Podcasts about inter american court

Myrna Mack Chang was a Guatemalan anthropologist whose commitment to documenting the struggles of indigenous communities put her in the crosshairs of a violent regime. In 1990, she was brutally assassinated for exposing human rights abuses, but her story didn't end there. Thanks to the relentless pursuit of justice by her sister, Helen Mack, her case set legal precedents in Guatemala and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. In this episode, we explore Myrna's life, her work, and the legacy she left behind in the fight for justice. Tune in as we honor her memory and discuss why her story is still relevant today. Don't forget to subscribe to The LEO Podcast for more stories that matter! BONUS EPISODES Patreon: ✨www.patreon.com/latinamericaneo✨ 

It's Christmas Eve Tuesday, December 24th, A.D. 2024. This is The Worldview in 5 Minutes written by Kevin Swanson and heard on 125 radio stations and at www.TheWorldview.com.  Filling in for Adam McMannus I'm Ean Leppin. National Association of Realtors Attacks Free Speech The US National Association of Realtors has slammed a Christian realtor in Virginia for his stance taken for the cause of righteousness. Wilson Fauber was declared guilty by the NAR ethics panel for “harassing speech” and “hate speech.”  Fauber's social media posts espoused traditional Christian views on marriage and sexuality. He shared comments from Franklin Graham and other Christian leaders online. In a statement released by the Founding Freedoms Law Center (FFLC), Fauber said: “In 44 years as a realtor, I have loved and served all people. Regularly, I hear from other faith-based realtors that live in fear of being similarly prosecuted for their faith, and potentially losing their livelihoods, if they don't hide their faith well enough."  Fauber's attorneys are seeking out other legal options in the case. In an interview with CBN News Fauber's attorney with the Founding Freedoms Law Center, Michael Sylvester said this concerning the case. SYLVESTER: “If speaking the Bible is hate-speech, we've really reached a new low, because we used to value our professions because of the values that they bring into society. So, we really need to say, 'no' to large-scale private censorship, and allow free speech again, instead of the censorship that we're seeing.” So what are Wilson Fauber's plans in pursuing this legally? FAUBER: “I'm adamant about pursuing the case. I believe the Lord has called me for such a time as this, to be His voice on this particular matter. [H]e has given me His peace. I feel strong about this, and I'm going to do everything I can to expose everything that is going on, and try to right the wrong, because this really isn't just about me. The National Association of Realtors has over 1,500,000 paying members, and so we're all under the same ordinance and these policies that are very binding on our lives 24/7. And, I don't think that that's right.” Jesus said, “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake. 12 Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you. Biden Pardons Murderers The President of the United States, Joe Biden, has issued clemency for America's worst criminals. He has commuted the sentences of 37 out of 40, the murderers convicted in federal courts over the years, reclassifying their sentences to life without the possibility of parole. The victims of the 37 include law enforcement officers and children. Some were guilty of murdering multiple victims, including drug lord, Kaboni Savage who lived up to his name - responsible for the murder of 12 people. Having pardoned 65 individuals, and commuting sentences of 1,634 others, President Biden has issued more pardons than any president in a 4 year term. U.S. Gives Over $2 Billion to Taiwan U.S. President Joe Biden has authorized up to $571 million of defense assets for Taiwan's defense program. That will take the US contributions to Taiwan in 2024 to $2.7 billion — the first major support for the island country since 1970. In response, China's Foreign Ministry issued a statement laced in threats, quote, “To aid “Taiwan independence” by arming Taiwan is just like playing with fire and will get the US burned.” Taiwan's GDP is about 6% that of communist China, with a population of 1.6% of China's. Taiwan's free market has enabled about 4 times the productivity of the communist nation.  American View of China at an All-Time Low The average American's view of China has hit an all-time low, positivity dropping from 53% in 1986 to 26% in the 2024 survey. The Surveys have been conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs since 1978. Majorities of Americans want to limit the growth of China's power, view China as a US rival, and say US-China trade weakens US national security.  Communist China's portion of the World Gross Product has expanded from 2.05% in 1980 to 19% in 2024. The US share of the World Gross Product has remained about the same — around 25%. El Salvador Pressured to Allow Abortion In 2013, an El Salvadoran woman with health problems lost her baby by C-section. She had earlier requested an abortion, but could not get it in a pro-life country. The mother's life was intact, but the case was appealed to a progressive, multinational court called the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR). The court found the government of El Salvador “responsible for violating the American Convention on Human Rights,” and ordered the nation to “amend existing medical protocols” to allow for abortion in similar cases. Remember Those Suffering From Hunger This Christmas, remember those suffering from severe hunger — Haiti, Sudan, South Sudan, Congo, Chad, Niger, and Somalia.  As of October 24, Somalia had “the second-highest undernourishment rate (over 51%), and the third-highest child mortality rate (over 10%)”North Korea has the highest undernourishment rate in the world. Starvation problems have reached 2008-2009 proportions, according to a report from the World Health Organization.  Story of the Author Behind "Silent Night" On December 24, 1818, Father Joseph Mohr of Oberndorf, Austria, was dealing with flooding in his chapel, and a damaged organ. He walked three kilometers to visit his organist friend, Franz Gruber, with a request. . . that he compose a Christmas tune to accommodate 6 verses of a poem he had written two years earlier —- to be accompanied by a simple guitar later that evening. Gruber returned two hours later with the music of a Christmas carol that would be included in almost every Christmas Eve service for the next two hundred years. Silent Night. Holy Night. All is Calm. All is Bright. Round Yon Virgin Mother and Child. Holy infant so tender and mild. Sleep in Heavenly Peace. Silent night! Holy night!. . . Shepherds quake at the sight! Glories stream from heaven afar, Heavenly hosts sing Alleluia! Christ the Saviour is born! Christ the Saviour is born! A blessed Christmas to our listeners, as we celebrate the birth of the very Son of God, the Savior of the world!  “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.” Close And that's The Worldview on this Monday, December 23rd, in the year of our Lord 2024. Subscribe by Amazon Music or by iTunes or email to our unique Christian newscast at www.TheWorldview.com. Or get the Generations app through Google Play or The App Store. I'm Ean Leppin feel free to email me contact@eanvoiceit. Seize the day for Jesus Christ.

Never Forget: A vigil for Honduran environmental activist and Indigenous leader Berta Cáceres in front of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights headquarters in San José, Costa Rica in April 2016. Cáceres was murdered in her home in Honduras on March 3, 2016. Photo by Daniel Cima. Writer essayist, and journalist Lauren Markham soon-to-be released book, Immemorial, reflects on how language and memorials can offer strategies for coping with climate anxiety and grief. Journalist, activist, and author Jason Mark has a book-in-progress, The Remembered Earth: How Our Memories of Nature Can Protect the Planet, which delves into the so-called “shifting baseline syndrome” and explores antidotes to environmental amnesia. In this episode of Terra Verde, Earth Island Journal editor-in-chief and cohost Maureen Nandini Mitra talks with the two writers about their new books, the power of words, and how the mere act of remembering can be action.     The post Remembrance as Resistance appeared first on KPFA.

Our Children's Trust (OCT) was founded in 2010 on the idea that courts are vital to democracy and empowered to protect our children and the planet. Without a stable climate system, every natural resource we rely upon to exercise our basic human rights—life, liberty, home, happiness—is under threat. In this conversation, you'll hear from Mat dos Santos, OCT's co-executive director, and two youth plaintiffs about how Our Children's Trust is changing the conversation around climate by activating the courts in the face of political gridlock. Last year, OCT represented 169 young plaintiffs globally in landmark cases such as Juliana v. U.S. and Held v. State of Montana—the first cases, worldwide, to recognize the right to a climate system capable of sustaining human life, and to enshrine science-based protections for children's fundamental rights into law. On June 1, 2022, 14 youth in Hawai'i filed a constitutional climate lawsuit against the State of Hawai'i claiming that their operation of a transportation system that results in high levels of greenhouse gas emissions violates their state constitutional rights, causing them significant harm and impacting their ability to “live healthful lives in Hawai'i now and into the future.” The youth seek to ensure the Hawai'i Department of Transportation steps up to meet the state legislature's goal to decarbonize Hawai'is economy and achieve a zero emissions economy by 2045.  In coordination with more than 50 prominent scientists, including Nobel Prize laureates, OCT also presented legal and scientific analyses on climate change impacts to various international and regional tribunals, including the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child, U.N. Special Rapporteur for Human Rights and the Environment, U.N. Special Rapporteur in the Field of Cultural Rights, European Court of Human Rights, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and Inter-American Court of Human Rights. MLF ORGANIZER Andrew Dudley   A People & Nature Member-led Forum program. Forums at the Club are organized and run by volunteer programmers who are members of The Commonwealth Club, and they cover a diverse range of topics. Learn more about our Forums. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Last month, Europe's top human rights court issued a major decision in the fight against climate change. In KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland, the highest chamber of the European Court of Human Rights found that the Swiss government has violated the human rights of its citizens by not doing enough to address the threat of climate change. The decision is a landmark ruling for activists, lawyers, and communities who are trying to use human rights law to hold governments accountable for promises to fight global warming. But it's not the only case asking what international law requires of nations when it comes to protecting the environment. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and the International Court of Justice are all grappling with similar questions.What do these cases mean for the fight against climate change? Where are the opportunities and risks? Joining the show to discuss the “Year of Climate” in international courts and tribunals are Naima Fifita and Joana Setzer. Naima is a lawyer from Tuvalu who has taken an active role in proceedings by small island nations before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Joana is an Associate Professorial Research Fellow at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Show Notes: Naima FifitaJoana Setzer (@JoanaSetzer)Paras Shah (@pshah518) Rebecca Hamilton's Just Security article “The ‘Year of Climate' in International Courts” Just Security's Climate Change coverageJust Security's International Law coverageMusic: “The Parade” by “Hey Pluto!” from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/hey-pluto/the-parade (License code: 36B6ODD7Y6ODZ3BX)Music: “Curiosity” by “All Good Folks” from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/t/all-good-folks/curiosity (License code: X6SN2UGIWYHPDJGF) 

Maricé Morales's parents are immigrants from Peru. She lived in Peru from age 12 to 17, when she returned to the United States to attend college. She graduated from George Mason University with a bachelor's degree in Global Affairs and French and a master's degree in public policy.  She received a juris doctorate from the University of Maryland School of Law and received a public service award from the law school. During this time, she was involved in legal work extended from the Public Defender's Office in New Orleans, LA to San Jose, Costa Rica at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. From canvassing neighborhoods to encouraging jury participation in Louisiana, to contributing to the international legal framework around discrimination and excessive force against Afro-descendants. Still, while in law school, Morales competed in the National Latina/o Law Student Association's sixth annual moot court competition. In 2014, she was elected to the Maryland House of Delegates, as the first Latina to represent District 19 in Montgomery County, MD. Maricé received the Governor's Award for her work combating Human Trafficking and was recognized in 2019 as one of the top 100 Most Influential Latina Leaders in the D.C., Maryland, and Virginia metropolitan area. Maricé currently ⁠practices law in the greater Washington, D.C. area, in her Law Office⁠ focusing on immigration, criminal defense, and personal injury law. She currently serves on the ⁠Montgomery College Board of Trustees⁠, and the boards for the Jewish Council on Aging and Emerge Maryland. Mentioned in the episode: LatinoUSA episode: ⁠Foreigner at Birth⁠ - Haitians and birthright citizenship in the Dominican Republic Book recommendation: ⁠Brown is the New White by Steve Phillips⁠ Connect with Maricé  Website: ⁠https://www.maricemorales.com/event⁠  IG: ⁠@morales4moco⁠ Facebook: ⁠https://www.facebook.com/morales4moco⁠ LinkedIn: ⁠https://www.linkedin.com/in/maric%C3%A9-morales-6b43242a ⁠ Ways to support the podcast: Give us a review on ⁠Apple Podcast⁠ Become a Listener Supporter, see link in bio ⁠Visit our Online Store⁠ and help us change the narrative with our t-shirt: “El Mejor Amigo de un Peruano es otro peruano.” Also available in feminine (“peruana”) and gender-neutral (“peruanx”) versions Follow Peruvians of USA Podcast on IG: ⁠@peruviansofusa ⁠ Like our page on ⁠Facebook⁠! --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/peruviansofusa/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/peruviansofusa/support

Litigation management is meat and potatoes for most in-house legal departments, but it's a rare case that goes up on appeal. The stakes are higher in those cases, and you need expert counsel to help navigate the process. Appellate specialist M.C. Sungaila is in The Legal Department to tell you what you need to know. She has appeared before many state and federal appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. M.C. also knows a lot about the bench after interviewing more than a hundred judges and justices for her award-winning podcast, The Portia Project. Listen through to the end to find out where you can get a "free" moot court exercise.

