev), ki so se zgodili že davno pred našimi rojstvi, bi lahko resda prepustili našim starejšim kolegom, vendar se nas še kako tičejo, ker gre za dušo in kolektivni spomin slovenskega naroda. Obenem nismo tako obremenjeni s preteklostjo, in prav zato lahko govorimo in pišemo o zgodovinskih dejstvih.. Tako lahko mirno zapišemo in ponovimo, da je od leta 1941 do 1990 v Sloveniji vladal totalitaristični režim, ki je grbo kršil najosnovnejše človekove pravice, še posebej v petdesetih in sedemdesetih letih prejšnjega stoletja. Ta režim je celotno svojo oblast (iz)gradil na množičnih pobojih 12.000 Slovencev večinoma krščanske vere in čez 100.000 pripadnikov drugih narodnosti po drugi svetovni vojni in ustrahovanju v letih po vojni, o čemer smo že pisali na tem blogu. Pri tem je šlo z vidika mednarodnega kazenskega prava in tudi slovenskega prava za genocid in hudodelstva zoper človečnost. Verjamemo, da boste ob branju romana »Zvoni Nilandije« opazili razliko med imenoma Vergilij in Vergil, ter tudi med petdesetimi leti prejšnjega stoletja in današnjim časom v Sloveniji. Pri vsem skupaj, gre za rimsko pietas, čut za trpljenje sočloveka, brez katerega lahko nekateri ljudje živijo.

*Temelji na neresnični domnevi, da naj bi obstajali labodi, ki zapojejo le enkrat v svojem življenju in sicer najlepše pred smrtjo. Uporablja se v malo manj fatalnih situacijah - za opis uspeha po dolgotrajni neopaženosti ustvarjalca, čeprav slutimo, da bo ta vendarle tudi njegov zadnji.

Would Women sign a petition to end women's suffrage ?

2006-04-12T17:44:00.000+02:00

The following video was shot in one of the all-girls high school in the United States of America. The author was later punished with after school detention at his all-boys high school. We must say that the comparisons with European countries and the country on the sunny side of the Alps are only incidental.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q1I94UEtO4&search=Women%27s%20Suffrage

Human rights in United Nations: The new Human Rights Council

2006-04-11T16:06:00.002+02:00

The United Nations gives only two per cent of its annual budget for human rights purposes, mostly for financing the Office of High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneve. The rest of money is spent mostly for keeping alive its immersive administrative apparatus. This Office of HCHR is considered to be under-staffed and constantly lacking in funding for its various mission needed in today's troublesome world. Apart from that the UN Special Rapporteurs for various human rights usually have to fund their fact-finding mission with their own many or their institutions, if the decided to prepare proper reports.

In the light of this wary facts and also last years report “In Larger Freedom (21 March 2005)"
from UN Secretary General, The United Nations General Assembly overwhelmingly approved the creation of a Human Rights Council on March 15, 2006.* It will replace the Commission on Human Rights, which will be formally abolished on 16 June 2006. This outcome is far from being perfect, however it may be a small step to whole-reaching UN reform.

In order to succeed, the new Human Rights Council must truly be “transparent, fair and impartial,” as the text indicates, “and uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights.” The test will be whether the UN General Assembly elects members with respectable human rights records which truly want to confront those States that are responsible for human rights abuses, regardless of geo-strategic or border relationships.

The NGO community, the Secretary-General, the U.S., and many other states were strong advocates of excluding States with atrocious human rights records from participating in the new Human Rights Council. This position responded to prior or current membership by countries accused of gross human rights abuses, including Zimbabwe, the Sudan, the Republic of the Congo, Cuba, Ethiopia, and Saudi Arabia, as well as Libya, which chaired the Commission in 2003. The new Human Rights Council includes the criterion that membership “shall take into account candidates’ contribution to the promotion and protection of human rights.” However, an earlier draft an earlier draft prohibited membership to any State found responsible for human rights abuses or violations by UN bodies.

The new Council is widely acknowledged to be imperfect. However, there were risks in the failure to create a new Council, which would have been be an embarrassment for the UN, or to create one that showed no semblance of reform or lessons learned from the Commission on Human Rights, which would have been a different type of embarrassment for the UN. The questions also remains whether NGOs will be able to take part in such Council like they were able in the former Commission on Human Rights.

* The vote was 170 to 4, with three abstentions. The resolution was opposed by the United States, Israel, the Marshall Islands and Palau. Belarus, Iran and Venezuela abstained.

More info on HR Council is available here: http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/

"The First War Crime was Committed in Slovenia"

2006-04-10T18:06:00.000+02:00

The case of Holmec is in the lime light again. This time under fresh interpretation, instigated a few years ago by Neva Miklavcic Predan and implicitly supported by the Minister for Interior Affairs of that time (Bandelj) for the purpose of short-term political gains... How characteristic for narrow minded people and for self-proclaimed liberals. Let's see how the independent narrates the story (by a Serbian journalist, to make sure). The complete version is available at http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article356833.ece, hereby we concentrate just on the most thought-provoking points:

1) "Slovenian authorities have closed the file on the very first known war crime committed in the Balkan conflict as the former Yugoslavia broke apart. In fact, they have emphatically done so twice in the last few days."

2)"The footage, made by Austrian ORF TV, has shocked the Slovenian public. It shows three soldiers waving a white sheet in apparent surrender, in the north-eastern village of Holmec, near the Austrian border. They are calmly shot dead by Slovene policemen who had surrounded them."

3)" The head of the Slovene Helsinki Monitor human rights group, Neva Miklavcic Predan, described the video as "the first documented war crime in former Yugoslavia," while many analysts compare it with the footage of the execution of six Muslims by Bosnian Serbs after the fall of the Muslim "safe haven" of Srebrenica in 1995."

4) "The Holmec case was a secret kept from the public for years, until a small newspaper carried an item on the shootings in 1999."

The best part, please read carefully:

5) "Slovenia waged (sic!) a short and relatively bloodless war of independence in June 1991 against the army then known as the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA). At the time, JNA was mostly made up of secondary school graduates and conscripts. A total of 47 JNA soldiers were killed in Slovenia, most of them aged between 18 and 22, from all the ethnic groups of the former Yugoslavia."

6) "Although the Slovene prosecution has closed the book on the Holmec case, the controversy is still alive. Miklavcic Predan is on trial in Slovenia for "deeply hurting the feelings of Slovene veterans of war" with her statements, and faces up to five years in prison for slander.
She said at the outset of the trial two months ago that it was a "political" case."

The best comes at the end under the fairy-tale number:

7) "Slovenia, with a population of only two million, is the only former Yugoslav republic to have joined the European Union, of which it became a full member in 2004.

But although it has a squeaky clean image inside Europe, Slovenia's human rights record has been tarnished by its treatment of non-Slovenes. "

What can we say: Sancta simplicitas. Very professional journalism, not tendencious at all... but above all: thank you Neva, thank you those in and close to LDS for tarnishing our face in Europe. We should just wait for a moment when Mr. Jansa &Co., who defended the independent Slovenia and make our dream a reality, end up in Hague for attacking and killing the innocent members of the JNA - which was not one of the biggest war machines in Europe, but merely a toothless kindergarden equipped with plastic guns and white handkerchief...

Hamas Speaks Reasonably – At Last

2006-04-08T21:04:00.000+02:00

The United States will cut off all assistance for building projects in the Palestinian territories and at the same time increase humanitarian aid to the Palestinians, State department announced yesterday. Similarly European Union declared it will cut direct aid to the Hamas led government. This is a reaction to ruling Hamas’ history of violence and its refusal to renounce its long standing vow to eradicate Israel.

This obviously synchronized action by US and EU follows Sharon’s party Kadima’s election victory (nevertheless, Olmert got less votes than he hoped for). During election campaign future prime minister Ehud Olmert promised he would continue Sharon’s policy of unilateralism, part of which was the disengagement from Gaza that took place last summer.

Present Israeli policies, now approved by the electorate, are a direct consequence of Fatah’s and Hamas’ politics of perpetual war. In an atmosphere where there is no interlocutor on the other side of a table, the only rational possibility left to Israel seems to be unilateral action of securing its borders and retreating from territories that proved to be too big a burden. Sharon himself paid a high price for this vision of peace, since Benjamin Netanjahu and others forced him to leave the same Likud he helped to establish many years ago. Sharon now lies in a coma, but his revenge on his old party comrades is sweet: not only had Sharon broke his ties with Likud - he broke the Likud, as one commentator put it.

Not just Kadima, the Labor also advocates the same policy, though its emphasis is slightly different. On the other side it seems symptomatic that both Hamas and hawks in Likud objected Sharon's successful strategy of disengagement. Certainly the disengagement from Gaza that took place last summer was extremely painful for Israeli society as a whole. But the real victims of the disengagement were the settlers, vast majority of them being orthodox and Zionist Jews who always understood settlements as Israel's last defense line and also as their sacrifice for the Holly land. One cannot deny the fact this really was a sacrifice since for years settlements and especially setters were hit the hardest by terrorism. Thus one of many dramatic consequences of the disengagement is an unprecedented inner rift in Zionist movement, one part of it now being deeply disappointed and suspicious of state of Israel. However, the greater part of the public have now voted for pragmatic policy of unilateralism.

It’s clear that peace in the Middle East will never be achieved without Israel giving up some of the territories it occupies. Both sides must accept reality eventually, but this seems increasingly difficult for Palestinian leaders (including those belonging to now defeated Fatah movement!), who have so far insanely clung to their “death to Israel” rhetoric. It seems that only prospects of loosing subsidies from the West will force Hamas to reconsider its position. In this manner new Palestinian foreign minister Zahar already wrote a letter to U.N. Secretary General, stating Hamas is prepared to engage in ”serious and constructive dialogue” to reach “just and comprehensive solution”. It seems Hamas even considers a possibility of a “two-state” solution in which Palestinians have “freedom and independence side by side with its neighbors”.

To the obvious detriment of the Palestinian people both Fatah and now Hamas have not been serious for years in their “peace efforts” - the consequence being Israeli public’s decision to stop waiting. Both disengagement and newly elected Hamas led government can be seen as an opportunity for both nations to take a step forward. Israel already painfully gave up part of occupied territories and at the same time forcefully removed its own citizens from it. Furthermore, during election campaign Olmert promised a partial retreat from territories West of Jordan. In the aftermath of Israeli elections it’s now Hamas’ turn to face the responsibilities of leading its people and finally identify true Palestinian interests. Language of reason, used in a letter to Secretary General, is a good start.

Situation of Detainees in Bahía de Guantánamo

2006-04-07T15:28:00.000+02:00

United States Navy have used Bahía de Guantánamo as a Naval Base for more than a century. US controls the land on both sides of the southern part of Bahía de Guantánamo under a lease set up in the wake of the 1898. It shoub ne noted that The Cuban government denounces the lease on grounds that article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties annnuls treaties agrered uponSince 2001, the naval base contains a detainment camp for militant combatants collected from Afghanistan and later from Iraq

On 15 February 2005 four UN Special Rapporteurs (the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the Special Rapporteur freedom of religion or belief, and the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health) and the Chairperson of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention iisued a reprot on Situation of detainees at Guantánamo Bay

The report on the situation of the detainees held at the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was issued by In this joint report, each Rapporteur examines the situation of the detainees as it relates to the Rapporteur’s mandate.

The report is based on the replies of the US government, interviews with former detainees, and responses from lawyers representing individuals currently detained at Guantánamo Bay. According to the US government, approximately 520 detainees were held in Guantánamo Bay as of October 2005. As of December 2005, nine detainees have been referred to a military commission.

The report lays out the obligations of the United States under international law. Citing the case of the International Court of Justice in Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the report finds that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights extends to Guantánamo Bay. The report moreover reiterates the complementary application of International Human Rights Law to International Humanitarian Law.

The Chairman of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers expressed their concerns regarding the situation of the detainees. In their view, the “legal regime applied to these detainees seriously undermines the rule of law and a number of fundamental universally recognized human rights, which are the essence of democratic societies.”

The report also criticizes that investigations into the allegations of torture have not been conducted through an impartial process. This, according to the Special Rapporteur on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, constitutes a violation of Articles 12 and 13 of the Convention against torture

In its conclusions, the reports finds that the individuals detained at Guantánamo Bay “are entitled to challenge the legality of their detention before a judicial body in accordance with Article 9 of the ICCPR” and that “[t]his right is currently being violated.” The conclusions specify that the interrogation techniques authorized by the Department of Defense amount to “degrading treatment in violation of Article 7 of ICCPR and Article 16 of the Convention against Torture.” The recommendations of the report state that “the United States Government should either expeditiously bring all Guantánamo Bay detainees to trial…or release them without further delay.” Moreover, the recommendations provide that the “United States Government should close the Guantánamo Bay detention facilities without further delay.”
On 10 March 2006 the United States issued a reply to the Report of the Five UNCHR Special Rapporteurs on Detainees Gunantamo Bay. In that reply, the United States declares that it “profoundly objects to the Report both in terms of process and of substance and underscores that the Report’s factual and legal assertions are inaccurate and flawed.”

