Browse results
Abstract
From a practitioner’s perspective the intervention explores how digital technologies have enhanced the capacities of policy-makers in anticipating and responding to atrocity crimes including through development and access to sophisticated technologies to collect and verify evidence of crimes for justice and accountability. Digital technologies have also provided perpetrators with enhanced tools to target populations with greater precision and commit atrocities against them. The intervention argues that the harm perpetuated by digital technologies can be mitigated by holding developers of these technologies accountable for creating operating environments that are safe and by naming and shaming governments that use new technologies to target populations.
Abstract
The study sought to explore the nature of community empowerment in holding local councils accountable. The study adopted both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods. Three Zones, namely Central Gondar, Wag Hemra, and South Wollo, were selected as study areas. From these three Zones, five woredas were selected. Two kebeles were selected purposively from each sample Woreda. Accordingly, 10 study kebeles were selected. A total of 269 samples from the community have been incorporated into the survey. Primary data were collected through survey, key informant interview, fgd, and in-depth interview techniques. The study used thematic analysis technique for the qualitative data and descriptive analysis for the quantitative data. The results show that the level of community empowerment in holding council members accountable for their needs and priorities is low. Local people have little say in their local affairs. Currently, the council members are serving their second term without local elections. Hence, Some Kebeles and Woredas do not have representatives in the local councils.
Abstract
Armenia and Azerbaijan have had a long history of adversarial conflict, with hostility being a recurring theme throughout history. The long history manifested into outright armed conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan in 2020. Subsequently, Armenia filed an application before the International Court of Justice to institute proceedings against Azerbaijan for racial discrimination against ethnic Armenians. This paper examines the jurisdiction of the icj in deciding on the dispute. The paper argues that it appears that the icj has jurisdiction over the present dispute. The second part of the paper discusses the applicability of the Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. It finally concludes with the way forward.
Abstract
The article explores the evolution of a key, yet relatively obscure, instrument relating to the ‘head’ of proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights (Court), namely interim measures. By employing the decisions related to the Polish rule of law crisis as a case study, the article contends that the Court’s use of interim measures in this context exhibits significant novelties compared to its previous practice, regarding both the scope and content of interim protection. More broadly, the Polish case study, along with other recent developments in the Court’s practice under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, highlights a growing tendency to use interim measures for addressing systemic issues in the Contracting Parties. This aspect prompts a reflection on the evolving nature and function of interim relief under the European Convention on Human Rights, and on the outstanding procedural shortcomings of the Rule 39 machinery, which is currently undergoing a process of reform.