Wie gelangen wesentliche politische Fragen überhaupt noch vor internationale Gerichten? Scheinbar zunehmend auf dem Wege von Advisory Opinions (Rechtsgutachten). Isabel Lischewski führt ein in die Voraussetzungen, unter denen der Internationale Gerichtshof (IGH) Rechtsgutachten erteilt. Jan-Henrik Hinselmann spricht dann mit Christoph Priess über die Konjunktur dieser Verfahrensart und ihre vielen spannenden Implikationen. Wir freuen uns über Lob, Anmerkungen und Kritik an podcast@voelkerrechtsblog.org. Abonniert unseren Podcast via RSS, über Spotify oder überall dort, wo es Podcasts gibt. Zeitstempel: 02:30 – Grundlagen: Die Eastern Carelia-Doktrin des IGH 07:15 – Aktuelle (Klima-)Advisory Opinions im Überblick 11:20 – Parallelität von Advisory Opinions: Fluch oder Segen? 18:04 – Advisory Opinions als “prozessuale Umgehungskonstruktion”? 23:35 – Israel-Palästina-Konflikt als „bilateraler Konflikt“? 27:28 – Zur Verbindlichkeit von Advisory Opinions 31:43 – Was folgt für künftige Gutachtenverfahren? 35:05 – Nachbesprechung   Hintergrundinformationen: IGH: United Nations General Assembly Request for Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice: Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change, 29 March 2023 IACtHR: Request for Advisory Opinion of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 9 January 2023 ITLOS: Request for Advisory Opinion of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea: Climate Change and International Law, 12 December 2022 Benoit Mayer, International Advisory Proceedings on Climate Change Philip Burton, Searching for the Eastern Carelia Principle   Moderation: Jan-Henrik Hinselmann, LL.M. (NYU) & Dr. Isabel Lischewski Grundlagen: Dr. Isabel LischewskiInterview: Christoph Priess, LL.M. (Cambridge) & Jan-Henrik Hinselmann, LL.M. (NYU)Schnitt: Daniela Rau   Credits: Gaston Browne, Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda, Public sitting held on Monday, 11 September 2023, at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Hamburg. (Transcript; Recordings)

Diego García Sayán was the UN's Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Lawyers and Judges from 2016–2022. Prior to this he performed numerous roles within the UN, was a judge on the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and held positions in the government of his native Peru. In this interview with the IBA's Director of Content, James Lewis, he discusses major rule of law themes, including his involvement in peace negotiations in Latin America, reform of the UN, the importance of the 2030 sustainability agenda, and how to protect the independence of lawyers and judges.