The United States asserts that it “offered the Special Rapporteurs unprecedented access to Guantanamo.” The United States also criticizes that the report asserted “the existence of jus cogens or non-derogable norms without citation of binding authority in support”, and that it “relied on international human rights instruments, declarations, standards, and general comments of treaty bodies without serious analysis of whether the instruments by the terms apply extraterritorially; whether the United States is a State Party- or has filed reservations or understandings – to the instrument.” The Special Rapporteurs’ view that the ICCPR is applicable to the detainees in Guantanamo Bay is also contested. According to the United States, the ICCPR is “by its express terms and clear negotiating record” only applicable within the signatories’ territory. The United States further declares that it is “engaged in a continuing armed conflict against Al Qaida, the Taliban and other terrorist organizations supporting them.” Therefore, the United States finds the law of armed conflict to govern “the conduct of armed conflict and related detention operations,” and also states that these rules permit lawful and unlawful combatants to be detained until the end of active hostilities without charges, trial, or access to counsel.”

What would you say about the report and its US reply? Does US position have any legal backing in international human rights law or its domestic law ?

UN report is available at:
http://www.ohchr.org/english/

US reply is available at: http://www.asil.org/pdfs/ilib0603212.pdf

Poetičnost Baskije

2006-04-06T17:26:00.000+02:00

Če človek pomisli kaj daje obrise avtohtoni kulturi nekega naroda, se slej ko prej ustavi pri pesnicah in pesnikih, ki jih dal ta narod svojim ljudem. Kot so Poezije Franceta Prešerna, Integrali in Pesmi Srečka Kosovela, Pesmi Štirih, zbrana dela Tomaža Šalumunova in pesmi vseh drugih slovenskih pesnic in pesnikov po izpovedni, emocionalni in estetski plati oblikovali in oblikujejo slovensko dušo, narodno zavest in nenazadnje slovensko kulturno avtohtonost, tako je podobno tudi pri drugih narodih. Ker v zadnjih dneh že govorimo o Baskiji, se je morda dobro za dan ali dva dvigniti nad politične razprave o (ne)srečni usodi prelepe in navdihujoče pokrajine ob Atlantskem oceanu, in se nekaj za trenutkov posvetiti baskovski duši, namreč baskovski poeziji. V spodnjih vrsticah objavljamo pesem »Egia bat esateagatik« baskovskega pesnika Gabriel Aresti-ija v baskovščini, španščini in angleščini. Slovenski prevod sledi v naslednjih mesecih. Ustvarjalec, ki ga je k besedi klicala nemirna kri, manihejec, raznihan med bsakovskim podeželjem in živčno trzavico mest, je bil nekakšen votek, povzetek stoletja, odlikovanega z zanosi, hrepenenji, nasilji, trpljenji in izgubo občutka za tradicijo, za duhovni spomin in dediščino. Baskovska poezija je dostopna na naslovu: http://www.basquepoetry.net

EGIA BAT ESATEAGATIK, Gabriel Aresti, 1963

Egia bat esateagatik,
alabak
hil behar bazaizkit,
andrea
bortxatu behar badidate,
etxea
lurrarekin
berdindu behar bazait;
Egia bat esateagatik,
ebaki behar badidate
nik eskribitzen
dudan
eskua,
nik kantatzen
dudan
mihina;
Egia bat esateagatik,
nire izena
kenduko badute
euskal literaturaren
urrezko
orrietatik,
inoiz,
inola,
inun
eznaiz
isilduko.

SI POR DECIR UNA VERDAD, Gabriel Aresti, 1963

Si por decir una verdad
han de matarme
las hijas,
han de violarme
la mujer,
han de derribar
la casa
donde vivo;
si por decir una verdad
han de cortarme
la mano
con que escribo,
la lengua
con que canto;
si por decir una verdad
han de borrar
mi nombre
de las páginas de oro
de la literatura vasca,
en ningún momento,
de ninguna manera,
en ningún lugar
podrán
acallarme.

IF FOR TELLING THE TRUTH... Gabriel Aresti, 1963

If for telling the truth
they must kill
my daughters,
rape my wife,
pull down
the house
where I live;
if for telling the truth
they must cut
off the hand
I write with,
the tongue
I sing with;
if for telling the truth
they must rub
out my name
from the golden pages
of Basque literature,
never in any way
nor in any place
will they be ableto make me shut up.

The New Political and Economic Agenda for Italy?

2006-04-05T18:14:00.000+02:00

This weekend Italian voters are going to decide the political and economic fate of their country for the following few years. The battle between the left and the right coalition has been going on for months, reaching its peak in the final weeks before the elections. The two camps are extremely colorful. The center-left, led by Mr. Prodi, ranges from the extreme left, to communists (whose icon is a travestite Vladimir Luxuria) to Christian parties, whereas the center-right, led by Mr. Berlusconi, starts with the latter and finishes with the obscure, yet almost fully-fledged (ex-)fascist parties.

The entire political campaign has been very much driven by the traditional binary discourse blaming one side of being communist and the other being fascist. Alessandra Mussolini certainly occupies the infamous 1st place as the controversial statements are considered. In her view, it is better to be a fascist than a homosexual.

In the very last days, the campaign has moved from idelogical propaganda to substantive economic debates - the tax policy being in the foreground. It has been said that Mr. Berlusconi came up with his last trump-card by promising the abandonment of a portion of property tax.

This might still shatter the polls and the final result is still contingent and unclear. Prodi's coallition has continuously been in the lead by a margin of a few percent, whereas Berlusconi has not given up yet. There are still many voters who have not made their decisions yet, and many of those, according to my interlocoturs, could go to Berlusconi. In a way, Prodi is in a weaker position, because he does not have his own political party, as Berlusconi does, rather he just sits on the top of the pre-elections coalition.

Hence, we will need to wait till Sunday for the final outcome. Whoever will win, will need to face the country, which has been a sleeping beauty in the Mediterranian since 1960s, caught in stagnation, facing big demographic problems and all the related problems of the modern times - insecurity, poverty, racism...

Dunque, bona fortuna amici Italiani - votate bene per vostro paese e per suo futuro. Noi siamo aspetando.

Israeli-Palestinian saga

2006-04-05T16:50:00.000+02:00

"We are prepared to compromise, give up parts of our beloved land of Israel, remove, painfully, Jews who live there, to allow you the conditions to achieve your hopes"

Israeli Prime minister Ehud Olmert, addressing Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas after leading his centrist Kadima Party to victory in last week's Israeli elections.

Nekatera vprašanja glede Baskije

2006-04-04T23:23:00.000+02:00

Španska vlada pred španskimi sodišči in tudi pred organi EU zastopa stališče, da ima pravico, da ne dovoli registracije strank, ki domnevno delujejo v povezavi s terorističnimi skupinami, s čimer upravičuje svoj boj zoper politične stranke, ki naj bi bile povezane s baskovsko oboroženo skupino ETO.

Problem je v tem, da do sedaj ni bilo dokazano, da je imela katerikoli baskovska stranka povezave z ETO. Vse temelji na domnevah, pri čemer španski kazenski zakonik ne zahteva gotovosti za pregon takšnih kaznivh dejanj. Tudi pri odmeri kazni za kazniva dejanja so razlike med Baskijo in ostalo Španijo smešne. Za nameren požig smetnjaka v Bilbu lahko storilec dobi do deset let zaporne kazni, medtem pa v sosednji špansko asimilirani Galiciji za ista kazniva dejanja, sodišča določajo kazen do enega leta pogojna. Podobnih primerov je še veliko.

Španija si vse od njihove državljanske vojne v tridesetih letih prešnjega leta ne spoštuje načela vladavine prave, temveč se na vse kriplje prizadeva ohraniti umetno državno tvorbo pri življenju. Celotna zadeva s političnega vidika zelo spominja na bivšo Jugoslavijo pred razpadom, Baskija pa na našo državo pred letom devetdeset.

Taking International Criminal Justice seriously

2006-04-03T14:29:00.000+02:00

In his article in 18 March 2006 issue of London-based magazine »The Spectator«, John Laughland nostalgically reminisces about his last encounter with Balkan butcher Milosevic. The article is entitled » A coffee, a smoke and a chat with Milosevic«. In the article he submits how lucky he was to meet personally with the Serbian butcher. In that article he undermines the status ICTY and its work to end impunity for heinous crimes on the territory of former Yugoslavia.The tip of the iceberg comes in the last paragraph, which is reproduced below.

He starts his article with »I was one of the last western journalists to be meet Slobodan Miloševič….The Hague tribunal is like Dover in Act V of King Lear – nearly all main surviving protagonists of the Balkan wars are assembled in this improbable place….Milosevic was not in charge of Yougoslavia when it was falling a part…

Last paragraph goes as follows: Demonisation and denunciation are infectious viruses which can engulf large numbers of people very quickly. They are parasites on one of the core human vices, pride because they give the denunicator and intoxicating sense of superiority of object of his attack. Milosevic is the seventh defendant to dies in the Hague's tender care, following the trial in which almost every established precept of jurisprudence and international law has been violated by judges there. If the legacy of his death is de facto legitimsation of gross abuses committed in his name of international justice by this kangaroo court, then all our liberties are at risk.

Since I cannot agree in any respect with opinion expressed, I hereby submit my reply to Mr John Laughland and to the magazine The Spectator.

Taking International Criminal Justice seriously: A reply to John Laughland

Dear John Laughland,

I cannot embrace your comments on most of points since are alas not objective and disregard the progressive international criminal justice law in the last decades. Indeed, Miloševič was de facto in charge of Yugoslavia when it was falling apart. There are countless memoirs and other records available, which were published in last decade by major political actors involved in political scene when Yougoslavia was falling a part. You submission is therefore simply wrong and it deceives your readers.

The surrender of Slobodan Milosevic to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia back in 2000 has focused world attention on the possibility of putting an end to impunity for individuals who commit gross atrocities during of war. War should not be used as a cover for genocide. It cannot used as a justification for murder and torture. And it cannot cloak the rape of innocent women and children.

Indeed, our liberties in international community would be put at risk if we would choose to disregard grave human rights violations committed anywhere and therefore to support a case fro impunity as you seem to suggest. You prove that you do no have any insight in operations of international criminal justice when you submit the ICTY violated every established precept of jurisprudence and international law. I ask you what means international human rights law for you in your lonesome opinion. By writing latter you give, in your words, yourself an intoxicating sense of superiority. I will explain what is international human rights law nowadays really about and why ICTY is not kangaroo court as you so mistakenly wrote.

International human rights law imposes a duty on states to investigate and prosecute violations committed within their jurisdictions, and the primary duty to end impunity rests with the state authorities where the violation is committed. However all too often, violators are not brought to justice in their own countries. The sight of large scale human suffering and mass violations of human rights and humanitarian law in recent years has given new impetus to international determination to bring violators to justice. Accountability for international crimes is increasingly viewed as a matter of concern for the international community as a whole, and there has been a trend towards the establishment of international mechanisms for criminal justice. International criminal tribunals were established by the UN Security Council in response to the conflicts in former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and in July 1998, states agreed to establish a permanent international criminal court to try perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.

Despite these important moves to create a system of international criminal justice, for the foreseeable future there will still remain a role for national courts in prosecuting those suspected of international crimes who come within their borders. We already have some indications of how this will work. One example is Germany’s proceedings against suspected war criminals from former Yugoslavia. Since 1992 Germany has apprehended four individuals suspected of involvement in atrocities in the conflict in former Yugoslavia. However, two of the most important war criminal from Yugoslav war, Mladić and Karadžič are still at large.

The effective exercise of universal jurisdiction is one important tool in the struggle to end impunity for international crimes. Most European states have accepted universal jurisdiction for the prosecution of war criminals and human rights violators through ratifying international treaties, and many have exercised jurisdiction on this basis during the 1990s. Nevertheless, an adequate legal basis for exercising universal jurisdiction remains lacking in many instances.

We need to support the International Criminal Court because it is in the everybody's interest to do so and because it will bring international criminals to justice. We need support the tribunals because they will protect and promote the very ideals and freedoms for which people around the world have fought and died. We need support the efforts of international criminal justice because a more stable world community, where gross criminal conduct is not tolerated, ensures a safer world in which every persons can live, work, trade and travel. Not to do so would be to the detriment not only of those living today and but also of our future generations.