José Miguel Vivanco, adjunct senior fellow for human rights at CFR and former executive director of the Americas division at Human Rights Watch, leads the conversation on human rights in Latin America. FASKIANOS: Welcome to today's session of the Fall 2023 CFR Academic Webinar Series. I'm Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach here at CFR. Today's discussion is on the record. The video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org, if you would like to share them with your colleagues or classmates. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We are delighted to have José Miguel Vivanco with us to discuss human rights in Latin America. Mr. Vivanco is an adjunct senior fellow for human rights at CFR and partner at Dentons Global Advisors. He formerly served as the executive director of the Americas Division at Human Rights Watch, where he supervised fact-finding research for numerous reports on gross violations of human rights and advocated strengthening international legal standards and domestic compliance throughout the region. He is the founder of the Center for Justice and International Law, an international civil society organization providing legal and technical assistance with the Inter-American Human Rights System. So, José Miguel, thank you very much for being with us today. I thought you could begin by giving us an overview of what you see as the most important human rights challenges and advances in Latin America today. VIVANCO: Well, thank you very much for this invitation. It is a pleasure to be with you all and to talk for an hour about human rights problems, human rights issues in Latin America. Let me first make a couple of points. First, I think it's very important that, in retrospect, if you look at Latin America in the 1960s, 1970s, and even 1980s, it was a region that was pretty much run by military dictatorships. So if you look at historically, the region is not in such a bad shape. I know that this comment is quite controversial and many experts who follow the region closely might disagree with that statement, but objectively speaking I think we need to recognize that most of the region is run today—with the exception, obviously, of Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua—by democracies, weak democracies, the kind of democracies that we have in Latin America are facing very serious challenges and with endemic problems such as corruption, abuse of power, lack of transparency, lack of proper accountability, and so on and so forth. But in general terms, this is a region that has a chance to conduct some self-correction. In other words, electoral democracy is a very, very important value in the region, and the citizens—most of the people are able to either reward or punish the incumbent government at the times of elections. That is not a minor detail. It is extremely important, especially if you take into account that during the last twenty years in Latin America, if I'm not wrong, the vast majority of the governments elected were from the opposition. The statistics, I think, show that in eighteen of the twenty last presidential elections, the winner has been the party of the opposition; which means that even though our democracies in Latin America are dysfunctional, weak, messy, slow, you know, short-term-oriented, obviously, but at least citizens take their rights seriously and they exercise their powers so that is why you see a regular zigzag or, you know, transfer of power from a left-wing government to a right-wing government or vice versa. And that is, again, something that is, obviously, a very, very important tool of self-correction. And that, obviously, includes or has an impact in terms of the human rights record of those countries. You know, I'm not—I'm not addressing yet—I will leave it for the Q&A section—conditions in those three dictatorships in Latin America. Let me just make some few more remarks about one of the biggest challenges that I see in the region. And that is, obviously, the rise of autocracy or autocratic leaders, populist leaders, leaders who are not interested or as a matter of fact are very hostile to the concept of rule of law and the concept of independence of the judiciary. And they usually are very charismatic. They have high level of popular support. And they run and govern the country in a style that is like a permanent campaign, where they normally go against minorities and against the opposition, against the free media, against judges and prosecutors who dare to investigate them or investigate the government. Anyone who challenges them are subject of this type of reaction. And that is, unfortunately, something that we have seen in Mexico recently and until today, and in Brazil, especially during the administration of President Bolsonaro. The good news about, in the case of Brazil, is that, thanks to electoral democracy, it was possible to defeat him and—democratically. And the second very important piece of information is that even though Brazil is not a model of rule of law and separation of power, we have to acknowledge that, thanks to the checks-and-balance exercise by the Supreme Court of Brazil, it was possible to do some permanent, constant damage control against the most outrageous initiatives promoted by the administration of President Bolsonaro. That, I think, is one of the biggest challenges in the region. Let me conclude my—make crystal clear that there are serious human rights problems in Latin America today regarding, for instance, abuse of power, police brutality, prison problems. Prisons are really, in most of the countries in the region, a disaster. And you know, a big number of prisoners are awaiting trial, in detention and unable to really exercise their rights. And unfortunately, populist leaders use the prison system or essentially criminal law, by expanding the practice and enlarging the numbers of crimes that could be subject of pretrial detention, and—you know, regardless of the time that it will take for that case to be prosecuted in full respect for the rule—due process, and so on and so forth. And that—the reason is very simple. There is a real demand in Latin America for policies that will address insecurity, citizen security. If you look at statistics in terms of crime rate, it is going up in most of the country. Obviously, there are big difference between countries like Mexico, for instance, or Colombia, and if you link—if you look at the power of cartels and big mafias, and gangs in other countries, or petty crime impacting the daily life of the citizens. Regardless of that point, one of the biggest demands in Latin America is for better and more public security. And that's why political leaders, usually the solution for that request and demand is to put people in prison with essentially no real due process and increase the number of prisoners without conviction. There are challenges for free speech occasionally, of those leaders who resent scrutiny of their practice. And normally there is a campaign against free media. And there are some attempts in some countries to constantly look for ways to undermine the independence of the judiciary. Keep in mind, for instance, that now in Argentina the whole Supreme Court is under impeachment, and it's essentially an impeachment promoted by the current government because they disagree with the rulings, positions of the Supreme Court. All the justices on the Supreme Court are subject of this political trial conducted by the Argentine Congress. That is a concrete example of the kinds of risks that are present for judges and the judiciary in general, when they exercise their power and they attempt to protect the integrity of the constitution. So let me stop here and we can move on to the most interesting part of this event. FASKIANOS: Well, that was quite interesting. So, thank you, José Miguel. We appreciate it. We going to go to all of you now for your questions. (Gives queuing instructions.) We already have some hands up. We will go first to Karla Soto Valdes. Q: My name is Karla Soto. I'm from Lewis University. My question is, what specific measures could be implemented to address and/or prevent trafficking within the asylum-seeking community during their journey to the U.S.? VIVANCO: Irina, are we going to take several questions, or? FASKIANOS: I think we should do one at a time. VIVANCO: Well, Karla, there are multiple tools to address that specific issue. But this applies to essentially most of the human rights problems all over the world. The menu is pretty ample, but depends on one important factor—whether the government involved cares about its own reputation. That is a very important premise here, because if you we are dealing with a democratic government, once again, it's not—when I refer to a democratic government, I don't have in mind a sort of Jeffersonian model, I'm referring to the kind of democracies that we have in Latin America. But, if the leaders in charge are—you know, they care about their own reputation, they care about domestic debate, very important, because these types of revelations usually have ramifications at the local level. If they pay close attention to those issues, I think it's possible to apply, essentially, the technique of naming and shaming. In other words, collecting information, documenting what exactly is happening, and revealing that information to the public, locally and internationally. That is going to create naturally a reaction, a process, an awareness, and local pressure is—hopefully, it's not just twenty-four hours news, so splash—big splash, but also will trigger some dynamics. If we are dealing with a country that is run by a dictatorship, it is a very, very different question, because normally you're facing a leader, a government, who couldn't care less about its own reputation. They have taken already and assume the cost of doing business in that type of context. Now, sometimes conditions are kind of mixed, where you have democratic country in general—so there is still free media, there is an opposition, there is Congress, there are elections. But the government in charge is so—is run by an autocratic leader. That makes, you know, quite—a little more challenging to just document and reveal that information. And you need to think about some particular agenda, governmental agenda. Some specific interests of the government in different areas. Let me see—let me give you an example. Let's say that the Bolsonaro administration is seriously interested in an incorporation into the OECD in Paris. That is an important piece of information. Whatever you think that is relevant information regarding the record of that government, you could provide information to an entity that is precisely evaluating the record of the government. And the government will be much more willing to address those issues because they have a genuine interest in achieving some specific goal at the international level. FASKIANOS: Fantastic. We're going to go to Nicole Ambar De Santos, who is an undergraduate student at the Washington University in St. Louis: When we consider weak democracy in a more personal sense, like Peru, the controversy of obligation to help these nations arises. How much third party or other nations, such as the United States, intervene? VIVANCO: Tricky question. Peruvian democracy is quite messy. Part of the problem is that the system, the political system, needs some real reform to avoid the proliferation of small political parties and to create the real link or relationship between leaders, especially in Congress, and their constituencies, and so they are much more accountable to their community, the ones who elected them. I don't think the U.S., or any other government, has a direct role to play in that area. My sense is that when we are looking into a dysfunctional democracy that deserve some probably even constitutional reforms, that is essentially a domestic job. That is the work that needs to be done by Peruvians. Without a local consensus about the reforms that need to be implemented in the political system, my sense is that it's going to be very difficult for the U.S. or any other large democracy, to address those kinds of points. It's very different, that type of conversation, from a conversation or an assessment of universal values, such as human rights. When we are looking into cases of police brutality, for instance, the international community has a role to play. But if I were part of the conversation or evaluation by the U.S. government or the European Union with regard to this dysfunctional democracy in Peru, I would approach very carefully by suggesting creating the right type of incentives, more than questions of punishment, or sanctions. It's incentives for them to create the right conditions to address the domestic problem that is—has become quite endemic, in the case of Peru. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next question from Matthew. Matthew, you don't have a last name, so can you identify yourself? Q: Hello. Yes, my name is Matthew. I am a junior student from Arizona State University studying business, but working on a thesis that has to do with human rights and the ethics of supply chain management. My question is, you were talking at the very beginning kind of just about history and how understanding history is important. And what I was hoping to get was, why is understanding history and culture important when working to address human rights issues, history of dictatorship, colonialism? In cultures it's socially acceptable things, like child labor, in some countries, that's not acceptable in Western ideology. So, yeah, just how is history and culture important when working to address human rights for the future? VIVANCO: Matthew, I think you're referring to two different issues. History is central. It's really, really relevant. Because that helps you—if you—if you follow your history, especially periods of time when massive and gross violations were committed in Latin America, it's important to put things in context and value what you have today. And the job is to—not only to preserve democracy, but also to look for ways to strengthen democracy. Because part of the problem is that domestic debate is so polarized today, not just in Latin America, all over the world, that sometimes people—different, you know, segments of society—in their positions, they're so dismissive of the other side, that they don't realize that we need to frame our debate in a constructive way. Let me put it—one specific example. If the government of Argentina, who is a government very receptive and very sensitive to vast and gross violations of human rights committed during the military dictatorship, so in other words, I don't need to lecture that government on that subject. They are actually the people who vote for the current government of Argentina—not the new government, the current government of Argentina—is deeply committed to those kinds of issues. I think that one of the biggest lessons that you should learn from the past is the relevance of protecting the independence of the judiciary. If you don't have an independent judiciary, and the judiciary becomes an entity that is an appendix of the ruling party or is intimidated by politics, and they could be subject of impeachment procedures every time that they rule something, that the powerful—the establishment disagree, I think they're playing with fire, and they're not really paying attention to the lessons that you learn from recent history in Latin America. That would be my first comment regarding that type of issue. And the second one, about you mentioned specifically cultural problems, culture, tensions or conflicts. And you mentioned—your example was child labor. And, and you suggested that that—the combination of child labor is something typical of Western ideology. If I'm not wrong, that was the language that you used. I would—I would push back on that point. And because this is not just a Western or European commitment. This is a universal one. And this is reflected on international treaties, and that are supposed to eradicate that kind of practice. If you give up to the concept of local traditions, you know, cultural, you know, issues that you need to pay attention, sure, as long as they are not to be in conflict with fundamental human rights. Otherwise, in half of the planet you're not going to have women rights, and women will be subject of traditional control. And you wouldn't have rights for minorities, and especially—and not only, but especially—the LGBTQ community. And you wouldn't have rights for racial minorities, or different religious beliefs. So, we have to watch and be very careful about what type of concessions we make to cultural traditions. I am happy to understand that different communities in Latin America might have different traditions, but there is some firm, solid, and unquestionable minimum that are the these universal human rights values that are not the property or monopoly of anyone. You know, these are—and this is not an ethical conversation. This is a legal one, because these values are protected under international law. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to combine or take two questions. The first question is from Lindsay Bert, who is at the department of political science at Muhlenberg College, who asks if you could speak on the efficacy of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in addressing the human rights violations you described. And the second question is from Leonard Onyebuchi Ophoke, a graduate student at Cavendish University in Uganda: Why is it almost impossible to hold the actors that violate human rights accountable? What could be done to make the mechanism more enforceable? VIVANCO: The inter-American system of human rights protection, there is nothing similar to inter-American system of human rights protection in the Global South. You don't have something similar in Asia, or Africa, or the Middle East. In other words, you don't have a mechanism where ultimately a court, a court of law—not just a commission, a court of law—handle individual cases, specific complaints of human rights abuses, and governments participate in public hearings. The parties involved have the obligation to present evidence before the court, and the court finally ruled on the specific matters where its decisions are binding. The number of issues that have been addressed by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the last thirty years in Latin America are really incredible. And the impact—this is most important point—the impact at a local level is remarkable. In the area, for instance, of torture, disappearances. I'm referring to the elaboration of concepts and the imposing the obligation of local governments to adjust their legislation and practice, and to address specific problems or issues by providing remedies to victims. That is quite unusual. And the court has remarkable rulings on free speech, on discrimination issues, on indigenous populations, on military jurisdiction. One of the typical recourse of governments in the region when security forces were involved in human rights atrocities was to invoke military jurisdiction. So they say, no worries, we are going to investigate our own crimes. And the court has been actually very, very firm, challenging that notion to the point that I don't think there is a single case in Latin America today—once again, with the exception of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, that I hope that somebody will ask me a question about those three countries—and I don't think there is a single case where today security forces try to—or attempt to shield themselves from investigation invoking military jurisdiction. And the credit is to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. I can elaborate, and give you—provide you with a long list of examples of areas where the court has been actually really, really critical in advancing human rights in the region. Let me give you actually one last example that I think is very—is very illustrative, very revealing. In Chile, something like probably twenty years ago or fifteen years ago, full democracy. Full democracy. No Chile under Pinochet. The Supreme Court of Chile ruled that a mother who was openly lesbian did not qualify for the custody of her children because she was lesbian. And she had a couple. So that was sufficient grounds to rule in favor of the father, because the mother didn't have the moral grounds to educate her own kids, children. And this was decided by the Supreme Court of Chile. Not just a small first instance tribunal. And I will point out that the vast majority of the—I mean, the public in Chile was pretty much divided, but I'm pretty sure that the majority of Chileans thought that the Supreme Court was right, you know? The case went to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. And fortunately, after a few years, the court not only challenged that decision of the Supreme Court, forced Chile to change its legislation, and to change the ruling of the Supreme Court of Chile, which is supposed to be the last judgment in the country. And the impact of that one, not only in Chile, in the rest of the region, because it shapes the common wisdom, the assumptions of many people. It helps for them to think carefully about this kind of issues. And the good news is that that mother was able to have the custody of her kids. And not only that, the impact in Chilean society and in the rest of the region was remarkable. Now, the second question that was asked was about how difficult it is to establish accountability for human rights abuses against the perpetrators of those abuses. I mean, it's a real challenge. It depends on whether or not you have locally an independent judiciary. If you do have an independent judiciary, the process is slow, it's messy, it's complicated. But there is a chance that atrocities could be addressed. And that is— especially human rights atrocities or abuses committed during the military dictatorship. There are countries in the region, like for instance, Chile, Peru, Argentina, Uruguay, where there are people in prison for those type of atrocities. In Brazil, thanks to an amnesty law that was passed in 1978, real investigation and prosecution of those atrocities actually never happened. And an important lesson that you could bear in mind is that Brazilian military are very dismissive of these type of issues, of human rights issues. But not only that, my sense is that Brazilian military officers at very high level are not afraid of stepping into politics, and give their opinion, and challenge the government. In other words, they were actually very, very active, and I'm referring to top officials in the Brazilian Army, during the Bolsonaro administration. There were top leaders who actually publicly argued that if they have to organize a coup again in Brazil, they are ready. That kind of language you don't find in Argentina, in Chile, in other countries where there have been some accountability. For one simple reason, the top military officers running the show are very much aware that if they get involved in politics, that they are part tomorrow of a coup d'état or something like that, at the end of the day they will be responsible. And they might be subject of criminal prosecution for atrocities committed during that period. And so there is a price to pay. So their calculation is much more, shall we say, prudent regarding this issue. But again, once again, how difficult it is? It's very difficult to establish accountability, and much more difficult when you're dealing with dictatorship, where you need to rely on the work done by, for instance, the ICC, the International Criminal Court, which is pretty active in the case of Venezuela. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next question from Fordham. Q: Good afternoon, Mr. Vivanco. My name is Carlos Ortiz de la Pena Gomez Urguiza, and I have a question for you. El Salvador is currently battling crime and gangs with strategies such as mano dura, which have shown a significant decrease in crime at the cost of violating human rights. Do you see a possible effective integration of such policies in high-crime-rate countries, such as Mexico, to stop the growth of narco and crime gang activity? And if so, how? VIVANCO: Well, look, yeah, Carlos, very good question. Bukele in El Salvador is a real, real challenge. It's really, really a complicated case, for several reasons. He's incredibly popular. No question about it. He has managed to—thanks to that popularity—to concentrate power in his own hands. He fully controls Congress. But, much more relevant, he fully controls the judiciary, including the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court today is subordinated to the executive branch. And he is constantly going after the civil society, and free media, and the opposition. Now, in violation of the Salvadorean constitution, he's going to run for reelection. And he will be reelected, because he's also very popular. And his policies to go after gangs are cruel, inhuman, and without—not even a facade of respect for due process. Essentially, the policy which is not sustainable and is—I don't think is something that you could export to other countries—is a policy—unless you have full control, unless you have some sort of dictatorship or quasi dictatorship. Which is based, in essence, in the appearance, in the number of tattoos that people, especially in the marginal communities in the periferia in El Salvador, where shanty towns are located. The police has a, you know, green light to arrest anyone who fit that profile. And then good luck, because it's going to be very, very difficult for that person to avoid something like several months in prison. The whole point of having an independent judiciary and due process is that law enforcement agencies have the—obviously, not only the right, the duty to prevent crimes and to punish criminals. Not physically punish them. You know, it's to arrest them, to detain them, and to use proportional force to produce that attention. But they need to follow certain rules. They cannot just go around and arrest anyone who they have some sort of gut feelings that they are involved in crimes, because then you don't—you're not—the whole system is not able to distinguish and to make a distinction between potential criminals and innocent people. But it is complicated, the case of Bukele, because, for instance, I was referring initially to the technique of naming and shaming as a technique, as a methodology to expose governments with deplorable human rights record. But in the case of Bukele, he couldn't care less about. In other words, actually, I think he used the poor perception that exists, already that is established outside El Salvador as a result of his persecution of gangs in El Salvador—he used that kind of criticism as a way to improve his support domestically. In other words, when the New York Times published a whole report about massive abuses committed by Bukele's criminal system, in the prison system in El Salvador, what Bukele does is to take that one, that criticism, as actually ammunition to project himself as a tough guy who is actually, you know, doing the right thing for El Salvador. It's a question of time. It's a question of time. All of this is very sad for El Salvador, one of the few democracies in Central America with some future, I think, because I think they managed after the war to create institutions that are—that were much more credible than in the neighboring countries, like Guatemala, Honduras, and I'm not going to even mention Nicaragua. But under the control of this strongman, everything is possible today in El Salvador. He will be able to govern El Salvador this way as long as he's popular. Unfortunately, the Biden administration has relaxed its attention and pressure on that government, based on the question of migration. So they are hostage by the cooperation of Bukele government to try or attempt to control illegal immigration into the U.S. So that point trumps or, I mean, supersedes everything else. And that is actually very unfortunate. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next two questions, written questions. One is on the subject that you wanted, from Brittney Thomas, who is an undergraduate at Arizona State University: How come the governments of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua are socialist or communist while other Latin America countries are predominantly democracies? And then from Roger— VIVANCO: I'm sorry, I couldn't understand the question. Obviously, it's about Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, but? FASKIANOS: Why are they socialist or communist while other Latin American countries are predominantly democracies? VIVANCO: Oh, I see. OK. FASKIANOS: Yeah. And then the next question is from Roger Rose, who is an associate professor of political science at University of Minnesota, Morris: Given the recent decline in the norms of U.S. democracy in the last seven years, does the U.S. have any credibility and influence in the region in promoting democracy? And, again, if you could comment specifically on nations with the least democratic systems—Venezuela, Nicaragua—how could the U.S. play a more constructive role than it is currently? VIVANCO: The U.S. is always a very important player, very, very important. I mean, it's the largest economy in the world and the influence of the U.S. government in Latin America is huge. However, obviously, I have to acknowledge that our domestic problems here and serious challenges to the fundamentals of the rule of law, and just the notion that we respect the system according to which one who wins the election is—you know, has the legitimacy and the mandate to form a new government. If that notion is in question, and there are millions of American citizens who are willing to challenge that premise, obviously undermines the capacity of the U.S. to exercise leadership on this—in this context. And the autocrats and the autocracies in the region—I'm not referring to the dictatorships, but I'm referring to the Andrés Manuel López Obrador, once again, from Mexico, or Bolsonaro in Brazil—they take those kinds of developments in the U.S. as green lights to do whatever they want at local level. So that is a serious—obviously, it's a serious problem. And what is going on here has ramifications not only in the region, but also in the rest of the world. Now, Cuba is a historical problem. It's going to be too long to address the question in terms of why Cuba is a dictatorship and the rest of the region. Part of the problem with Cuba is that you have a government that violates the most fundamental rights and persecutes everyone who challenges the official line. And most of the Cubans today are willing to leave the country and to go into exile. But the problem is that we don't have the right tool, the right instrument in place, to exercise pressure on Cuba. And the right instrument today is the embargo. And that embargo, that policy is a total failure. The Cuban government is the same, exactly the same dictatorship. There has been no progress. And there's going to be no progress, in my view, as long as the U.S. government insist on a policy of isolation. You should be aware that every year 99 percentage of the states in the world condemned the isolation against Cuba, with the exception and the opposition of the U.S. government, Israel, and in the past was the Marshall Islands. Now, I don't think even the Marshall Islands joined the U.S. government defending that policy. So the policy is incredibly unpopular. And the debate at international level is about the U.S. government policy on Cuba and not about the deplorable human rights record of Cuba. That's why I was actually very supportive of the change of policy attempted during the Obama administration. Unfortunately, the isolation policy depends on Congress. And since the times of Clinton, this is a matter of who is the one in control of Congress. And the policy of isolation, it once again makes Cuba a victim of Washington. And Cuba, by the way, is not isolated from the rest of the world. So the U.S. is incredibly, I would say, powerless with regard to the lack of democracy and human rights in Cuba. And at the time, offers a fantastic justification for the Cuban government to present itself as a victim. I think that is the—this is one of the most serious mistakes of the U.S. foreign policy in Latin America that I hope that one day will be—will be addressed effectively. The case of Nicaragua and Venezuela is different, in the sense that we are looking into countries that—Venezuela in particular—have democracy for—a very questionable democracy, very weak, subject of tremendous corruption, and so on and so forth. But they have a system of political parties, free media, and so on, for many, many years. And they end up electing a populist leader whose marching orders and, you know, actually first majors was to establish some effective control of the judiciary. And the Supreme Court became an appendage of the government many, many, many years ago, which means that they managed during the Chavez administration to run the country with some sort of facade of democracy. Today, under Maduro it's no a longer a façade, it's a clear dictatorship responsible for atrocities. Fortunately, it is under investigation by the ICC. And the case of Nicaragua is an extreme case, similar to Venezuela. And it's—it's a dictator who has managed to put in prison everyone who is not in full alliance with the government, including religious leaders, and academics, and opposition leaders, civil society, et cetera. The case of Nicaragua is more complicated because Nicaragua is subject of sanctions by the U.S. government, and the European Union, and Canada, and some governments in the region. But still, we don't see much progress there. FASKIANOS: Great. I'm going to go next to Nassar Nassar, who has a raised hand. You can unmute yourself and state your affiliation. Q: Yes. Hello. FASKIANOS: Great. Thank you. Q: Hi. My name is Nassar Nassar. I'm from Lewis University. So my question is, which are the most significant actors in the global governance of human trafficking? And how effective are they in tackling that? VIVANCO: Well, this is a matter that is usually—the main actors—so this is organized crime. This is organized crime. This is a question regarding—this is a—it's a huge business, and extremely profitable. And if you want to address these kinds of issues, you need regional cooperation, which is very challenging. Keep in mind that at a local level, in many of the most democratic countries in the region, you have tremendous tensions among the local police and different police. For instance, the local FBI—equivalent to an FBI, is usually in tension with other branches of law enforcement. And if you expect to have cooperation from the rest of the countries in the region, it's extremely challenging. So these type of issues require effective cooperation, adjustment on legislation. Require more better intelligence. The reason why you have this type—proliferation of this type of business is because, obviously, corruption and lack of accountability. So this is—my point is that it is a reflection of how weak is our law enforcement system, and how unprofessional, and subject many times of corruption. FASKIANOS: Just to follow up on that, a written question from Patricia Drown, who's at Regent University. How are the cartels and mafia being armed, and by whom? VIVANCO: Well, in the case of, for instance, Mexico, weapons comes from the U.S. Sometimes even legally. You know, the Second Amendment plays a role here. It's so easy to have access to weapons, all kind of weapons, in the U.S. So that helps. And a lack of actually an effective control mechanism to stop that type of traffic. The amount of money that cartels moved in countries like Mexico, but Colombia as well, and this mafia scene in Central America is significant. So they do have capacity to corrupt local enforcement officials that belongs to the police, the army, even the judiciary. And as long as you don't address the root cause of the problem, which is the lack of presence of the state—in other words, there are vast—as you know, there are regions of Colombia that are not under the control of the government, the territories in Colombia. And there are regions of Mexico that, unfortunately, are increasingly under more effective control of cartels than law enforcement and legitimate officials. So that unfortunately, is the—in my view, one of the reasons why it is relatively easy to witness this type of proliferation of illegal business. FASKIANOS: Fantastic. I think we are out of time. We have so many written questions and raised hands. Maybe I'll just try to sneak in one more from Andrea Cuervo Prados. You have your hand raised. I think you also wrote a question. So if you can be brief and tell us who you are. Q: OK. Hello. I'm adjunct faculty at Dickinson State University. And, Mr. Vivanco, I have a question related to Colombia. What do you think about the state of the human rights in Colombia under the new leftist president, Gustavo Petro, compared to the previous president, Ivan Duque? VIVANCO: Andrea, I think it's pretty much the same. When we witness actually an improvement of human rights conditions in Colombia, it was during the negotiations with the FARC. I'm referring to the administration of President Juan Manuel Santos. And with the signature of the peace agreement, when they signed the peace agreement, the numbers shows a serious decline in the cases of, for instance, internally displaced people, torture cases, executions, abductions, and many other of those typical abuses that are committed in Colombia in rural areas where this organized crime and irregular armed groups are historically present. But then the policies implemented during the Duque administration were actually not very effective. There was a sort of relaxation during that period, and not effective implementation of those commitments negotiated with the FARC. That had an implication in terms of abuses. And today I don't see a major shift. My sense is that the local communities are subject of similar abuses, including human rights activists as well as social leaders, in areas where there is a very weak presence of the state. FASKIANOS: Thank you very much. José Miguel Vivanco. We really appreciate your being with us today. And I apologize. Great questions. I'm sorry, we couldn't get to all of the written ones or raised hands. It's clear we will have to do this—focus in on this again and have you back. You can follow José Miguel on X at @VivancoJM. And the next Academic Webinar will be on Wednesday, November 29, at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Shibley Telhami, who's a professor at the University of Maryland, will lead a conversation on public opinion on Israel and Palestine. And in the meantime, I encourage you to learn about CFR paid internships for students and fellowships for professors at CFR.org/careers. You can follow us at @CFR_Academic. And visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. Again, José Miguel, thank you very much for today, and to all of you for joining us. VIVANCO: Thanks a lot. FASKIANOS: Take care. (END)

José Miguel Vivanco, adjunct senior fellow for human rights at CFR and former executive director of the Americas division at Human Rights Watch, leads the conversation on human rights in Latin America. FASKIANOS: Welcome to today's session of the Fall 2023 CFR Academic Webinar Series. I'm Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach here at CFR. Today's discussion is on the record. The video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org, if you would like to share them with your colleagues or classmates. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We are delighted to have José Miguel Vivanco with us to discuss human rights in Latin America. Mr. Vivanco is an adjunct senior fellow for human rights at CFR and partner at Dentons Global Advisors. He formerly served as the executive director of the Americas Division at Human Rights Watch, where he supervised fact-finding research for numerous reports on gross violations of human rights and advocated strengthening international legal standards and domestic compliance throughout the region. He is the founder of the Center for Justice and International Law, an international civil society organization providing legal and technical assistance with the Inter-American Human Rights System. So, José Miguel, thank you very much for being with us today. I thought you could begin by giving us an overview of what you see as the most important human rights challenges and advances in Latin America today. VIVANCO: Well, thank you very much for this invitation. It is a pleasure to be with you all and to talk for an hour about human rights problems, human rights issues in Latin America. Let me first make a couple of points. First, I think it's very important that, in retrospect, if you look at Latin America in the 1960s, 1970s, and even 1980s, it was a region that was pretty much run by military dictatorships. So if you look at historically, the region is not in such a bad shape. I know that this comment is quite controversial and many experts who follow the region closely might disagree with that statement, but objectively speaking I think we need to recognize that most of the region is run today—with the exception, obviously, of Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua—by democracies, weak democracies, the kind of democracies that we have in Latin America are facing very serious challenges and with endemic problems such as corruption, abuse of power, lack of transparency, lack of proper accountability, and so on and so forth. But in general terms, this is a region that has a chance to conduct some self-correction. In other words, electoral democracy is a very, very important value in the region, and the citizens—most of the people are able to either reward or punish the incumbent government at the times of elections. That is not a minor detail. It is extremely important, especially if you take into account that during the last twenty years in Latin America, if I'm not wrong, the vast majority of the governments elected were from the opposition. The statistics, I think, show that in eighteen of the twenty last presidential elections, the winner has been the party of the opposition; which means that even though our democracies in Latin America are dysfunctional, weak, messy, slow, you know, short-term-oriented, obviously, but at least citizens take their rights seriously and they exercise their powers so that is why you see a regular zigzag or, you know, transfer of power from a left-wing government to a right-wing government or vice versa. And that is, again, something that is, obviously, a very, very important tool of self-correction. And that, obviously, includes or has an impact in terms of the human rights record of those countries. You know, I'm not—I'm not addressing yet—I will leave it for the Q&A section—conditions in those three dictatorships in Latin America. Let me just make some few more remarks about one of the biggest challenges that I see in the region. And that is, obviously, the rise of autocracy or autocratic leaders, populist leaders, leaders who are not interested or as a matter of fact are very hostile to the concept of rule of law and the concept of independence of the judiciary. And they usually are very charismatic. They have high level of popular support. And they run and govern the country in a style that is like a permanent campaign, where they normally go against minorities and against the opposition, against the free media, against judges and prosecutors who dare to investigate them or investigate the government. Anyone who challenges them are subject of this type of reaction. And that is, unfortunately, something that we have seen in Mexico recently and until today, and in Brazil, especially during the administration of President Bolsonaro. The good news about, in the case of Brazil, is that, thanks to electoral democracy, it was possible to defeat him and—democratically. And the second very important piece of information is that even though Brazil is not a model of rule of law and separation of power, we have to acknowledge that, thanks to the checks-and-balance exercise by the Supreme Court of Brazil, it was possible to do some permanent, constant damage control against the most outrageous initiatives promoted by the administration of President Bolsonaro. That, I think, is one of the biggest challenges in the region. Let me conclude my—make crystal clear that there are serious human rights problems in Latin America today regarding, for instance, abuse of power, police brutality, prison problems. Prisons are really, in most of the countries in the region, a disaster. And you know, a big number of prisoners are awaiting trial, in detention and unable to really exercise their rights. And unfortunately, populist leaders use the prison system or essentially criminal law, by expanding the practice and enlarging the numbers of crimes that could be subject of pretrial detention, and—you know, regardless of the time that it will take for that case to be prosecuted in full respect for the rule—due process, and so on and so forth. And that—the reason is very simple. There is a real demand in Latin America for policies that will address insecurity, citizen security. If you look at statistics in terms of crime rate, it is going up in most of the country. Obviously, there are big difference between countries like Mexico, for instance, or Colombia, and if you link—if you look at the power of cartels and big mafias, and gangs in other countries, or petty crime impacting the daily life of the citizens. Regardless of that point, one of the biggest demands in Latin America is for better and more public security. And that's why political leaders, usually the solution for that request and demand is to put people in prison with essentially no real due process and increase the number of prisoners without conviction. There are challenges for free speech occasionally, of those leaders who resent scrutiny of their practice. And normally there is a campaign against free media. And there are some attempts in some countries to constantly look for ways to undermine the independence of the judiciary. Keep in mind, for instance, that now in Argentina the whole Supreme Court is under impeachment, and it's essentially an impeachment promoted by the current government because they disagree with the rulings, positions of the Supreme Court. All the justices on the Supreme Court are subject of this political trial conducted by the Argentine Congress. That is a concrete example of the kinds of risks that are present for judges and the judiciary in general, when they exercise their power and they attempt to protect the integrity of the constitution. So let me stop here and we can move on to the most interesting part of this event. FASKIANOS: Well, that was quite interesting. So, thank you, José Miguel. We appreciate it. We going to go to all of you now for your questions. (Gives queuing instructions.) We already have some hands up. We will go first to Karla Soto Valdes. Q: My name is Karla Soto. I'm from Lewis University. My question is, what specific measures could be implemented to address and/or prevent trafficking within the asylum-seeking community during their journey to the U.S.? VIVANCO: Irina, are we going to take several questions, or? FASKIANOS: I think we should do one at a time. VIVANCO: Well, Karla, there are multiple tools to address that specific issue. But this applies to essentially most of the human rights problems all over the world. The menu is pretty ample, but depends on one important factor—whether the government involved cares about its own reputation. That is a very important premise here, because if you we are dealing with a democratic government, once again, it's not—when I refer to a democratic government, I don't have in mind a sort of Jeffersonian model, I'm referring to the kind of democracies that we have in Latin America. But, if the leaders in charge are—you know, they care about their own reputation, they care about domestic debate, very important, because these types of revelations usually have ramifications at the local level. If they pay close attention to those issues, I think it's possible to apply, essentially, the technique of naming and shaming. In other words, collecting information, documenting what exactly is happening, and revealing that information to the public, locally and internationally. That is going to create naturally a reaction, a process, an awareness, and local pressure is—hopefully, it's not just twenty-four hours news, so splash—big splash, but also will trigger some dynamics. If we are dealing with a country that is run by a dictatorship, it is a very, very different question, because normally you're facing a leader, a government, who couldn't care less about its own reputation. They have taken already and assume the cost of doing business in that type of context. Now, sometimes conditions are kind of mixed, where you have democratic country in general—so there is still free media, there is an opposition, there is Congress, there are elections. But the government in charge is so—is run by an autocratic leader. That makes, you know, quite—a little more challenging to just document and reveal that information. And you need to think about some particular agenda, governmental agenda. Some specific interests of the government in different areas. Let me see—let me give you an example. Let's say that the Bolsonaro administration is seriously interested in an incorporation into the OECD in Paris. That is an important piece of information. Whatever you think that is relevant information regarding the record of that government, you could provide information to an entity that is precisely evaluating the record of the government. And the government will be much more willing to address those issues because they have a genuine interest in achieving some specific goal at the international level. FASKIANOS: Fantastic. We're going to go to Nicole Ambar De Santos, who is an undergraduate student at the Washington University in St. Louis: When we consider weak democracy in a more personal sense, like Peru, the controversy of obligation to help these nations arises. How much third party or other nations, such as the United States, intervene? VIVANCO: Tricky question. Peruvian democracy is quite messy. Part of the problem is that the system, the political system, needs some real reform to avoid the proliferation of small political parties and to create the real link or relationship between leaders, especially in Congress, and their constituencies, and so they are much more accountable to their community, the ones who elected them. I don't think the U.S., or any other government, has a direct role to play in that area. My sense is that when we are looking into a dysfunctional democracy that deserve some probably even constitutional reforms, that is essentially a domestic job. That is the work that needs to be done by Peruvians. Without a local consensus about the reforms that need to be implemented in the political system, my sense is that it's going to be very difficult for the U.S. or any other large democracy, to address those kinds of points. It's very different, that type of conversation, from a conversation or an assessment of universal values, such as human rights. When we are looking into cases of police brutality, for instance, the international community has a role to play. But if I were part of the conversation or evaluation by the U.S. government or the European Union with regard to this dysfunctional democracy in Peru, I would approach very carefully by suggesting creating the right type of incentives, more than questions of punishment, or sanctions. It's incentives for them to create the right conditions to address the domestic problem that is—has become quite endemic, in the case of Peru. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next question from Matthew. Matthew, you don't have a last name, so can you identify yourself? Q: Hello. Yes, my name is Matthew. I am a junior student from Arizona State University studying business, but working on a thesis that has to do with human rights and the ethics of supply chain management. My question is, you were talking at the very beginning kind of just about history and how understanding history is important. And what I was hoping to get was, why is understanding history and culture important when working to address human rights issues, history of dictatorship, colonialism? In cultures it's socially acceptable things, like child labor, in some countries, that's not acceptable in Western ideology. So, yeah, just how is history and culture important when working to address human rights for the future? VIVANCO: Matthew, I think you're referring to two different issues. History is central. It's really, really relevant. Because that helps you—if you—if you follow your history, especially periods of time when massive and gross violations were committed in Latin America, it's important to put things in context and value what you have today. And the job is to—not only to preserve democracy, but also to look for ways to strengthen democracy. Because part of the problem is that domestic debate is so polarized today, not just in Latin America, all over the world, that sometimes people—different, you know, segments of society—in their positions, they're so dismissive of the other side, that they don't realize that we need to frame our debate in a constructive way. Let me put it—one specific example. If the government of Argentina, who is a government very receptive and very sensitive to vast and gross violations of human rights committed during the military dictatorship, so in other words, I don't need to lecture that government on that subject. They are actually the people who vote for the current government of Argentina—not the new government, the current government of Argentina—is deeply committed to those kinds of issues. I think that one of the biggest lessons that you should learn from the past is the relevance of protecting the independence of the judiciary. If you don't have an independent judiciary, and the judiciary becomes an entity that is an appendix of the ruling party or is intimidated by politics, and they could be subject of impeachment procedures every time that they rule something, that the powerful—the establishment disagree, I think they're playing with fire, and they're not really paying attention to the lessons that you learn from recent history in Latin America. That would be my first comment regarding that type of issue. And the second one, about you mentioned specifically cultural problems, culture, tensions or conflicts. And you mentioned—your example was child labor. And, and you suggested that that—the combination of child labor is something typical of Western ideology. If I'm not wrong, that was the language that you used. I would—I would push back on that point. And because this is not just a Western or European commitment. This is a universal one. And this is reflected on international treaties, and that are supposed to eradicate that kind of practice. If you give up to the concept of local traditions, you know, cultural, you know, issues that you need to pay attention, sure, as long as they are not to be in conflict with fundamental human rights. Otherwise, in half of the planet you're not going to have women rights, and women will be subject of traditional control. And you wouldn't have rights for minorities, and especially—and not only, but especially—the LGBTQ community. And you wouldn't have rights for racial minorities, or different religious beliefs. So, we have to watch and be very careful about what type of concessions we make to cultural traditions. I am happy to understand that different communities in Latin America might have different traditions, but there is some firm, solid, and unquestionable minimum that are the these universal human rights values that are not the property or monopoly of anyone. You know, these are—and this is not an ethical conversation. This is a legal one, because these values are protected under international law. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to combine or take two questions. The first question is from Lindsay Bert, who is at the department of political science at Muhlenberg College, who asks if you could speak on the efficacy of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in addressing the human rights violations you described. And the second question is from Leonard Onyebuchi Ophoke, a graduate student at Cavendish University in Uganda: Why is it almost impossible to hold the actors that violate human rights accountable? What could be done to make the mechanism more enforceable? VIVANCO: The inter-American system of human rights protection, there is nothing similar to inter-American system of human rights protection in the Global South. You don't have something similar in Asia, or Africa, or the Middle East. In other words, you don't have a mechanism where ultimately a court, a court of law—not just a commission, a court of law—handle individual cases, specific complaints of human rights abuses, and governments participate in public hearings. The parties involved have the obligation to present evidence before the court, and the court finally ruled on the specific matters where its decisions are binding. The number of issues that have been addressed by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the last thirty years in Latin America are really incredible. And the impact—this is most important point—the impact at a local level is remarkable. In the area, for instance, of torture, disappearances. I'm referring to the elaboration of concepts and the imposing the obligation of local governments to adjust their legislation and practice, and to address specific problems or issues by providing remedies to victims. That is quite unusual. And the court has remarkable rulings on free speech, on discrimination issues, on indigenous populations, on military jurisdiction. One of the typical recourse of governments in the region when security forces were involved in human rights atrocities was to invoke military jurisdiction. So they say, no worries, we are going to investigate our own crimes. And the court has been actually very, very firm, challenging that notion to the point that I don't think there is a single case in Latin America today—once again, with the exception of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, that I hope that somebody will ask me a question about those three countries—and I don't think there is a single case where today security forces try to—or attempt to shield themselves from investigation invoking military jurisdiction. And the credit is to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. I can elaborate, and give you—provide you with a long list of examples of areas where the court has been actually really, really critical in advancing human rights in the region. Let me give you actually one last example that I think is very—is very illustrative, very revealing. In Chile, something like probably twenty years ago or fifteen years ago, full democracy. Full democracy. No Chile under Pinochet. The Supreme Court of Chile ruled that a mother who was openly lesbian did not qualify for the custody of her children because she was lesbian. And she had a couple. So that was sufficient grounds to rule in favor of the father, because the mother didn't have the moral grounds to educate her own kids, children. And this was decided by the Supreme Court of Chile. Not just a small first instance tribunal. And I will point out that the vast majority of the—I mean, the public in Chile was pretty much divided, but I'm pretty sure that the majority of Chileans thought that the Supreme Court was right, you know? The case went to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. And fortunately, after a few years, the court not only challenged that decision of the Supreme Court, forced Chile to change its legislation, and to change the ruling of the Supreme Court of Chile, which is supposed to be the last judgment in the country. And the impact of that one, not only in Chile, in the rest of the region, because it shapes the common wisdom, the assumptions of many people. It helps for them to think carefully about this kind of issues. And the good news is that that mother was able to have the custody of her kids. And not only that, the impact in Chilean society and in the rest of the region was remarkable. Now, the second question that was asked was about how difficult it is to establish accountability for human rights abuses against the perpetrators of those abuses. I mean, it's a real challenge. It depends on whether or not you have locally an independent judiciary. If you do have an independent judiciary, the process is slow, it's messy, it's complicated. But there is a chance that atrocities could be addressed. And that is— especially human rights atrocities or abuses committed during the military dictatorship. There are countries in the region, like for instance, Chile, Peru, Argentina, Uruguay, where there are people in prison for those type of atrocities. In Brazil, thanks to an amnesty law that was passed in 1978, real investigation and prosecution of those atrocities actually never happened. And an important lesson that you could bear in mind is that Brazilian military are very dismissive of these type of issues, of human rights issues. But not only that, my sense is that Brazilian military officers at very high level are not afraid of stepping into politics, and give their opinion, and challenge the government. In other words, they were actually very, very active, and I'm referring to top officials in the Brazilian Army, during the Bolsonaro administration. There were top leaders who actually publicly argued that if they have to organize a coup again in Brazil, they are ready. That kind of language you don't find in Argentina, in Chile, in other countries where there have been some accountability. For one simple reason, the top military officers running the show are very much aware that if they get involved in politics, that they are part tomorrow of a coup d'état or something like that, at the end of the day they will be responsible. And they might be subject of criminal prosecution for atrocities committed during that period. And so there is a price to pay. So their calculation is much more, shall we say, prudent regarding this issue. But again, once again, how difficult it is? It's very difficult to establish accountability, and much more difficult when you're dealing with dictatorship, where you need to rely on the work done by, for instance, the ICC, the International Criminal Court, which is pretty active in the case of Venezuela. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next question from Fordham. Q: Good afternoon, Mr. Vivanco. My name is Carlos Ortiz de la Pena Gomez Urguiza, and I have a question for you. El Salvador is currently battling crime and gangs with strategies such as mano dura, which have shown a significant decrease in crime at the cost of violating human rights. Do you see a possible effective integration of such policies in high-crime-rate countries, such as Mexico, to stop the growth of narco and crime gang activity? And if so, how? VIVANCO: Well, look, yeah, Carlos, very good question. Bukele in El Salvador is a real, real challenge. It's really, really a complicated case, for several reasons. He's incredibly popular. No question about it. He has managed to—thanks to that popularity—to concentrate power in his own hands. He fully controls Congress. But, much more relevant, he fully controls the judiciary, including the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court today is subordinated to the executive branch. And he is constantly going after the civil society, and free media, and the opposition. Now, in violation of the Salvadorean constitution, he's going to run for reelection. And he will be reelected, because he's also very popular. And his policies to go after gangs are cruel, inhuman, and without—not even a facade of respect for due process. Essentially, the policy which is not sustainable and is—I don't think is something that you could export to other countries—is a policy—unless you have full control, unless you have some sort of dictatorship or quasi dictatorship. Which is based, in essence, in the appearance, in the number of tattoos that people, especially in the marginal communities in the periferia in El Salvador, where shanty towns are located. The police has a, you know, green light to arrest anyone who fit that profile. And then good luck, because it's going to be very, very difficult for that person to avoid something like several months in prison. The whole point of having an independent judiciary and due process is that law enforcement agencies have the—obviously, not only the right, the duty to prevent crimes and to punish criminals. Not physically punish them. You know, it's to arrest them, to detain them, and to use proportional force to produce that attention. But they need to follow certain rules. They cannot just go around and arrest anyone who they have some sort of gut feelings that they are involved in crimes, because then you don't—you're not—the whole system is not able to distinguish and to make a distinction between potential criminals and innocent people. But it is complicated, the case of Bukele, because, for instance, I was referring initially to the technique of naming and shaming as a technique, as a methodology to expose governments with deplorable human rights record. But in the case of Bukele, he couldn't care less about. In other words, actually, I think he used the poor perception that exists, already that is established outside El Salvador as a result of his persecution of gangs in El Salvador—he used that kind of criticism as a way to improve his support domestically. In other words, when the New York Times published a whole report about massive abuses committed by Bukele's criminal system, in the prison system in El Salvador, what Bukele does is to take that one, that criticism, as actually ammunition to project himself as a tough guy who is actually, you know, doing the right thing for El Salvador. It's a question of time. It's a question of time. All of this is very sad for El Salvador, one of the few democracies in Central America with some future, I think, because I think they managed after the war to create institutions that are—that were much more credible than in the neighboring countries, like Guatemala, Honduras, and I'm not going to even mention Nicaragua. But under the control of this strongman, everything is possible today in El Salvador. He will be able to govern El Salvador this way as long as he's popular. Unfortunately, the Biden administration has relaxed its attention and pressure on that government, based on the question of migration. So they are hostage by the cooperation of Bukele government to try or attempt to control illegal immigration into the U.S. So that point trumps or, I mean, supersedes everything else. And that is actually very unfortunate. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next two questions, written questions. One is on the subject that you wanted, from Brittney Thomas, who is an undergraduate at Arizona State University: How come the governments of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua are socialist or communist while other Latin America countries are predominantly democracies? And then from Roger— VIVANCO: I'm sorry, I couldn't understand the question. Obviously, it's about Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, but? FASKIANOS: Why are they socialist or communist while other Latin American countries are predominantly democracies? VIVANCO: Oh, I see. OK. FASKIANOS: Yeah. And then the next question is from Roger Rose, who is an associate professor of political science at University of Minnesota, Morris: Given the recent decline in the norms of U.S. democracy in the last seven years, does the U.S. have any credibility and influence in the region in promoting democracy? And, again, if you could comment specifically on nations with the least democratic systems—Venezuela, Nicaragua—how could the U.S. play a more constructive role than it is currently? VIVANCO: The U.S. is always a very important player, very, very important. I mean, it's the largest economy in the world and the influence of the U.S. government in Latin America is huge. However, obviously, I have to acknowledge that our domestic problems here and serious challenges to the fundamentals of the rule of law, and just the notion that we respect the system according to which one who wins the election is—you know, has the legitimacy and the mandate to form a new government. If that notion is in question, and there are millions of American citizens who are willing to challenge that premise, obviously undermines the capacity of the U.S. to exercise leadership on this—in this context. And the autocrats and the autocracies in the region—I'm not referring to the dictatorships, but I'm referring to the Andrés Manuel López Obrador, once again, from Mexico, or Bolsonaro in Brazil—they take those kinds of developments in the U.S. as green lights to do whatever they want at local level. So that is a serious—obviously, it's a serious problem. And what is going on here has ramifications not only in the region, but also in the rest of the world. Now, Cuba is a historical problem. It's going to be too long to address the question in terms of why Cuba is a dictatorship and the rest of the region. Part of the problem with Cuba is that you have a government that violates the most fundamental rights and persecutes everyone who challenges the official line. And most of the Cubans today are willing to leave the country and to go into exile. But the problem is that we don't have the right tool, the right instrument in place, to exercise pressure on Cuba. And the right instrument today is the embargo. And that embargo, that policy is a total failure. The Cuban government is the same, exactly the same dictatorship. There has been no progress. And there's going to be no progress, in my view, as long as the U.S. government insist on a policy of isolation. You should be aware that every year 99 percentage of the states in the world condemned the isolation against Cuba, with the exception and the opposition of the U.S. government, Israel, and in the past was the Marshall Islands. Now, I don't think even the Marshall Islands joined the U.S. government defending that policy. So the policy is incredibly unpopular. And the debate at international level is about the U.S. government policy on Cuba and not about the deplorable human rights record of Cuba. That's why I was actually very supportive of the change of policy attempted during the Obama administration. Unfortunately, the isolation policy depends on Congress. And since the times of Clinton, this is a matter of who is the one in control of Congress. And the policy of isolation, it once again makes Cuba a victim of Washington. And Cuba, by the way, is not isolated from the rest of the world. So the U.S. is incredibly, I would say, powerless with regard to the lack of democracy and human rights in Cuba. And at the time, offers a fantastic justification for the Cuban government to present itself as a victim. I think that is the—this is one of the most serious mistakes of the U.S. foreign policy in Latin America that I hope that one day will be—will be addressed effectively. The case of Nicaragua and Venezuela is different, in the sense that we are looking into countries that—Venezuela in particular—have democracy for—a very questionable democracy, very weak, subject of tremendous corruption, and so on and so forth. But they have a system of political parties, free media, and so on, for many, many years. And they end up electing a populist leader whose marching orders and, you know, actually first majors was to establish some effective control of the judiciary. And the Supreme Court became an appendage of the government many, many, many years ago, which means that they managed during the Chavez administration to run the country with some sort of facade of democracy. Today, under Maduro it's no a longer a façade, it's a clear dictatorship responsible for atrocities. Fortunately, it is under investigation by the ICC. And the case of Nicaragua is an extreme case, similar to Venezuela. And it's—it's a dictator who has managed to put in prison everyone who is not in full alliance with the government, including religious leaders, and academics, and opposition leaders, civil society, et cetera. The case of Nicaragua is more complicated because Nicaragua is subject of sanctions by the U.S. government, and the European Union, and Canada, and some governments in the region. But still, we don't see much progress there. FASKIANOS: Great. I'm going to go next to Nassar Nassar, who has a raised hand. You can unmute yourself and state your affiliation. Q: Yes. Hello. FASKIANOS: Great. Thank you. Q: Hi. My name is Nassar Nassar. I'm from Lewis University. So my question is, which are the most significant actors in the global governance of human trafficking? And how effective are they in tackling that? VIVANCO: Well, this is a matter that is usually—the main actors—so this is organized crime. This is organized crime. This is a question regarding—this is a—it's a huge business, and extremely profitable. And if you want to address these kinds of issues, you need regional cooperation, which is very challenging. Keep in mind that at a local level, in many of the most democratic countries in the region, you have tremendous tensions among the local police and different police. For instance, the local FBI—equivalent to an FBI, is usually in tension with other branches of law enforcement. And if you expect to have cooperation from the rest of the countries in the region, it's extremely challenging. So these type of issues require effective cooperation, adjustment on legislation. Require more better intelligence. The reason why you have this type—proliferation of this type of business is because, obviously, corruption and lack of accountability. So this is—my point is that it is a reflection of how weak is our law enforcement system, and how unprofessional, and subject many times of corruption. FASKIANOS: Just to follow up on that, a written question from Patricia Drown, who's at Regent University. How are the cartels and mafia being armed, and by whom? VIVANCO: Well, in the case of, for instance, Mexico, weapons comes from the U.S. Sometimes even legally. You know, the Second Amendment plays a role here. It's so easy to have access to weapons, all kind of weapons, in the U.S. So that helps. And a lack of actually an effective control mechanism to stop that type of traffic. The amount of money that cartels moved in countries like Mexico, but Colombia as well, and this mafia scene in Central America is significant. So they do have capacity to corrupt local enforcement officials that belongs to the police, the army, even the judiciary. And as long as you don't address the root cause of the problem, which is the lack of presence of the state—in other words, there are vast—as you know, there are regions of Colombia that are not under the control of the government, the territories in Colombia. And there are regions of Mexico that, unfortunately, are increasingly under more effective control of cartels than law enforcement and legitimate officials. So that unfortunately, is the—in my view, one of the reasons why it is relatively easy to witness this type of proliferation of illegal business. FASKIANOS: Fantastic. I think we are out of time. We have so many written questions and raised hands. Maybe I'll just try to sneak in one more from Andrea Cuervo Prados. You have your hand raised. I think you also wrote a question. So if you can be brief and tell us who you are. Q: OK. Hello. I'm adjunct faculty at Dickinson State University. And, Mr. Vivanco, I have a question related to Colombia. What do you think about the state of the human rights in Colombia under the new leftist president, Gustavo Petro, compared to the previous president, Ivan Duque? VIVANCO: Andrea, I think it's pretty much the same. When we witness actually an improvement of human rights conditions in Colombia, it was during the negotiations with the FARC. I'm referring to the administration of President Juan Manuel Santos. And with the signature of the peace agreement, when they signed the peace agreement, the numbers shows a serious decline in the cases of, for instance, internally displaced people, torture cases, executions, abductions, and many other of those typical abuses that are committed in Colombia in rural areas where this organized crime and irregular armed groups are historically present. But then the policies implemented during the Duque administration were actually not very effective. There was a sort of relaxation during that period, and not effective implementation of those commitments negotiated with the FARC. That had an implication in terms of abuses. And today I don't see a major shift. My sense is that the local communities are subject of similar abuses, including human rights activists as well as social leaders, in areas where there is a very weak presence of the state. FASKIANOS: Thank you very much. José Miguel Vivanco. We really appreciate your being with us today. And I apologize. Great questions. I'm sorry, we couldn't get to all of the written ones or raised hands. It's clear we will have to do this—focus in on this again and have you back. You can follow José Miguel on X at @VivancoJM. And the next Academic Webinar will be on Wednesday, November 29, at 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Shibley Telhami, who's a professor at the University of Maryland, will lead a conversation on public opinion on Israel and Palestine. And in the meantime, I encourage you to learn about CFR paid internships for students and fellowships for professors at CFR.org/careers. You can follow us at @CFR_Academic. And visit CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. Again, José Miguel, thank you very much for today, and to all of you for joining us. VIVANCO: Thanks a lot. FASKIANOS: Take care. (END)