El Tribunal Constitucional Espanol decide hoy sobre la anulación de las listas de Aukera Guztiak en Euskadi Herria (Pais Vasco)

2006-03-31T23:26:00.000+02:00

El Tribunal Constitucional se pronunciará hoy sobre el recurso que presentó la plataforma Aukera Guztiak (Todas las Opciones, en castellano) contra la sentencia del Supremo que anuló su candidatura a las elecciones vascas. Está previsto que el tribunal tome una decisión antes de medianoche, cuando comience la campaña de las autonómicas vascas.

La voluntad de los magistrados que integran la Sala Segunda es la de resolver la cuestión antes del comienzo, a las doce de esta noche, de la campaña electoral. Pues tenemos solomente que esperar para su decision.

The Rise and Fall of International Law in Africa – March 2006

2006-03-29T11:37:00.002+02:00

It has never been possible to conduct in international community any policy on the basis of Kant's categorical imperative: act as if your every action shall become a universal moral law, but at least one of the latest developments on the African continent suggests given the circumstances at hand.

Several interesting developments took place recently on the African continent regarding compliance with international (human rights) obligations. I endeavor to look more in detail in two of them. Firstly in the complex situation concerning request for extradition of former Liberian dictator Charles Taylor, and secondly the first arrest ever by the International Criminal Court in Democratic Republic of Congo.

On Friday 16 March 2005, the Liberian president Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, who was inaugurated on Jan. 16, 2006, as the country's new president (and Africa's first female president after she beat former European footballer of the year George Weah) formally requested Nigeria to extradite Taylor so that he can stand trial for war crimes. At a cost of a quarter of a million lives, the war eventually spilled over into the neighboring states of Sierra Leone, Guinea, and Ivory Coast, thereby threatening regional stability. Charles Taylor is accused of creating and backing the Revolutionary United Front rebels in Sierra Leone, who are accused of a range of atrocities, from the use of child soldiers to chopping off the lips, ears, and limbs of their civilian victims. Taylor himself is also accused of several other atrocities in Liberia and the region, including trading diamonds for weapons and spreading conflict and instability..

On March 17 President Sirleaf made the following statement before the U.N. Security Council:"It is time to bring the Taylor issue to closure," adding that she wants collective action on the issue. She added that the collective decision of the African leaders should be one "that would allow Mr. Taylor to have his day in court. The Liberian people feel that justice would be done when attention moves from Mr. Taylor to support for their development."

The question remained whether the "Big Men" of Africa, whose culture of mutual protection is largely responsible for the culture of impunity and corruption that is eroding the continent, will rise to the occasion. However, the Nigerian government stated on 25 March 2005 stated that Liberia was free to collect Taylor so that he may face war crimes charges in Liberian courts.

But not suprisingly another statement was released by Nigeria's government, saying that
Charles Taylor disappeared from the seaside villa where he had been living in exile. This was three days after the Nigerian government said it would end his asylum and allow him to face an indictment by an international court in Sierra Leone. Liberia has called on "all countries in the region not to give refuge to Mr. Taylor, but to execute the warrant for his arrest." When will African leaders rise to fulfill their international human rights obligations and face charges for most henious human rights violations?

Another part of this contribution focuses on the the situtation in Democratic Republic of Congo, where incumbent government two years ago reffered the situtation for investigation to the International Criminal Court in the Hague. On 17 March 2006, Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, a Congolese national and alleged founder and leader of the Union des Patriotes Congolais (UPC) was arrested and transferred to the International Criminal Court. Thomas Lubanga is alleged to have committed war crimes as set out in article 8 of the Statute, committed in the region of Ituri in the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo since July 2002. Ituri is reported to be Ituri is one of the areas worst affected by Congo’s devastating war, which is still underway. A local conflict between Hema and Lendu ethnic groups that began in 1999 was exacerbated by Ugandan armed forces and aggravated by a broader international armed conflict in the DRC. As the conflict spiraled and armed groups multiplied, more than 60,000 civilians were slaughtered in Ituri, according to the United Nations. He is among other charged with recruiting children in his rebel group by force and training as soldiers.

It is submitted that Thomas Lubanga’s arrest offers victims of the horrific crimes in Ituri some hope of seeing justice done at last. However, for justice to be fully achieved, the victims must be offered just compensation and post conflict counselling.

Lubanga’s arrest warrant may be reached at: http://www.icc-cpi.int/library/cases/ICC-01-04-01-06-37_English.pdf

Addendum: Charles Taylor was caught today on the border between Nigeria and Cameroon and he is already on the plane towards Freetown.

Sleeping With the Enemy or the Unbearable Comfortableness of Slovene Radicals

2006-03-28T19:16:00.000+02:00

Faculty of Social Sciences (FDV) of University of Ljubljana organized a symposium last weekend, titled "Democracy of multitude in-outside-beyond Europe". Star of the evening was Antonio Negri, Italian political philosopher who on this occasion presented Slovene translation of his recent books "Multitudes" and "The Return".

Negri, who served his entire prison sentence of 17 years for "crimes of association and insurrection against the state", was during criminal proceedings cleared of rest of the charges that linked him to the terrorist Red Brigades. Today Negri seems to be “last best hope,” to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln in somewhat perverse manner, of Anti-Globalization movement, theoretically based in a sort of dialectic materialism adapted for 21st century.

Although Negri's somewhat dubious fame could be simply explained by mere European inclination towards "radical glamour," phenomenon so typical for various continental anti-globalization movements, it must be said that Negri’s previous work "Empire" was cited among the seven 'next big ideas' by Time. Perhaps this appraisal tells more about Time than about Negri. Finally, Slavoj Žižek himself hailed "Empire" as “a communistic manifesto of our time, that convincingly shows how global capitalism generates contradictions, which will make it explode eventually”.

As expected, the press covering the symposium and Negri's visit, presented both his revolutionary branch of new Marxism and the event itself without any critical reflection whatsoever (see for instance this article in Delo: http://www.delo.si/article.print.php?ID=127217). As if there was nothing problematic about the claim that "nation is the most oppressive formation in history" to quote dr.Andrej Kurnik, one of the hosts of symposium and – how appropriate - lecturer of “political extremism” on Faculty of Social Studies (his text with quote on nation can be found here: http://www.progresivna-stranka.si/prikaziforum.asp?id=212). One of the key suppositions of Negri’s Multitude is "inevitability of downfall of sovereignty." But this hope of "destruction of sovereignty is not enough," assert the organizers of symposium. Instead of sovereignty new institutional structures must be created based on "existent conditions"(sic!; see more on that here: http://www.krtaca.si/node/1301). This hopelessly boring and impotent drivel goes on and on in "Anti-Globalization" discourse and one cannot but nostalgically remember brilliant pieces of wisdom by such great revolutionary theorists as Edvard Kardelj, or - for those unfamiliar with Slovenian past - Lev Trotsky who were both able to test so many "compassionate" theories in their ferocious practice.

Carl Schmitt was predicting the demise of the state as early as the sixties. Long before him, following different theoretical presumptions Marx famously created his dogma on demise of state. As regards notions of "state", "nation" and "sovereignty", there have truly been some fundamental changes in second half of 20th century - constitutional theory now speaks of "open statehood". Nevertheless both the state, nation and concept of sovereignty are here to stay since there are several functions that only Verfassungstaat, state ruled by law, can perform, such as international cooperation, administration, judiciary and especially protection of human rights. Despite this, words like “state”, "nation" and especially “Slovene nation” remain abusive language to our anti-globalization radicals.

To conclude: it would be interesting to know how Negri is perceived in his homeland Italy. As for Slovene anti-globalists and revolutionary theorists the question remains what is their relation to certain nation-state, namely Republic of Slovenia. Both of latest Negri's books were published by publicly funded Student publishing house, The NGO’s aligned with radical theory and activism are funded by budget and the Faculty For Social Sciences (FDV), alma mater of vast majority of radicals, is also funded by public sector. Why do I stress that? Once more, theorists and activists belonging to the so called global social movements are not embarrassed at all by getting subsidies from the very same state they despise. Who cares if the nation is "the most oppressive formation in history" and if the state has to be destroyed. For every sensible Machiavellian knows, be it Andrej Kurnik or Henry Kissinger, that it's allowed to take money from the enemy, as long as it's for the noble cause.

Točen čas in datum pred sodno palačo v Ljubljani

2006-03-26T16:04:00.000+02:00

Stanje slovenskega sodstva je mogoče ponazoriti tudi z nedelovanjem na videz nepomembnih stvari, ki na nek način vendarle simbolizirajo slovensko realnost in (ne)odločnost slovenske družbe, da stopi na višjo stopnico.

V Miklošičevem parku pred ljubljansko sodno palačo stoji ura, ki je bila postavljena na prelomnici med devetnajstim in dvajsetim stoletjem. Prav ta ura je že dvajset let pokvarjena in ne deluje. Ko je ura še delovala jo je moral sodni sluga vsak dan naviti. Šele pred kratkim so se na ljubljanskem okrožnem sodišču odločili, da uro obnovijo in jo popravijo. Tako so uro pred tremi tedni, ki levo od vhoda kaže datum, desno pa čas, odnesli na popravilo. Ure v zadnjih letih niso vzdrževali. Mojster, ki popravlja uro pravi » da so morda le steber kdaj pobarvali, če so opazili kakšno temno liso.

Ko čakamo na novo uro pred sodno palačo, lahko vsi skupaj še enkrat razmislimo o stavbah, pročeljih in ljudeh, ki bi bili vsi potrebni prenove oziroma objektivnega ocenjevanja njihovega dela.

"Judiciary" in Slovenia

2006-03-23T14:32:00.000+01:00

Being in agreement with what Jernej has posted in his last contribution, I would suggest to stay with ECHR, but to shed some light on the recent developments in connection with Slovenian cases pending there.

In the last couple of weeks there has been a literal landslide of judgments rendered against Slovenia, either for the unreasonably long trial procedures (i.e. judgments not rendered in a reasonable due-time), and most recently - namely today: for "unfair" trial.

This developments should ring an alarm bell in the Slovenian public --- yet this is not what has happened. To the contrary, and ironically so, the government which has finally -and as the 1st one in the democratic Slovenia - approached this problem seriously is being castigated in the public as attempting to encroach on the independence of the 3rd branch, i.e the judiciary.

I will not comment here on the reactions of Slovenian judiciary to the proposed reforms. My comments should better be expressed in a bar after having drunk 5 beers --- for the reasons that are also better to be expounded there. However, I have to admit that I have never before heard that judiciary would be on "a white strike" and I could have never imagined that judicial association is actually closely related to the football tiffosi. (If you don't know what I'm talking about, login on the SLO TV website and check the news - the clip - from a couple of days ago.)

To conclude, if the judicary is indpenedent - in a way it is understood in Slovenia - then it is just the judiciary and only the judiciary that is responsible for the convictions of the Republic of Slovenia before ECHR. It should be then - pursuing this devastating logics - for the judiciary to pay the fines - and not for the state budget and hence for us taxpayers. And it should be the judiciary - independently to make sure - which is to remedy the through and trhough skewed legal landscape in Slovenia.

Let's face it: BUT what do YOU think?

Case of Saddam Hussein - Decision of European Court of Human Rights on Admissibility

2006-03-22T12:25:00.000+01:00

The European Court of Human Rights on 15 March 2005 delivered decision on admissibility in the case of Sadam Hussein. It held that it was not established that there was “any jurisdictional link between the applicant and the respondent States”… or “that the applicant was capable of falling within the jurisdiction of those States, within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention.” The Court therefore declared the application inadmissible.

Saddam Hussein (“the applicant”), former Iraq dictator , was captured by US soldiers on 13 December 2003 near Tikrit during an operation called “Operation Red Dawn.” On June 29, 2004, he filed a complaint against 21 countries, namely Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Turkey, Ukraine and the United Kingdom (the “respondent States”). The full decision is available at:
http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Press/2006/March/HUSSEIN%20ADMISSIBILITY%20DECISION.htm

The applicant complained about his arrest, detention, handover and ongoing trial under Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment), 5 (right to liberty and security), and 6 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights together with Article 1 of the 6th (abolition of the death penalty in time of peace) and 13th (abolition of the death penalty in all circumstances) Protocols. He maintained that he would be executed following a finding of guilt after a “show trial” for which he lacked even the basic tools of defence. The applicant asserted that the Court had jurisdiction because the respondent States were occupying powers in Iraq, because he was under their direct authority and control or because they were responsible for the acts of their agents abroad. He further maintained that the respondent States were de facto occupying powers even after the transfer of sovereignty in June 2004.