In 2003, an oil company entered the indigenous Sarayaku community's territory in the Ecuadorian Amazon in search of oil. Neither the government nor the firm had consulted the community beforehand. The locals responded by filing a lawsuit against the company. The ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights would go onto become an important case for indigenous communities all over the world. Former Sarayaku president Jose Gualing and community leader Ena Santi recall the landmark case. A Munck Studios production for BBC World Service presented by Isak Rautio. (Photo: Ecuadorian rainforest. Credit: Fabio Cuttica/Reuters)

In Episode 44, Shayan Ahmed Khan is joined by Viren Mascarenhas to have an in-depth discussion on the Advisory Opinion on Climate Change and International Law pending before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The discussion also touches upon the pending advisory opinions before the International Court of Justice and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Sources: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/issues/environment/srenvironment/activities/AmicusBrief-SRsto-ITLOS_May302023.pdf https://www.itlos.org/en/main/cases/list-of-cases/request-for-an-advisory-opinion-submitted-by-the-commission-of-small-island-states-on-climate-change-and-international-law-request-for-advisory-opinion-submitted-to-the-tribunal/

The famed Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Parade returns to Oxford Street on its 45th anniversary to celebrate World Pride 2023, and we meet the people in the colorful throng (with correspondent Barry McKay). And in NewsWrap: Panama's Supreme Court overrules the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to reject marriage equality, Japan's Prime Minister Fumio Kishida says marriage inequality isn't unjust discrimination, Chinese students slapped with disciplinary action for distributing Pride flags file a lawsuit, Mississippi and Tennessee join the wave of U.S. states denying gender-affirming care to trans children and the latter bans drag shows, mixed martial arts fighters promise to protect a West Virginia drag brunch after threats cause its cancelation, and more international LGBTQ news reported this week by Ava Davis and Michael LeBeau (produced by Brian DeShazor).  All this on the March 6, 2023 edition of This Way Out! Join our family of listener-donors today at http://thiswayout.org/donate/

Lecture summary: It is alleged that the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) embodied the victory of Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice's preference to interpret treaties based on the “ordinary meaning of the words” over Sir Hersh Lauterpacht's view that one instead should seek to ascertain the treaty parties' “actual intentions.” But is that so? If, as VCLT Article 31(1) provides, the focus is to be on “the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose,” and if that “ordinary meaning” is not, as per Article 32, “ambiguous,” “obscure,” “manifestly absurd or unreasonable,” then why should resort to “Supplementary Means of Interpretation” be appropriate at all “in order to confirm the meaning resulting from the application of article 31”? If, as many believe, the VCLT is hierarchical, shouldn't interpretation be complete when an “ordinary meaning” is established that is “unambiguous,” not “obscure,” and “neither manifestly absurd or unreasonable”? Did those preferring to determine the treaty parties “actual intentions” in fact sneak into the VLCT's text that provision for supplementary “confirmation” of a clear “ordinary meaning”? Is to that extent the VCLT in fact, as is said of treaties generally, “an agreement to disagree”? In reality, given the sequential submissions in international arbitrations, as well as before international courts and tribunals, each party, beginning with the Applicant's or Claimant's Memorial, followed by Respondent's Counter-Memorial, the Reply Memorial etc., from the start places before the adjudicator all of its arguments under Section 3. of the VCLT (Articles 31-33).The fact that Article 31's “General Rule Of Interpretation” and Article 32's “Supplementary Means Of Interpretation” are presented to the adjudicator as a unit, and not seriatim, has resulted in some arbitral tribunals not treating those two articles of the VCLT as being hierarchical, and instead applying what has become known as the “crucible approach,” i.e., stirring the two in the pot of deliberations as though they were a regulatory potpourri rather than distinct rules, the later to be applied only if the first did not produce an unchallengable “ordinary meaning.” Thus separate approaches to the VCLT have arisen that have raised the question posed by former ICJ President Schwebel: “May Preparatory Work Be Used to Correct Rather Than Confirm the ‘Clear' Meaning of a Treaty Provision?”Judge Charles N Brower's career has been divided between private law practice, first with White & Case LLP in New York City and Washington, D.C., since 2001 as an Arbitrator Member of Twenty Essex Chambers in London, and public service, first with the Office of The Legal Adviser of the U.S. Department of State (1969-73)(successively as Assistant Legal Adviser for European Affairs, Deputy Legal Adviser and Acting Legal Adviser), as Judge of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal (1983-present), as sub-Cabinet rank Deputy Special Counsellor to the President of the United States dealing with the Iran-Contra affair (1987), as Judge ad hoc of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (1999-2002)(appointed by Bolivia), and the most -appointed of the only five Americans ever to be appointed Judge ad hoc of the International Court of Justice (2014-2022) (appointed by Colombia (1 case) and the United States (2 cases)).Judge Brower's book: 'Judging Iran: A Memoir of The Hague, The White House, and Life on the Front Line of International Justice' is available now to pre-order and will be released on 11 April 2023.