The Court found that the applicant had not demonstrated that he fell within the jurisdiction of the respondent States. The Court held that the applicant has not established that he fell within the jurisdiction of the respondent States on any of the bases alleged. He has not demonstrated that those States had jurisdiction on the basis of their control of the territory where the alleged violations took place. Even if he could have fallen within a State’s jurisdiction because of his detention by it, he has not shown that any one of the respondent States had any responsibility for, or any involvement or role in, his arrest and subsequent detention.

The Court councluded that there is no basis in its case law and the applicant has not invoked any established principle of international law which would mean that he fell within the respondent States’ jurisdiction on the sole basis that those States allegedly formed part of a coalition with the US, when the impugned actions were carried out by the US, when security in the zone in which those actions took place was assigned to the US and when the overall command of the coalition was vested in the US.

Two things are of notice in this case. Firstly, the former dictator resorted to human rights court for alleged violation of human rights, which are the same he so grossly abused during his regime. It is interesting and peculiar to observe that the Court excluded responsibility of European states by implying that US is the one who has had control over the whole territory in Iraq and gave the former dictator in a way moral victory over the US government.

Life as a Bom yeoreum gaeul gyeoul geurigo bom

2006-03-20T20:08:00.000+01:00

Widely-acclaimed Korean film director Ki-duk Kim in his movie Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter... and Spring from 2003 presents a Buddhist understanding of the life circle by following life of boy from childhood to the autumn of his life. A young boy lives in a small floating temple on a beautiful lake, together with an elderly master who teaches him the ways of the Buddha. The youth runs away to the outside world but his lust turns his life into hell, so he returns to the lake temple to find spiritual enlightenment. The movie shows that enlightenment may be reach by following simple ways, only that some achieve them sooner, some later and some never.

No Catharsis for Serbia

2006-03-18T20:52:00.000+01:00

The images received from Belgrade and Pozarevac today left a strong and weary impact with me: there has been no catharsis for Serbia. It is amazing how many people gathered in Milosevic's support and how the Serbian government at least implicity allowed to use public facilities (like museum, etc) for his funeral and how the arrest warrant against his widowed was waived...

It might be an end to an era, but it seems that something will remain burning deeply inside the Volkgeist of the Serbian people. I am afraid that this crackling little fire might, if not in some way effectively extinguished, blow up again the ever present Balkan barrel of powder.

Historia magistra vitae - and yet the Serbs, so it seems, have not learned anything and at the same time the complacent West might be deceived that everything is in its ordinary place.

Deja vu? I, sincerely, hope not.

US Immigration policy

2006-03-16T15:17:00.000+01:00

You may read interesting article on the reform of US Immigration policy in todays Heralds Tribune at the following link: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/03/15/opinion/edimmig.php

Slavoj Žižek delivers a sermon in NY Times

2006-03-14T21:17:00.000+01:00

The renowned Slovenian philosopher published an article Defenders of the Faith in NY Times Sunday, apparently stating our goal regarding the world peace or perhaps even condition humaine itself, should be "restoring the dignity of atheism, one of Europe's greatest legacies and perhaps our only chance for peace".

Unfortunately, Žižek does not tell how can atheism as such actually be our only chance. Surely the current uncertainty regarding islamist violence and fundamentalist terrorism wouldn’t just stop by allegiance to “atheism as European legacy”. Furthermore, Žižek states that

»Today, when religion is emerging as the wellspring of murderous violence around the world, assurances that Christian or Muslim or Hindu fundamentalists are only abusing and perverting the noble spiritual messages of their creeds ring increasingly hollow. […] More than a century ago, in "The Brothers Karamazov" and other works, Dostoyevsky warned against the dangers of godless moral nihilism, arguing in essence that if God doesn't exist, then everything is permitted. The French philosopher André Glucksmann even applied Dostoyevsky's critique of godless nihilism to 9/11, as the title of his book, "Dostoyevsky in Manhattan," suggests.

This argument couldn't have been more wrong: the lesson of today's terrorism is that if God exists, then everything, including blowing up thousands of innocent bystanders, is permitted — at least to those who claim to act directly on behalf of God, since, clearly, a direct link to God justifies the violation of any merely human constraints and considerations. In short, fundamentalists have become no different than the "godless" Stalinist Communists, to whom everything was permitted since they perceived themselves as direct instruments of their divinity, the Historical Necessity of Progress Toward Communism.”

Since we have become accustomed to Žižek’s provocative style, the substance is not very surprising either. What strikes me though is how patently Marxist Žižek sounds, preaching about “religion, […] the wellspring of murderous violence around the world.” As if a motto “religion the opium for the people,” wasn't completely discredited in an era Avbelj writes about in his post on Slobodan Milošević and socialist Yugoslavia.

Žižek, dubbed “the great joker” by one Slovenian observer, misses the fundamental dialectic concerning religious experience and reason. More than this, his focus on atheism as a key part of Western, or at least European legacy appears artificial and even forced. For it is not atheism but rationalism that is a key Western invention, intimately linked with a phenomenon of secular society that gave rise to humanism. The Greek ideal was rational insight into reality, and the West never renounced it. However, our society is of course also fundamentally indebted to Judaism and Christianity, since this is where we received a notion of a person as an autonomous entity. Both faith and reason represent the core of Western culture and roots of Europe in particular. This is Europe's identity.

In a relation between Glauben und Wissen the reason limits and defines faith in a way that prevents its degradation into fundamentalism thus affirming the Augustinian formula fides quaerens intellectum, ‘faith seeking understanding’. On the other hand, function of religion is not limited solely to the field of pure religious experience but provides also for the irrational insight and for the set of values that lead the reason, since reason alone is morally blind and as such simply cannot answer the most urgent questions of modernity (such as those arising in bioethics, concerning advanced deterioration of the environment, or the fatal use of weapons of mass destruction). Atheism too, of course can be a source of meaning, but to claim its superiority in an apparent attempt to undermine or even demonize faith sounds utterly outdated and anachronistic.

There is one thing however, that does credit to Slavoj Žižek: He didn’t choose the simplest way to proclaim his revelation. It would be easier to promote atheism as “modern Europe's most precious legacy,” in one of the main European newspapers. I’m sure Žižek has access to all of them. It takes a true believer for this kind of proselytism in a leading conservative newspaper in a country where overwhelming majority declares itself religious.

The End of the Balkan Butcher

2006-03-13T21:02:00.000+01:00

The death of Slobodan Milosevic brings to an end a certain era through which also the members of this blog have lived. We still do remember the sirens, the threats, the attack on Slovenia, the direct fear these caused and the anxiety which remained in us when the violent tide set towards the south. Slovenia managed to defend its independence with a minimal bloodshed, the other republics have not.

Slobodan Milosevic was just the last, but nicely and fully brushed, communist piece in the masterpiece mosaic that the Communist parties of Yugoslavia under the leadership of Tito built. The historical lie, the deception of the brotherhood and unity, resulted in the worst masacres on Europe's soil since 1945. Slobodan Milosevic was the last particle of this vicious communist machinery that was slowly but persistently operating behind the veil of velvet terror and imaginary welfare. He had a chance to take into his hands the product of them all - the Yugoslav people's army - and sent it against the very people it should have served to.

Slovenia, as stressed before, has due to the visdom of new political figures and intellectuals belonging to the so called Slovenian spring, managed to escape this Balkan barrel of powder. Ever ticking nationalistic and social bomb. We returned where we came from and in the aftermath of Milosevic's crusade almost nobody invokes Slovenia as part of the Balkan region. I sincirely hope that we left the Balkan, as it has stood, for good.

Yet, even that being true, we still have to deal wiht the legacy of our communist and Balkan past. It is not easy to redo 50 and more years, the years which is all what our parents and grandparents were left with, but we have to strive for the better tomorrow. We have to show that we can lead and that we can contribute to success of a more promising story, to the creation of the EU - as an area of freedom, justice and security.

On our way there we must not forget our past, and we must not forget the nations living south of our borders. We shared a common political past with them, linguistically they are our brothers, yet culturally just our remote cousins (to paraphrase Cankar) and it is our duty to help them find the way.

Finally, the death of Milosevic and with it the end of an era of fear and terror, it is also time that WE Slovenians sweep away the communist relicts that can be stumbled on at every step in our capital city and to resurrect the monuments that unite us and that will escort us in a prosperous future that we will be all proud of.

Once upon a time in Iran

2006-03-11T18:54:00.000+01:00

International communty has in recent months become quite suspicious and weary of Iranian plan to develop a civilian nuclear programme to produce energy. It has accused Iran of seeking to build a nuclear bomb, whereas Iran says it is only seeking to produce electricity. It also developed the machinery to separate uranium from its core itself because no foreign country was willing to supply it. The question remains how tackles Western fears that Iran is building atomic bomb?

One can certainly not find a solution to this issue in Security Council imposing any kind of sanctions on Iran, less start talking about the possible armed attack on Iran. One of the oldest civilization on Earth will not be changed in one day as Rome was not build in one day. Options for influncing that ancient country with self-content regime are very limited. West cannot make Iran peaceful and democratic, it can only help to create the conditions in which Irani people decide themselves to make it so.

Millions of Iranians are fiercely critical of their theocratic regime and of its crazily outsopken president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. But many of them also believe that Iran is entitled to use nuclear power to produce energy. The Iranian Society faces eternal question how to weed out the corruption and practices of clientism and nepotism and steer itself to better standards of living and welll being together. Will eforts keep moving forward or stall? As said the solution is not in imposition of sanctions on nuclear issue and/or on human rights issue. The efforts and the subsequent results have to come from the Iranian society itself. Otherwise there will an anti-western revolt among majority of population. It is not wise argument to suggest that West or Europe should trigger Iraq-like madness since it may only benefit the affluent religious circles in Iran.

Nevertheless, it is a historical fact who used the atomic bomb for the first and last time. It was decribed then as an excessive use of force, which went against principles of international humanitarian law. This time around much better decision-making is needed.

Ordinary Kashmiri Women Created History

2006-03-09T12:58:00.000+01:00

Yesterday marked International Women's Day (8 March). This date is also commemorated at the United Nations and is designated in many countries as a national holiday. On that day we can look back to a tradition that represents at least nine decades of struggle for equality, justice, peace and development. International Women's Day is the story of ordinary women as makers of history and therefore we hereby present contribution by Fozia Lone on the Struggle of Ordinary Women in Kashmir.

Ordinary Kashmiri Women Created History - A Salutation to the Kashmiri Women of APDP & KWIPD

Although started in 1930’s, Kashmir freedom struggle took the aggressive form in 1989. This anger demolished the already rickety State administration and horrified the Kashmiris. The government responded to it primarily by delivering an armed response. Indian Government deployed about 4 hundred thousand Indian security forces in Kashmir to suppress this insurrection. (See, Anthony Davis, ‘The Conflict in Kashmir’, 7 Jane’s Intelligence Review, 1995, p.40). This resulted in the death of thousands of people especially at the hands of Indian army. While following their counterinsurgency operations army resorted to human rights violations, which included Custodial Killings, Extrajudicial Killings, Torture, disappearances and Rape.

During the last 16 years of conflict in Kashmir, Women are the most unfortunate sufferers. They have been physically abused, molested, humiliated, disgraced, raped and traumatized when their husbands and sons were ruthlessly killed and suspiciously disappeared. On 23rd February 1991 women of Kunnan Pushpora Village in Kashmir were victimised by the mass rape at the hands of the Indian security forces. On that fateful day about 60 women were raped. The documentary film, When the Storm Came, available at http://journalism.berkeley.edu/projects/mm/shilpi/ depicts this. Among all the issues enforced disappearance and Rape were most terrifying and least attention was given to these problem. The required awareness about these issues, both locally and internationally, was generated by the initiatives of the Kashmiri women.

The official findings reveal that in Kashmir so far more than 8000 people are unaccounted for and have disappeared in custody (enforced or involuntary disappearances) over the past 21 years. Indian security force, task force and other government agencies arrested these people and later their fate remains unknown. When large numbers of people were disappeared, initially the parents especially mothers of disappeared persons made individual efforts by filling the habeas corpus petitions in Jammu and Kashmir High Court. In 1994 Parveena Ahangar (mother of a disappeared person, now the chairperson of the APDP) with the help Pervez Imroz, (a human rights lawyer and spearhead of Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society JKCCS) formulated a group called ‘Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons’. At present this group works as the human rights faction with the aim ‘to know the whereabouts of their missing relatives’ and ‘to take the collective political action against it’. They are also pressing the government to form a commission to enquiry into these involuntary disappearances.

Initially these brave women had to face many difficulties but through the efforts of these bold women of Kashmir people’s participation amplified and in 1998 APDP was affiliated to the Asian Federation Against Enforced Disappearances (AFAD). This establishment is a new coalition gathering organization that works for the "disappeared" in several South Asian Countries. Its core members include the Families of Victims of Involuntary Disappearances from the Philippines, the Organization of Parents and Family Members of the Disappeared (OPFMD) from Sri Lanka, the Association of Parents of Disappeared Persons (APDP) in the Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir and the KONTRAS of Indonesia.

On April 22, 2005, Mothers of missing youth were comforted when they successfully laid the foundation at Lawaypora (Kashmir) for the memorial in the recollection of those who were disappeared after their arrest by the security forces. This was yet another achievement of these valiant women since previous government dismantled the memorial when it was laid at Eidgah (Kashmir) on 18th July 2001. Although nothing can reimburse the sorrow, anguish, mental agony and torment of Kashmiri mothers however, raising the memorial was certainly an audacious act by them in an effort to remember there loved ones.

In 2000 the Kashmir University students initiated the Kashmiri Women’s Initiative for Peace and Disarmament (KWIPD) to wipe the tears of the suffering women of Kashmir and advocated that ‘the rights of women cannot be enforces without restoration of peace in the region’. The women member of this group come from all sects of the society and is the first Kashmiri women group. To guarantee the Kashmiri women their right to be heard all over the world KWIPD start its quarterly newsletter “Voices Unheard” which was edited Aasia Jeelani. (The Newsletter can be accessed on http://www.geocities.com/kwipd2002/) Aasia Jeelani at the age of 29, in extremely regrettable incident was put to sleep forever in the landmine explosion at Lolab on 20th April 2004, while monitoring the Parliamentary elections. In order to increase awareness within the region, KWIPD conducted discussions and debates to advocate the significance of nuclear disarmament.

Recalling the stories of these incredible and remarkable Kashmiri women on International women’s day I take the opportunity to pay homage to Aasia Jeelani who was truly the angel of peace. I also congratulate the brave Kashmiri women of my motherland for initiating the struggle for equality, integrity, justice peace and progress. This collective power of Kashmiri women was perceive by millions of people all over the world. I believe even more is possible if women of world will support each other in their genuine battles. Since, International Women's Day is the universal day to connect all women around the world and motivate them to achieve their full potential, I appeal the conscious women of the world to join Kashmiri women’s amicable struggle and assist women in conflict to restore their dignity.

Miss Fozia Lone
Research Student,
Aberdeen University
f.lone@abdn.ac.uk

"Vse je treba zbutati" in "jim posekati roke"

2006-03-07T18:56:00.000+01:00

V oddaji Vroče na ljubljanski TV-papriki se je voditeljica Manca Zver strinjala s poslancem Zmagom Jelinčičem, da je treba pedofile fizično kaznovati in zanje uvesti dosmrtno kazen, Jelinčič pa je še dejal, da bi bilo treba preprodajalcem drog posekati roke. Manca Zver pa je še dodala naslednje:: "Jaz bi naredila to, da vse te pedofile damo na en velik plac in da pridemo ljudje in jih tam ... zbutamo." Vprašanje, ki se postavlja nevednemu bralcu, je koga je treba dejansko “zbutat in mu posekat roke”.

Zmago Jelinčič je včeraj izustil, da "sovražnega govora ni, je le govor, ki govori resnico. Njegova izjava nas ne preseneča in kot tudi ne bi smela presenetiti vsakogar, ki pozna slovensko danost v gospodovem letu 2006. Prikličimo si v spomin za trenutek izjave našega vrlega poslanca iz leta 1998 o tem kaj bi bilo potrebno storiti z volilci takratnega predsedniškega kandidata Franceta Bernika. Izjavama Zmaga Jeliničiča in Mance Zver ni kaj dodati kot le to, da je jasno, da v Sloveniji ni nikaršne kulture izražanja v javnih občilih, saj jih vsakdo izkorišča kot se mu le zdi. V preteklosti smo Slovenci že dovolj pretrpeli zaradi raznih oblik sovražnega govora in podpihovanja nestrpnosti zoper razne družbene in narodnostnih skupnosti. Kdo pravzaprav želi živeti v državi kjer lahko vsaka samooklicana “medijska osebnost” spodbujala in razpihovala nestrpnost brez vsakršnih posledic, ki jih seveda ni za pričakovati v tem primeru? Najprej se prične gonja zoper Rome in pedofile, potem pa se razširi na druge družbene in narodnostne skupine – ali kako se je že vse skupaj začelo v tretjem Reichu pod Hitlerjem v tridestih letih prejšnjega stoletja v Nemčiji?

Sovražni govor je eno nedvomno najmočnejših sredstev diskriminacije, še posebno, ker ga težko definiramo in še težje preiskujemo in kaznujemo. O sovražnem govoru govorimo takrat, ko gre za izražanje mnenj in idej, ki so po svoji naravi ksenofobični, diskriminatorni, rasistični in naperjeni predvsem zoper razne manjšine (etnične, verske, kulturne) in zajema tako govorno, pisno kot nebesedno (parade, insignije, simboli, ipd.) komunikacijo.

Demokratična družba je tista vrednota, zaradi katere je svoboda izražanja zapisana v Evropsko konvencijo o človekovih o pravicah, in katero bodo nadzorni organi pri preučevanju nasprotujočih si interesov vedno izbrali kot rešitev. To sta v večini svojih odločitev, ki se nanašajo na sovražni govor, poudarila tudi Evropska komisija za človekove pravice in Evropsko sodišče za človekove pravice. Komisija in Sodišče sta v svojih odločitvah večkrat izrazila mnenje, da so bili nameni in cilji tistih, ki so zahtevali zaščito sovražnega govora, v neposrednem nasprotju z demokratičnimi izročili, idejami in ideali, ki so evropske države vodili pri ustvarjanju EKČP.

Tudi slovenska ureditev prepoveduje sovražni govor. V 63. člen ustave RS je zapisano, da je protiustavno vsakršno spodbujanje k narodni, rasni, verski ali drugi neenakopravnosti ter razpihovanje narodnega, rasnega, verskega ali drugega sovraštva in nestrpnosti. 300. člen kazenskega zakonika pa določa kazensko odgovornost za tistega, ki izziva ali razpihuje narodnostno, rasno ali versko sovraštvo, razdor ali nestrpnost, ali širi ideje o večvrednosti ene rase nad drugo.

V tem primeru gre za najnižjo možno obliko medijskega nastopaštva samooklicanih medjiskih osebnosti, ki ne pozna nobenih etičnih meja, odgovornosti in ni občutljiva do pravic drugih ljudi. Na potezi je okožno državno tožilstvo v Ljubljani, ali pač? Tudi na tem primeru je jasno, da se slovenska družba ne more soočiti z globinami temnih senc preteklosti tudi zato, ker komajda shaja s vzdrževanjem ravnotežja v slovenski sedanjosti in realnosti.

Dark side of individualism or the importance of community

2006-03-06T22:59:00.000+01:00

The fact that this theme is somewhat controversial, doesn’t help – in this sense I will rather speak of "moral obligations" since "duty" might carry some negative connotation.

Letnar finished his last post with a following dilemma: "The question poses whether human rights are western myth and should we re-discover their ideal versions of common well-being?" This is a good starting point for my further contribution to the debate.

I do not doubt that acknowledgment of human rights is among greatest historical achievements of western civilization. I stick to my view, which now I have been repeating almost ad nauseam, that human rights are indispensable in every society, not simply in democracies. It stems from the notion of human dignity - human rights are something that is given prior to state, since it is bound inextricably with a notion of a person. I think that Letnar agrees with this when he writes about "African human rights setting," in which "a sense of duty and responsibilities, on individuals and their communities, is more paramount than the notion of human rights."

However, the rights culture must be opened to criticism. As egalitarian democracy was crucial for advance of humanism it contains its dark side also. This was beautifully noted by Tocqueville in his Democracy in America, where he writes that democratic equality pulls one to himself. One is focused to himself and in this way loses wider angle of view. The community becomes less and less important when individual becomes more and more self-absorbed, and in Tocqueville’s words looks for “petits et vulgaires plaisirs”.

It seems Avbelj concedes to this as he writes: "If the world is failing, if it is drowning in the stinky lake of egoism, it is not liberal society based on the inherent respect for an individuum which is to be blamed, but rather the institutions within this kind of society that have not performed their roles. The state of liberty entails a responsible, reflective individuals, and it demands hard work and continuous improvements. Sometimes it is much easier to bow to the master, to live in the state of duties and to deny one's self than to exercise your freedom responsibly." I agree with much of what is said here, with one – having Tocqueville in mind - important objection: democracy inherently promotes individualistic behaviour which can ultimately end in egoism. More popular for this are in this context expressions such as: "I-generation", "narcissism" or "permissive society". In this view traditional liberal institutions have contributed to modern phenomena such as: alienation from political process, unbridled greed, loneliness, urban crime, dissolution of the traditional familiy, excessive litigiousuess …

As Rawls rightly argues we have a supreme interest in shaping our own destiny. However it is also true, that our selves are constituted by many attachments rooted in community (e.g. family, ethnicity, religion....). Thus policies should not be concerned solely with securing the conditions for protection of individual rights and individual choices, as we need to sustain and promote these social attachments crucial to our well being and respect. Some human goods have irreducibly social nature. Our interest in community may occasionally conflict with our other vital interests in leading freely chosen lives. My view is that the latter does not necessary trump the former in cases of conflict (c.f. that with Dworkin’s maxim regarding policies and rights).

It is true that Rawls also strongly highlights the meaning of basic social structure and government as well that must provide basic conditions for rightful society. He also pays close attention to the psychological conditions that facilitate the formation of liberal selves committed to justice.
However, modern democracies all face the following problem: whereas the assertion of life (basic human rights) was once confined to the matters of essential human interest, an aggressive rights rhetoric has colonized political debate thus making reasonable discussion impossible. This is so called rights culture.

So called communitarian criticism of liberalism can be most fruitful when advocating certain specific policies, such as promotion of family ties, strengthening local communities etc. In this manner it is possible for instance to advocate measures aimed at encouraging marriage, increasing the difficulty of legal marriage dissolution based on empirical evidence that points to psychological and social benefits of marriage etc. Gay marriage issue too can now be resolved in new light: marriage can be seen as public institution, through which certain values are promoted. In this way these values should not be necessary trumped by rights of individual couples. Cartoon controversy of course is another typical case.

Increased attention to intersubjective community is therefore important both for moral life and personal satisfaction. Taking the importance of community seriously in political philosophy would mean acknowledging and attempting to resolve systematically the conflicts that can arise in any theory that recognizes the importance of both individual autonomy and participation in communities.

On human rights and duties to our communities

2006-03-06T12:43:00.000+01:00

This is a brief follow up on what Movrin and Avbelj submitted in our discussion on rights and duties in democratic society. Moving beyond their pro-et-contra discussion on right and duties, I hereby explain that concepts of duties are not necessarily underestimated in contemporary European society since they very much present in our every day life. They are not constructed in the form of duties as such but in the form of negative aspect of rights. Rights are more than relationship between state and indivuduals. And it is in the relationship between individuals themselves where rights acquire the form of duties.

We may all agree upon that every society is built on a set of values and norms. Avbelj asserts that in democratic society in relation between individual and the state should be on the right not on the duty and the makes further claim that Christianity is based on individulism. I can not follow the former aspect of this argument fully. Human Rights in modern society are not just relationship between individual and state, but concern also relationship between private parties (individuals, association, corporations, etc.) themselves. This implies that most of human rights norms have horizontal and vertical effect. This basically means that concept of human rights per se involves also aspect of duties to other human beings and communities as a whole. Also our European societies are constructed on such notion of duty. Movrin argues that no religion is individulistic and I could not agree more with what. What he forgets is how the individualism was used to construct to make benefit for higher gains (financial) and how then therefore the notion of rights took over the throne in Europe, whereas sense of solidarity finds itself only in nationalism.

It is right that duties do not have prominent place in the European context as they do in African human rights setting, where a sense of duty and responsibilities, on individuals and their communities, is more paramount than the notion of human rights.

Generally, the concept of duty requires an individual to place the common good before individual satisfaction. This is how the African society is modelled. Those that go against these norms are seen as outcasts and this explains why for a long time African communities farmed and harvested in groups. It was done for the common good of the extended family. The question poses whether human rights are western myth and should we re-discover their ideal versions of common well-being?
To be continued.

On a difference between Individualism and Egoism

2006-03-04T12:15:00.000+01:00

And yet it is moving. Movrin (who by the way continuously misspells my name) has pushed our discussion in a much broader context with an apparent aim to undermine my emphasis on the importance of rights as opposed to duties in a democratic society.

He draws the apocalyptic scenario from the liberal individualism by contending that "With traditional mechanisms, human rights standards alone included, we are obviously very poorly equipped for preventing these possibly imminent scenarios."

Hereby, I refuse making any step back: in a democratic constitutional society in relation between the individual and the state the emphasis should be on the right, not on the duty. This is a sound basis of individualism, which I think Christianity is inherently based upon and it even promotes it as opposed to other religions - where the collective trumps the individual. It goes without saying what are the political and societal implications of this converse mindset.

Of course, it is different if individualism collapses into egoism, self-centerdness, alienation and mere pursuance of strictly personal, narrow opportunistic pecuniary goals. No religion would advocate that and neither would I. And I have not. I rather stress that it is the egoism that threatens the world and our every-day lives and not individualism, which is a sine qua non for our development as unique human beings created in the image of God or its secular equivalent, as Weiler would put it.

The red line between individualism and egoism is evidently narrow and tiny. The balance between the two is precarius and a lot of efforts are needed to preserve it. Here the church, the civil society, familiy and welfare state should step in and promote a public ethos of solidarity, mutal help and encouragement. Liberal society, and only liberal society - I am afraid - based on individual as a distinct subject, widely opens the door to these institutions and mechanisms to execute their role and missions.

If the world is failing, if it is drowning in the stinky lake of egoism, it is not liberal society based on the inherent respect for an individuum which is to be blamed, but rather the institutions within this kind of society that have not performed their roles. The state of liberty entails a responsible, reflective individuals, and it demands hard work and continuous improvements. Sometimes it is much easier to bow to the master, to live in the state of duties and to deny one's self than to exercise your freedom responsibly.

Apologia pro vitis eorum

2006-03-04T11:18:00.000+01:00

It is alive!! Finally some emotions on this lonesome blog. It’s good for the debate and it’s good for the ratings (c’mon people, is anybody reading this at all?!?!). However, as an old proponent of liberal democracy - one of catholic persuasion, that is - I must say, pro bono (for the sake of the argument, but most of all because Avbel isn’t here to talk it over beer) something in the defense of Mr. Letnar and Mr. Umek. As for me, I will throw additional light on some of my own ideas in special post, as it was promised in my famous Blues for Allah (part 1) post.

As we are only lawyers we should strive for precision, since words have their exact meanings - we are not poets, sadly (those volumes of unpublished heart breaking stanzas everyone of us has hidden in his bottom drawer will never make us famous). It is thus crucial to be accurate and not jump to conclusions.

Letnar observes: "Most of Western European societies face at this point of time major problems in grasping and accepting the fact, which one may nowadays trace down only in the history books. That fact rests on illusion that Europe remains a centre of world, which could be further from the truth.”

What is wrong with this picture? Nothing, except that it’s correct. Europe has not been the center of the world at least since World War I, when it finally became clear, that USA have more wealth, almost infinitive military arsenal, bigger geopolitical influence and, what is of utmost importance, moral legitimacy to lead the free world. Since then USA have asserted itself as “last best hope” even in international arena, to quote famous Lincoln’s formulation. Does that present a “major problem” for Europe, as Letnar claims? Of course it does. It has been extremely difficult to cope with this loss. In 2003, for instance, there were large “alleuropean” demonstrations, formally anti-war demonstrations, but the evident undertone was staunch antiamericanism. At the end of these massive demonstrations two of the great thinkers of our time, late J.Derrida and J.Habermas, have published well known article Die Wiedergeburt Europas in which they seem to, inter alia defined Europe simply per negationem. Thus according to them being European merely means being Non-American. If this isn’t an identity crisis I don’t know what it si!

Further, Letnar’s disputable passage continues in this way: “Western European high-societies warm-heartily reminisce the day where the world balance has been shaped differently as it is now." Since sadly I’m not a member of “western European high societies“ (will somebody introduce me, for heavens’ sake!?!?!) I cannot say for sure what goes on in their minds, but Chirac’s reaction to Bush’s pre-war rhetoric seemed to me pretty much an arrogant reaction of a bankrupt aristocrat, whose wounded vanity makes him look and act silly. It certainly seems plausible to me he still “warm-heartily reminisces” his country’s better days.

“What does this have to do with the question of freedom of speech?” Avbel asks.

I don’t know if this was Letnar’s idea, but to me it’s obvious that whole civilizations, not only autocratic regimes, as we were used to so far, are now turning away from the idea of free democratic society. After 1989 we thought it would be another way around. At least Fukuyama said so. In my opinion one of the reasons for this failure is the fear of overly individualistic, atomistic and even egoistical concept of society, which sometimes seems to be exported. From other civilizations’ point of view, the threat can be quite real that after they accept this concept, nothing will remain of their identity. Or will this be a plain caricature of their precious traditions, and not even a funny one? I think that our duty is to present democracy for what it is: as freedom and justice and not as a trigger happy war monger, who just waits to rob the third world of its natural resources and of its traditional identities. I don’t say that this is actually happening, but the perception in some of these countries is very much like that. If Karikaturenstreit has tought us anything, it has shown us that global public not only exists, but it’s also very much aware of itself. And it holds its own global public opinion. The fact that Middle-Eastern rogue regimes have in fact artificially spurred the reaction to the cartoons is of minor importance in this regard.

As for “anti-imperialistic sentiments” as such I agree with Avbel they are simply funny. But, unless Letnar admits it, I cannot see any anti-imperialistic sentiments here.

And duties? Firstly, duty is conceptual twin of a right. My right is someone else’s (negative) duty. But I suppose Umek had something else in mind. Although he hasn’t elaborated much on his ideas, his line of thought seems very clear to me (he can correct me if I’m wrong). As I already mentioned somewhere, nobody of sane mind doubts in something like ECHR (if certain monsignor, master of Codice Civile does, let him be). He and his consortes are of no importance to us. What is important however, is that completely individualistic, atomistic conception of society ends in utter egoism, where the fundamental purpose of liberal state, that is common good and justice, is finally lost. Famously, one such duty democracy unconditionally requires is patriotism. In no way of course this should be written in criminal code, as Avbel rhetorically puts it. However it’s uncontested, that a citizen democracy can only work if most of its members are convinced that their political society is a common venture of cosiderable moment, and believe to be of vital importance that they participate in the ways they must to keep it functioning as democracy, to quote Charles Taylor.

Let me mention some very real threats that are in my opinion direct consequences of the lack of global sense of solidarity, of duty if you will. Namely, how to prevent the threat of nuclear warfare, now that bi-polar division of the world has ended? Why don’t we just “nuke ‘em”, since unlike Soviets, they have just couple of those big bombs. We can probably survive their few hits. Why not to proceed with stem cell research, why not to play God? It’s for the common good after all, who cares about ethics, when science will save us? And why not chop down the Rain forest completely, when we need furniture? The consumer is always right!

Will man destroy the Earth to move on? These are (amplified) caricatures, but they present some of the gravest dilemmas of our time. Is this what liberalism is supposed to be? I don’t think so, but the signs are there, that this is a direction the West is heading (see also Krusec’s post Major world crisis ahead?, posted on February 21). Will we recognize what our duty is here? With traditional mechanisms, human rights standards alone included, we are obviously very poorly equipped for preventing these possibly imminent scenarios.

Again, world religions can offer some of the answers. Take Christianity. Although it has invented a notion of individual as a value an sich (Letnar, this one’s for you, since you doubt this historical fact, at least after couple of beers) - it is never individualistic. Actually, no religion is. Thus, religious sense for the community and religious sense for the common good, for solidarity, which also implies sense for duty, can provide for one possible anchor in these Zeiten des Ubergangs. By making no threat to the ECHR whatsoever.

"Every human right has its opposite: the duty"

2006-03-03T17:27:00.000+01:00

The discussion on this blog has gone far way from the liberal thought, therefore it is time to step in again. Let's first tackle with the problem that religion has been banned from the European public sphere and that only atheists have their own prevailing say. This is essentially what Movrin espouses. If this was a genuine perception of the reality, I would full-heartedly join Movrin and condemn this kind of situation, since it is anti-liberal. In a liberal society no comprehensive doctrine: either religious or non-religious (i.e. secular) has a privileged position. If European public sphere is like that, it is anti-liberal and we have to fight it back, as Movrin does, to establish the equilibrium of free and equal citizens within the society of a public reason.

However, I am afraid that a view that religion is expelled from the public sphere is a fortiori Slovenian perception, where religion was effectively not just banned from the public sphere, but people were even persecuted for holding their religious beliefs. In the West there is no embarassement on either side between the two interlocoturs if the question is posed about being religious or not. In Slovenia these kinds of questions are taboos, and the answers are concealed under the veil of cowardness. The same goes for political views and opinions.
Hence, my dear friend Miha: maybe it is not as black as it seems, it is only on us to step from behind the veil and assert our religious views in a way it is permitted in the trully liberal society.

Jernej's views have in the last weeks, similarly, drifted away from liberal and some sort of anti-imperialistic speech is comming from his mouth. "Most of Western European societies face at this point of time major problems in grasping and accepting the fact, which one may nowadays trace down only in the history books. That fact rests on illusion that Europe remains a centre of world, which could be further from the truth. Western European high-societies warm-heartily reminisce the day where the world balance has been shaped differently as it is now." What does this have to do with the question of freedom of speech? And after all, cartoons were published also by non-western European states... This anti-imperialistic sentiment spurrs some concerns.

But, my final and gravest concerns lie with the continuous and ever-lasting-re-emergence of the claims that human rights have also their opposites: the duty? What is this? Merely a redundant saying or a wish for an oppressive society? Would we like to live in the society where we would again need to ask the authorities wether is compatible with our duties to publish something or not? Which authorities: state, communist party, a church?

Societies based on duties, and not on human rights, are based on criminal law, they are oppressive societies. They are not based on individual's freedom. Of course, I warmly agree that freedom has to be exercised responsibly, this is our duty, but this can be and it is, if it is, enforced by the state only by criminal means. The more emphasis on duties, the powerful the state. Since human rights are conceptually understood as being aimed against the state, human duties are in favor of the state aimed against the indviduals.

The case of Karikaturstreit is a genuinely hard case, since the very liberal scheme of the society is at stake. Apparently liberalism has its limits, has its threshold of decency - called justice. We are all aware that carving out areas of taboos is fatal for freedom of speech, whereas we simultaneously know that cross-religious-practice of defamation and insulting is not what a just liberal society would want us to pursue. Therefore Dworkin says that UK press acted prudently for non-publishing the cartoons - but he at the same time insists that free speech taboos should not be created. I hold that if one newspaper publishes these cartoons, it is covered by freedom of speech, whereas an intentional concerted practice based on the assertion of power of the press all over Europe - just in order to show that they can insult and that everything is allowed, is not. In such a case secularism purports to have a privileged position and it is imposed on all non-secular-believers. This breaches the equilibrium of free and equal citizens and it is despicable.

Freedom of Speech as a Trump Card?

2006-03-01T18:31:00.002+01:00

It may be a wise idea to join my dear friend Miha Movrin’s proposal to welcome the challenge of trying to come to the bottom of this, in his words, orchestrated hysterical reaction surrounding the publication of those very wicked (in the meaning of Cambridge dictionary definition "as immoral or bad for you, but in an attractive way") cartoons published by Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten on 30 September, 2005. Movrin rightly observes that the whole confusion has subsided in last weeks, and one may add that in fact it has not really vanished, but it only moved from the front pages of media to sub-consciousness of the European Identity. And it is to stay there forever regardless how apocalyptic that may sound. For one to ponder and discuss about this contraversy, one needs to have her/his feet on ground and not just dismiss the problem as Danish Prime Miniser Rasmussen did, by saying that the freedom of expression has a wide scope and the Danish governments has no means of influencing the press. When in fact nobody asked him to interfere with the freedom of press but merely to endevuour to live up Danish human rights obligations of respecting all religions and desisting from offending their devotees to prevent an escalation which would have serious and far-reaching consequences. Danish misunderstanding of the whole debate can be compared only to their desperate clinging to island of Greenland, which is still under their colonial jurisdiction, and to their appalling policies towards refugees.

This post is a continuation of debate started by two of the Matej Avbelj's posts (Freedom of Expression - a Case of Abuse? february 04, Dworkin on Cartoons and Holocaust Denial, posted on february 22 and subsequent comments), and Miha Movrin’s todays’ input on “Blues for Allah”, where he writes that “the reason is that European society simply does not understand the notion of offended religious sensibilities anymore.” The European misunderstandings and aloofness are core to debate on freedom of expression in our societies and thet also facilitate the growing fear of “Other” and the “others”, meaning everythings which is non-(west)european. This aloofness of the “old Europe” is also core to article of Fozia Lone, who writes that by publishing these blasphemous cartoons, Danish newspapers have not only offended religious sensibilities, but violated the laws of self-censorship also. The article may be reached at the following address: http://www.greaterkashmir.com/full_story.asp?Date=01_3_2006&ItemID=2&cat=12

Most of Western European societies face at this point of time major problems in grasping and accepting the fact, which one may nowadays trace down only in the history books. That fact rests on illusion that Europe remains a centre of world, which could be further from the truth. Western European high-societies warm-heartily reminisce the day where the world balance has been shaped differently as it is now. Let us illustrate this phenomena with self-explaining example.

It was a rainy day when in 1884 twenty-five countries met to agree a zero meridian (line is an imaginary straight line which runs from the North Pole to the South Pole) for the whole world. The conference agreed that the Prime Meridian of the World would be the one that ran through Airy's transit telescope at Greenwich. Most of the countries, which participated, were European. The comparison can be drawn to Berlin Congress in 1872 when major European powers agreed to draw artificial borders on the African continent without involving or allowing for any African delegation to attend at the congress.

The fact that Europe does not understand the notion of offended religious sensibilities anymore may be seen from the comments may be authors of the cartoons. When asked about the message of the drawing, the cartoonist later explained. The misunderstanding can not be more explicits.

"The cartoon is not about Islam as a whole, but the part that apparently can inspire violence, terrorism, death and destruction. And thereby the fundamentalist part of Islam. I wanted to point out that terrorists get their spiritual ammunition from Islam."

"There are interpretations of it [the drawing] that are incorrect. The general impression among Muslims is that it is about Islam as a whole. It is not. It is about certain fundamentalist aspects, that of course are not shared by everyone. But the fuel for the terrorists’ acts stem from interpretations of Islam. I think there is no escaping that. That does not mean that all Muslims are responsible for terror. It is about showing a connection, from where the spiritual fuel comes. There are some interpretations of Islam, according to which you become a martyr if you die for Islam, and you can therefore with a calm mind kill the infidels, and you will be rewarded in the beyond."

The comments are available at: http://www.jp.dk/indland/artikel:aid=3579530/

It is difficult not be critical of decision of editor of Jyllands-Posten to publish those sort of cartoons: when one does something that one know will create hatred and annoy people who are a indeed large ethnic and religious minority in Europe, it basically invates the kind of responses as they have bee seen througout worldwide in last monts. Also the European Copurt of Human Rights on every possible occasion reiterates the general principle “that the autonomous existence of religious communities is indispensable for pluralism in a democratic society” (Supreme Holy Council of the Muslim Community v. Bulgaria, Appl. No. 39023/97, Judgement, 16 December.). Indeed it was again in Danish Case Jersild v. Denmark, where the ECtHR court held that propagation of falsehoods or intolerance is to be generally prohibited.

Freedom of expression may not be used as a trump card for daily political struggles within the European societies, who have reluctantly and gradually come to accept that Muslim and other ethnic/religious minorities are not going to assimilate to the European way of living. Like it or not all mature societies can regonize that fact and ensure the respect of others and their rights and religious sentiments.

Blues For Allah

2006-03-01T10:35:00.000+01:00

(part 1)

It seems easier to take a closer look on the cartoon controversy now that well orchestrated hysterical reaction (it's an oxymoron, I know, but history has many cunning passages) of the Muslim world has subsided and nervously defensive response of most of the European press has toned down as well. Although Muslim reaction deserves special analysis from the point of view of international politics (Jernej Letnar, Where Art Thou?) especially since this global dispute about taste has turned into vandalism and even killing sprees in some cases I do not wish to speak of Muslim response, neither of use of the Arab street by the ruling elites, and some of the particular characteristics of Islam, respectively (a-propos, Slovenian Franciscan missionary was badly beaten in Turkey, which is a possible candidate for a EU entry).

What I wish to elaborate on is purely and simply a problem of freedom of speech and its relation to religious feelings. This question inevitably brings me to the point of dealing with more profound subject of European identity. This post is a continuation of debate started by two of the Avbel's posts (Freedom of Expression - a Case of Abuse? february 04, Dworkin on Cartoons and Holocaust Denial, posted on february 22), and of the comments we made on the last one.

There are roughly three kinds of arguments in the global debate, at least three that I can think of:

1. The most vocal are of course classical representatives of the so called »progressive liberal thought.« Theirs is the usual mantra that goes like this: we-won't-give-our-freedom-of-speech-away or in some (usually tabloid) cases: to-the-barricades! This argument does not need any further consideration since it's simply a battle with straw men - this is one tangram shape that has already been assembled and a Columbus' egg that already stands on end. Just for the record: surely nobody at the right mind denies catalogue of human rights as it was adopted in international documents especially in ECHR. Even freshmen in Faculties of law don't need much persuasion on this matter. This is why it is even more surprising how one dimensional and undifferentiated is the debate on this level. I was leaning towards a notion that Dworkin belongs to this crowd, but Avbel (see his response to my comment on his Dworkin on Cartoons and Holocaust Denial post) has showed that this is hardly the case.

2. Much more interesting is an opposite approach: this one says Danish cartoons are only result of western intolerance towards ethnical minorities; they are a symptom of western arrogance in relation to the rest of the world. This argument is especially dear to those who see western imperialism and globalisation behind every corner. But not just multicultural fanatics, also many liberals inclined to the left side of political spectrum who are usually free speech absolutists have taken up this standpoint. Since they have always been free speech fanatics especially when Christian religious feelings were on the agenda, some took great effort to defend their new position during this Bilderstreit which is in favor of non publishing the cartoons. However most of them just forgot their previous position hoping that everybody else will do the same.
Despite this I have to admit that in general this approach is much more creative from argument described in No.1, but it's hard not to see duplicity of some opinion makers, and their moralizing of the worst kind. In Slovenia double standards are most visible in relation to Catholic religious feelings, which are not worth a dime in media landscape.

3. If we reject free speech absolutism this controversy can be viewed as a classical case of balancing between freedom of speech and protection of religious feelings. The peculiarity however which cannot be overstated, is that this case cannot be resolved with usual juristic vocabulary. The reason is that European society simply does not understand the notion of offended religious sensibilities anymore. In the society where religion has been successfully removed from the public sphere, there can be no understanding of religious feelings. Typical for this atmosphere is a good cartoon by Bernd Zeller in Berliner Zeitung, (Berliner Zeitung, 11./12. February, No. 36). Cartoon shows a group of immigrants in a immigrations office. One of them says to the immigration officer:

Unsere Religion verbietet Darstellungen von Heidi Klum, Dirk Bach und Florian Silberreisen !

Officer's response is this:

Ach ja? Und wie gewalttätig sind sie?

It's a good joke, which Danish cartoons certainly aren't (note a very important distinction: German cartoonist is making a legitimate comment on certain kind of religious belief, but is not trying to break the particular religious taboo). German cartoon also includes justified comment on the islamist violence. However, it is obvious, that the author simply does not understand that certain categories actually can be sacrosanct to some people. This new ignorance goes for whole European society. Of course, religious citizens can express their indignation but at the end of the day media, public opinion and justice system simply cannot understand what the big fuss is all about. As far back as 1949, Lord Denning said: »The offence of blasphemy is now a dead letter«.

Until now, that is. (to be continued)

Izjava tedna - Statement of the week

2006-02-26T15:59:00.000+01:00

Nespoštovanje mednarodnih obveznosti se v Srbiji nadaljuje na takšen ali drugačen način.

Srbska radikalna stranka, hkrati največja stranka v srbskem parlamentu, je pozvala Ratka Mladića in Radovana Karadžića naj se ne predata Haagu. Predsedniku te stranke, Šešelju, je očitno že žal, da se je prostovoljno predal Haagu.

Na včerejšnjem mitingu v Beogradu je namestnik predsednika te stranke, Tomislav Nikolić, izjavil sledeče:

- Dolazili su nam ovih dana neki u stranku i pitali koliko ćemo ljudi izvesti na ulice ako Mladić bude izručen tribunalu, a ja sam im rekao - dođite u petak na miting pa ćete videti koliko. A sad pitam zašto već ne počnu u Hagu sa suđenjem našem predsedniku Vojislavu Šešelju, i kažem - zato jer se plaše, jer nemaju ni optužnicu niti imaju šta da mu dokažu. Ali ne plaši se toga toliko Karla del Ponte, koliko Vojislav Koštunica i Boris Tadić, koji znaju da slede izbori, da će radikali osvojiti vlast i da će se prestati sa izdajom, mitom i korupcijom –

Obenem je generalni sekretar stranke Aleksandar Vučić dodal, da:

- Šešelj u Hagu ne brani sebe, već Srbiju, da se "bori za slobodu Srbije i da mi treba da mu pomognemo -

Sprašujemo se kdaj bo ta narod dokončno prevzel kolektivno krivdo za genocid, etnično čiščenje in zločine pri človečnosti na Hrvaškem, Kosovu, Bosni in Sloveniji? Kdaj bodo njihovi voditelji priznali invidualno kazensko odgovornost za vse grozote? Nihče drug jim ne bo skopal brezihodno jamo kot oni sami, pri čemer pa se lahko do katarze dokopljejo samo tako, da objektivno obračunajo s pretektlostjo in tudi sedanjostjo.

Qualite des Etudes du Droit en Slovenie

2006-02-24T11:21:00.000+01:00

Nous sommes tres fiers d'avoir de la chance vous informier que Jernej Letnar et Matej Avbelj ont publie un Article dont le magazine Slovene "Ampak" sur de la Qualite des Etudes du Droit en Slovenie.

L'Article pourait etre disponible sur l'internet www.ampak.si. Si non, on doit l'achter, evidemment.

Dubai Port Authority as a Trojan Horse for the US Democrats

2006-02-23T18:06:00.000+01:00

The incumbent US government recently approved the sale of a British company that currently manages the ports to state-run Dubai Ports World, which would under the deal win managment control of 50 ports wordwide, including 5 major ports on the East coast of the United States. According to the agreement Dubai Ports World would handle shipping arrivals, departures, unloading at the docks and many security-related functions, whereas US federal government would oversee those security operations. However, Democrats and many Republicans who remain skeptical of a United Arab Emirates company playing such a central role at sensitive entry points in the United states. They also came up that some of the hijackers involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks used the United Arab Emirates as an operational and financial headquartes, but they forgot to tell nobody of this persons came out of Emirate Dubai.

After this news came out, Democratic and also senior Republican Senators, who face reelection campaigns later this year, threatened to introduce legislation to delay the takeover if Bush does not act quickly prevents take over. Lets ask ourselves what are democrats trying to bring accross here? It is known that American trust the Bush administration on national security questions, and hardly possible to see any prospects for swing in other direction on the next elections in the automn. They should rather concentrate on domestic issues such health and social security system if they want to gain some more seat in the Congress later this week. At the end why Dubai companyshould not manage ports in the United States since it does so sucessfully in over twenty other world ports.

Črni scenarij? Še pomnite gospod Hribar?

2006-02-22T21:19:00.000+01:00

Danes je bil uradno za kardinala Rimokatoliske cerkve izbran tudi slovenski skof Franc Rode. S tem je bil narejen se en korak k crnemu scenariju, ki ga je pred leti, prav pred nekimi volitvami, ko je tudi tedanji predsednik Slovenije Milan Kucan zatrdil, da bo kandidiral na volitvah le za to, da prepreci ponovno ozivitev fasizma na Slovenskem. Dr. Hribar, filozof, ki smo mu v tem blogu ze namenili castno mesto izjave tedna, je tedaj kot crni scenarij orisal tole trojko: Jansa premier, Jambrek predsednik, Rode kardinal. Samo se dr. Jambrek mora narediti kljucni korak in kolaps bo tu.

Lepo bi bilo slisati, kaj o tedanji svoji izjavi meni dr. Hribar.

A Ugandan "man of the people" with wide-brimmed safari hat

2006-02-22T20:38:00.000+01:00

Uganda was only decade ago praised by everyone from US's former president Bill Clinton to South Africa's former president Nelson Mandela as the continent's success story. It was thought Uganda future was going to be different. Not quite. Ten years down the line not much have changed for better. Civil society is alive, but not flourshing, primary education is not free and tailored after World Bank's proposals, war in north is still raging, children as still being kidnapped into slavery by Lords Resistance Army and indeed President is the same as it was then. In fact he changed the Constitution to allow him to run for third term of office.

"African leader should not stay in office more ten years" said Ugandan President Museveni 10 years ago. However, After 20 years in power, Museveni changed his mind and constitution. With the term limits now gone, he says he hopes to stay in power until 2013, a total of 27 years. It is a fact that most of the African leaders have had such a habit of clinging to power.

Uganda is nowadays in disarray, the incumbent government controls only half of the territory, the other northern part is controled by rebel group Lords Resistence Army (LRA) who advocates for living according 10 commandments with instant murders, totrutre and ethnic cleasing. The rebel group has become notorious for kidnapping children into slavery and mutilating civilians. The war in norther Uganda rages already for 20 years country's brutal 20-year war in the north, where LRA has driven more than 1.6 million people off their farms and left tens of thousands dead.

There is no need for Ugandans to call Museveni a president when he is reality self-proclaimed king. What kind of the message is he sending to the rest of Africa? Once his wide-brimmed safari hat, his modest ranch and his beloved cattle, stood for something - better future and progress - but now... However, one may add than Uganda has quite strong democratic institutions such as courts, a constitution, a more or less free press.

Dworkin on Cartoons and Holocaust Denial

2006-02-22T16:36:00.000+01:00

Just recently Ronald Dworkin has spoken out about the cartoons that caused such a furry in the Muslim world. The following is the excerpt from his comment "Even bigots and Holocaust deniers must have their say" for the English newspaper The Guardian:

"The British media were right, on balance, not to republish the Danish cartoons that millions of furious Muslims protested against in violent and terrible destruction around the world. Reprinting would very likely have meant more people killed and more property destroyed. It would have caused many British Muslims great pain because they would have been told that the publication was intended to show contempt for their religion, and though that perception would have been inaccurate and unjustified the pain would nevertheless have been genuine. True, readers and viewers who have been following the story might well have wanted to judge the cartoons' impact, humour and offensiveness for themselves, and the media might therefore have felt some responsibility to provide that opportunity. But the public does not have a right to read or see whatever it wants no matter what the cost..." (Full Article is available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1709372,00.html)

Whatever you think of Dworkin in general and of this comment in particular you have to confess that he is making important and thought provoking points. I think I could go with him on his point about the Holocaust denial issue - especially in the light of the present bizzare case where an obscure English historian was convicted to 3 years imprisonment for the holocaust denial 16 years ago. The harm of this speech, in my view, is certainly not so great that a well ordered constitutional society could not fight against without oppressive means, i.e. by mere counter speech.

Finally, especially the ever silent intelligence of this blog is particularly invited to comment on this issue.

Major world crisis ahead?

2006-02-21T10:28:00.000+01:00

The Laboratoire européen d’Anticipation Politique Europe 2020 now estimates to over 80% the probability that the week of March 20-26, 2006 will be the beginning of the most significant political crisis the world has known since the Fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, together with an economic and financial crisis of a scope comparable with that of 1929. This last week of March 2006 will be the turning-point of a number of critical developments, resulting in an acceleration of all the factors leading to a major crisis, disregard any American or Israeli military intervention against Iran. In case such an intervention is conducted, the probability of a major crisis to start rises up to 100%.

What are the two characteristics of this crisis?
"As some insitutions claim, this crisis results from the analysis of decisions taken by the two key-actors of the main on-going international crisis, i.e. the United States and Iran:
- on the one hand there is the Iranian decision of opening the first oil bourse priced in Euros on March 20th, 2006 in Teheran, available to all oil producers of the region. Iran's opening of an Oil Bourse priced in Euros at the end of March 2006 will be the end of the monopoly of the Dollar on the global oil market. The immediate result is likely to upset the international currency market as producing countries will be able to charge their production in Euros also. In parallel, European countries in particular will be able to buy oil directly in their own currency without going though the Dollar. Concretely speaking, in both cases this means that a lesser number of economic actors will need a lesser number of Dollars. This double development will thus head to the same direction, i.e. a very significant reduction of the importance of the Dollar as the international reserve currency, and therefore a significant and sustainable weakening of the American currency, in particular compared to the Euro. The most conservative evaluations give €1 to $1,30 US Dollar by the end of 2006. But if the crisis reaches the scope anticipated by LEAP/E2020, estimates of €1 for $1,70 in 2007 are no longer unrealistic.

- On the other hand, there is the decision of the American Federal Reserve to stop publishing M3 figures (the most reliable indicator on the amount of dollars circulating in the world) from March 23, 2006 onward. Why is this important? Well, since printing paper money is nothing short of counterfeiting, the issuer of the international currency must always be the country with the military might to guarantee control over the system. This magnificent scheme seems the perfect system for obtaining perpetual wealth for the country that issues the de facto world currency. The one problem, however, is that such a system destroys the character of the counterfeiting nation’s people-- just as was the case when gold was the currency and it was obtained by conquering other nations. And this destroys the incentive to save and produce, while encouraging debt and runaway welfare.

The American and Iranian decisions coming into effect during the last week of March 2006, will catalyse and turn into a total crisis seven sector-based crises affecting the whole planet in the political, economic and financial fields, as well as in the military field most probably too: loss of confidence in the Dollar, explosion of the US financial imbalances, oil crisis, end of the global US leadership, distrust towards the Arab-Muslim world, inefficiency of the global governance, and uncertainties about the European governance... "

Taken from 2020 European Laboratory of Political Anticipation (www.europe2020.org/en/section_global/150206.htm)

NYU Global Law School Goes Truly Global

2006-02-19T12:50:00.000+01:00

NYU Global Law School has made a path-breaking step: it is to establish a joint LL.M Program in Asia with the University of Singapur. This is the first real move towards the globalization of education which will show the road of development of legal education in the future.

What is all about (for more details consult: http://www.nyulawglobal.org/graduateadmissions/singapore/index.htm, which is also the source of what follows)?

"In a move that will transform the very concept of global legal education, New York University School of Law (NYU) and the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law (NUS) have created a dual degree program in Asia's commercial and legal hub, Singapore.
Entitled NYU@NUS, this program will allow students from around the world to experience two educational universes, earning Master of Laws (LL.M.) degrees from both a leading U.S. institution and a leading Asian law school. A distinct feature of the NYU degree is that, whilst taking place in Singapore, the degree will be taught predominantly by NYU Faculty in residence at NUS. It is also envisaged that in keeping with the global orientation of the NYU@NUS program, there will be collaborative teaching between NYU and NUS Faculty. In addition to the academic program — in all respects as rigorous as its counterpart in New York — students will be able to opt for internships with Singaporean and other Asia-based law firms, as well as governmental and non-governmental agencies. After graduating, they may also choose to spend a further two months in New York taking a special course in American Lawyering."

The ratio of this joint enteprise is clear: it is advantageous for all those taking part: NYU is spreading its influence, Singapur is getting a superb squad of professors and students that might stay there and boost its economic and scientific development, students are experiencing the two economic metropolis in the world, they are acquiring knowledge of two crucial legal systems and above all they are creating a truely global network of people that might run the world in the decades to come.

What is the lesson that Slovenia should learn from this? This first of all shows how much we are lagging behind with the persistent monopoly on legal education and how the world currents of education are passing by us. If I was in the shoes of the Slovenian government today, I would immediately try to establish a contact with NYU in order to attract them and convince them to establish a similar educational center in Slovenia. It could serve as the European center as the one in Singapur serves as the Asian center.

Self-determination of peoples - Comments by Ms Fozia Lone

2006-02-17T16:59:00.000+01:00

Fozia Lone is a Doctoral Research Student at School of Law, University of Aberdeen, f.lone@abdn.ac.uk. Fozia comes from Indian administered Kashmir region.

Dear Jernej, I generally agree with what you have mentioned especially your argument that other circumstances in which right to self-determination can be used must be developed, is persuasive. However, as has been mentioned that violation of human rights gives the right to exercise external self-determination is equally correct. In Bangladesh case it was the fact of repression rather then the fact that Bengalis were linguistically, ethnically and culturally different from Pakistanis, which ultimately vindicated the creation of Bangladesh as an independent state.

On the other hand Srdjan, comment that right to self-determination is disappearing from the vocabulary of the major political actors involved in the Kosovo crisis seems to be sound. However, Srdjan seems to ignore the fact that this notion of right to self-determination still exists in international law although is accompanied by the confusion as to its beneficiaries. Politicians, especially of countries who are caught in this identity crisis, generate a lot of this mystification. It is because politicians usually take contextual approach that suits them while discussing this concept and forget about its legal side. Additional problem has been caused by the ineffective drive to identify â€کpeopleâ€™ in international law, particularly in the post-colonial period. Further uncertainty crops up when the concept of right to self-determination is discussed in relation with other equally unclear notions like territorial integrity, derogation, and secession. This right has also suffered by the bewildering state practice, contradictory resolutions from international organisation, treaty laws that are poorly drafted without defining the central entity- â€کpeopleâ€™ and by the uncommunicative views of the courts.

While inquiring into the past parameters of self-determination it may appears that self-determination is only for decolonised people or non-self-governing states as pointed by Jernej. But how can we ignore the up and coming crises like Kosovo, Kashmir and Palestine, which need immediate indulgence. We cannot simply consent to let people suffer just because there is no international law that can be applied on them. Law has to change with the shifting time and same applies on the right to self-determination. Although there is no shortage of literature on various dimensions of self-determination but surprisingly enough there is the bizarre deficiency of wide-ranging legal narrative of this concept. This vacuum can be filled if this concept will be amending or clarified within international law otherwise it can soon be the â€کdead letter of pastâ€™. Therefore the time has arrived to make efforts to rotate this concept in a direction within international law so that International peace can be protected.

European Court in Strasbourg does not find Czech Roma children victims of discrimination in Education

2006-02-16T16:21:00.000+01:00

The European Court of Human Rights on 8 February delivered decision against 18 Roma children who had been forced to attend segregated schools in the Czech Republic. The case of D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic was brought before the European Court of Human Rights in an effort to put an end to a widespread practice of discrimination throughout Central and South East Europe, where Roma children are routinely placed in schools for the mentally disabled regardless of their actual intellectual abilities. The panel of judges on the case, which included also Czech and Hungarian judges, voted six to one against.

The Court held that the setting and planning of the curriculum fell in principle within the competence of the State concerned. That mainly involved questions of expediency on which it was not for the Court to rule and whose solution might legitimately vary according to the country and the era. The Court continued that given States’ margin of appreciation in the education sphere, they could not be prohibited from setting up different types of school for children with difficulties or implementing special educational programmes to respond to special needs.

The Court suprasingly agreed with the Chech government argument that the system of special schools in the Czech Republic was not introduced solely to cater for Roma children and that considerable efforts are made in these schools to help certain categories of pupils to acquire a basic education. However, the Court disregarded the fact that in most of the special schools Roma pupils made up between 80% and 90% of the total numbers of the pupils. What kind of message is the ECtHr sending with this decision? It seems that message is that is OK to force Roma children to attend segrated schools, which are intended for the mentally disabled regardless of their intelectuall abilities. This decision is absurd and in total non-compliance with international human rights law and also EcHRT's Courts own jurisprudence.

In dissent, Judge Cabral Barreto of Portugal noted that the Czech Government had previously conceded that, at the time relevant to the applications before the Court, "Romany children with average or above-average intellect [we]re often placed in [special] schools on the basis of results of psychological tests"; "[t]he tests [we] reconceived for the majority population and do not take Romany specifics into consideration"; and in some special schools, "Romany pupils made up between 80% and 90% of the total number." Taken together, these concessions amounted to "an express acknowledgement by the Czech State of the discriminatory practices complained of by applicants.

In the light of all of this we are of the opinion that the judgment's narrow conception of discrimination is at odds with developments in much of intertnational community and it is not helpful for the state of human rights in Europe that Strasbourg Court submits that systematic racial segregation in Czech schools is OK.

Taking Peoples' Right to Self-Determination Seriously 2

2006-02-15T20:05:00.000+01:00

Latest input on right to self-determination of peoples on the Transatlantic Assemblyweblog alas does not bring our discussion further since you more or less submit the arguments which were already given. Nevertheless, you may know that International Court of Justice in the West-Saharan Advisory Opinion defined self-determination as the need to pay regard to the freely expressed will of peoples. The same Court recognized it in South West Africa cases as one of the essential principles of international law. Later, in East Timor case ICJ once again confirmed the right of peoples to self-determination

You basically do not take in account the case law of ICJ and basic principles of international human rights law. Many scholars (Cassesse, Alfredsson, Schenin, Koskeniemi, Klabbers) have written on the topic of internal and external self-determination. My previous contributions argued that there is right to external self-determination everywhere basic human rights have been blatantly violated. I would accept if some would argue that this not the state of international law at this point of time since international law nowadys might only recognize the exercise of right to self-determination only in the context of decolonization (as in the case of Greenland and Faore Islands) and non-self-governing territories. But sure one may argue that international human rights law is developing towards greater accountability for human rights violations in nation states. Certainly international law and international community has in last decade showed more "humane face" as in the case of humanitarian intervention in Kosovo. The right of colonized peoples to self-determination is confirmed in the consistent practice of States and international organizations, including case-law ans is therefore beyond any doubt. However, other possible self-determination scenarios amy be considered, including liberation of occupied territories, the separation from a State with a non-representative government, and peoples who were subjected to gross human rights violations.