Lecture summary: It is alleged that the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) embodied the victory of Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice’s preference to interpret treaties based on the “ordinary meaning of the words” over Sir Hersh Lauterpacht’s view that one instead should seek to ascertain the treaty parties’ “actual intentions.” But is that so? If, as VCLT Article 31(1) provides, the focus is to be on “the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms of the treaty in their context and in the light of its object and purpose,” and if that “ordinary meaning” is not, as per Article 32, “ambiguous,” “obscure,” “manifestly absurd or unreasonable,” then why should resort to “Supplementary Means of Interpretation” be appropriate at all “in order to confirm the meaning resulting from the application of article 31”? If, as many believe, the VCLT is hierarchical, shouldn’t interpretation be complete when an “ordinary meaning” is established that is “unambiguous,” not “obscure,” and “neither manifestly absurd or unreasonable”? Did those preferring to determine the treaty parties “actual intentions” in fact sneak into the VLCT’s text that provision for supplementary “confirmation” of a clear “ordinary meaning”? Is to that extent the VCLT in fact, as is said of treaties generally, “an agreement to disagree”? In reality, given the sequential submissions in international arbitrations, as well as before international courts and tribunals, each party, beginning with the Applicant’s or Claimant’s Memorial, followed by Respondent’s Counter-Memorial, the Reply Memorial etc., from the start places before the adjudicator all of its arguments under Section 3. of the VCLT (Articles 31-33). The fact that Article 31’s “General Rule Of Interpretation” and Article 32’s “Supplementary Means Of Interpretation” are presented to the adjudicator as a unit, and not seriatim, has resulted in some arbitral tribunals not treating those two articles of the VCLT as being hierarchical, and instead applying what has become known as the “crucible approach,” i.e., stirring the two in the pot of deliberations as though they were a regulatory potpourri rather than distinct rules, the later to be applied only if the first did not produce an unchallengable “ordinary meaning.” Thus separate approaches to the VCLT have arisen that have raised the question posed by former ICJ President Schwebel: “May Preparatory Work Be Used to Correct Rather Than Confirm the ‘Clear’ Meaning of a Treaty Provision?” Judge Charles N Brower’s career has been divided between private law practice, first with White & Case LLP in New York City and Washington, D.C., since 2001 as an Arbitrator Member of Twenty Essex Chambers in London, and public service, first with the Office of The Legal Adviser of the U.S. Department of State (1969-73)(successively as Assistant Legal Adviser for European Affairs, Deputy Legal Adviser and Acting Legal Adviser), as Judge of the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal (1983-present), as sub-Cabinet rank Deputy Special Counsellor to the President of the United States dealing with the Iran-Contra affair (1987), as Judge ad hoc of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (1999-2002)(appointed by Bolivia), and the most -appointed of the only five Americans ever to be appointed Judge ad hoc of the International Court of Justice (2014-2022) (appointed by Colombia (1 case) and the United States (2 cases)). Judge Brower's book: 'Judging Iran: A Memoir of The Hague, The White House, and Life on the Front Line of International Justice' is available now to pre-order and will be released on 11 April 2023.

Lawless elements are ascendant in Mexico, as evidenced by the operations of criminal cartels engaged in human and drug trafficking, often with the active support or acquiescence of government actors. The sharp increase in the number of victims of homicide, disappearances and torture over the past decade is unparalleled in the country's recent history. According to editors Alejandro Anaya-Muñoz and Barbara Frey, the war on drugs launched in 2006 by President Felipe Calderón and the corrupting influence criminal organizations have on public institutions have empowered both state and nonstate actors to operate with impunity. Impunity, they argue, is the root cause that has enabled a human-rights crisis to flourish, creating a climate of generalized violence that is carried out, condoned, or ignored by the state and precluding any hope for justice. Mexico's Human Rights Crisis (U Pennsylvania Press, 2019) offers a broad survey of the current human rights issues that plague Mexico. Essays focus on the human rights consequences that flow directly from the ongoing war on drugs in the country, including violence aimed specifically at women, and the impunity that characterizes the government's activities. Contributors address the violation of the human rights of migrants, in both Mexico and the United States, and cover the domestic and transnational elements and processes that shape the current human rights crisis, from the state of Mexico's democracy to the influence of rulings by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the decisions of Mexico's National Supreme Court of Justice. Given the scope, the contemporaneity, and the gravity of Mexico's human rights crisis, the recommendations made in the book by the editors and contributors to curb the violence could not be more urgent. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Lawless elements are ascendant in Mexico, as evidenced by the operations of criminal cartels engaged in human and drug trafficking, often with the active support or acquiescence of government actors. The sharp increase in the number of victims of homicide, disappearances and torture over the past decade is unparalleled in the country's recent history. According to editors Alejandro Anaya-Muñoz and Barbara Frey, the war on drugs launched in 2006 by President Felipe Calderón and the corrupting influence criminal organizations have on public institutions have empowered both state and nonstate actors to operate with impunity. Impunity, they argue, is the root cause that has enabled a human-rights crisis to flourish, creating a climate of generalized violence that is carried out, condoned, or ignored by the state and precluding any hope for justice. Mexico's Human Rights Crisis (U Pennsylvania Press, 2019) offers a broad survey of the current human rights issues that plague Mexico. Essays focus on the human rights consequences that flow directly from the ongoing war on drugs in the country, including violence aimed specifically at women, and the impunity that characterizes the government's activities. Contributors address the violation of the human rights of migrants, in both Mexico and the United States, and cover the domestic and transnational elements and processes that shape the current human rights crisis, from the state of Mexico's democracy to the influence of rulings by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the decisions of Mexico's National Supreme Court of Justice. Given the scope, the contemporaneity, and the gravity of Mexico's human rights crisis, the recommendations made in the book by the editors and contributors to curb the violence could not be more urgent. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/latin-american-studies

Lawless elements are ascendant in Mexico, as evidenced by the operations of criminal cartels engaged in human and drug trafficking, often with the active support or acquiescence of government actors. The sharp increase in the number of victims of homicide, disappearances and torture over the past decade is unparalleled in the country's recent history. According to editors Alejandro Anaya-Muñoz and Barbara Frey, the war on drugs launched in 2006 by President Felipe Calderón and the corrupting influence criminal organizations have on public institutions have empowered both state and nonstate actors to operate with impunity. Impunity, they argue, is the root cause that has enabled a human-rights crisis to flourish, creating a climate of generalized violence that is carried out, condoned, or ignored by the state and precluding any hope for justice. Mexico's Human Rights Crisis (U Pennsylvania Press, 2019) offers a broad survey of the current human rights issues that plague Mexico. Essays focus on the human rights consequences that flow directly from the ongoing war on drugs in the country, including violence aimed specifically at women, and the impunity that characterizes the government's activities. Contributors address the violation of the human rights of migrants, in both Mexico and the United States, and cover the domestic and transnational elements and processes that shape the current human rights crisis, from the state of Mexico's democracy to the influence of rulings by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the decisions of Mexico's National Supreme Court of Justice. Given the scope, the contemporaneity, and the gravity of Mexico's human rights crisis, the recommendations made in the book by the editors and contributors to curb the violence could not be more urgent. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Lawless elements are ascendant in Mexico, as evidenced by the operations of criminal cartels engaged in human and drug trafficking, often with the active support or acquiescence of government actors. The sharp increase in the number of victims of homicide, disappearances and torture over the past decade is unparalleled in the country's recent history. According to editors Alejandro Anaya-Muñoz and Barbara Frey, the war on drugs launched in 2006 by President Felipe Calderón and the corrupting influence criminal organizations have on public institutions have empowered both state and nonstate actors to operate with impunity. Impunity, they argue, is the root cause that has enabled a human-rights crisis to flourish, creating a climate of generalized violence that is carried out, condoned, or ignored by the state and precluding any hope for justice. Mexico's Human Rights Crisis (U Pennsylvania Press, 2019) offers a broad survey of the current human rights issues that plague Mexico. Essays focus on the human rights consequences that flow directly from the ongoing war on drugs in the country, including violence aimed specifically at women, and the impunity that characterizes the government's activities. Contributors address the violation of the human rights of migrants, in both Mexico and the United States, and cover the domestic and transnational elements and processes that shape the current human rights crisis, from the state of Mexico's democracy to the influence of rulings by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the decisions of Mexico's National Supreme Court of Justice. Given the scope, the contemporaneity, and the gravity of Mexico's human rights crisis, the recommendations made in the book by the editors and contributors to curb the violence could not be more urgent. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

Lawless elements are ascendant in Mexico, as evidenced by the operations of criminal cartels engaged in human and drug trafficking, often with the active support or acquiescence of government actors. The sharp increase in the number of victims of homicide, disappearances and torture over the past decade is unparalleled in the country's recent history. According to editors Alejandro Anaya-Muñoz and Barbara Frey, the war on drugs launched in 2006 by President Felipe Calderón and the corrupting influence criminal organizations have on public institutions have empowered both state and nonstate actors to operate with impunity. Impunity, they argue, is the root cause that has enabled a human-rights crisis to flourish, creating a climate of generalized violence that is carried out, condoned, or ignored by the state and precluding any hope for justice. Mexico's Human Rights Crisis (U Pennsylvania Press, 2019) offers a broad survey of the current human rights issues that plague Mexico. Essays focus on the human rights consequences that flow directly from the ongoing war on drugs in the country, including violence aimed specifically at women, and the impunity that characterizes the government's activities. Contributors address the violation of the human rights of migrants, in both Mexico and the United States, and cover the domestic and transnational elements and processes that shape the current human rights crisis, from the state of Mexico's democracy to the influence of rulings by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the decisions of Mexico's National Supreme Court of Justice. Given the scope, the contemporaneity, and the gravity of Mexico's human rights crisis, the recommendations made in the book by the editors and contributors to curb the violence could not be more urgent. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/drugs-addiction-and-recovery

Lawless elements are ascendant in Mexico, as evidenced by the operations of criminal cartels engaged in human and drug trafficking, often with the active support or acquiescence of government actors. The sharp increase in the number of victims of homicide, disappearances and torture over the past decade is unparalleled in the country's recent history. According to editors Alejandro Anaya-Muñoz and Barbara Frey, the war on drugs launched in 2006 by President Felipe Calderón and the corrupting influence criminal organizations have on public institutions have empowered both state and nonstate actors to operate with impunity. Impunity, they argue, is the root cause that has enabled a human-rights crisis to flourish, creating a climate of generalized violence that is carried out, condoned, or ignored by the state and precluding any hope for justice. Mexico's Human Rights Crisis (U Pennsylvania Press, 2019) offers a broad survey of the current human rights issues that plague Mexico. Essays focus on the human rights consequences that flow directly from the ongoing war on drugs in the country, including violence aimed specifically at women, and the impunity that characterizes the government's activities. Contributors address the violation of the human rights of migrants, in both Mexico and the United States, and cover the domestic and transnational elements and processes that shape the current human rights crisis, from the state of Mexico's democracy to the influence of rulings by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the decisions of Mexico's National Supreme Court of Justice. Given the scope, the contemporaneity, and the gravity of Mexico's human rights crisis, the recommendations made in the book by the editors and contributors to curb the violence could not be more urgent. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Lawless elements are ascendant in Mexico, as evidenced by the operations of criminal cartels engaged in human and drug trafficking, often with the active support or acquiescence of government actors. The sharp increase in the number of victims of homicide, disappearances and torture over the past decade is unparalleled in the country's recent history. According to editors Alejandro Anaya-Muñoz and Barbara Frey, the war on drugs launched in 2006 by President Felipe Calderón and the corrupting influence criminal organizations have on public institutions have empowered both state and nonstate actors to operate with impunity. Impunity, they argue, is the root cause that has enabled a human-rights crisis to flourish, creating a climate of generalized violence that is carried out, condoned, or ignored by the state and precluding any hope for justice. Mexico's Human Rights Crisis (U Pennsylvania Press, 2019) offers a broad survey of the current human rights issues that plague Mexico. Essays focus on the human rights consequences that flow directly from the ongoing war on drugs in the country, including violence aimed specifically at women, and the impunity that characterizes the government's activities. Contributors address the violation of the human rights of migrants, in both Mexico and the United States, and cover the domestic and transnational elements and processes that shape the current human rights crisis, from the state of Mexico's democracy to the influence of rulings by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the decisions of Mexico's National Supreme Court of Justice. Given the scope, the contemporaneity, and the gravity of Mexico's human rights crisis, the recommendations made in the book by the editors and contributors to curb the violence could not be more urgent. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Lawless elements are ascendant in Mexico, as evidenced by the operations of criminal cartels engaged in human and drug trafficking, often with the active support or acquiescence of government actors. The sharp increase in the number of victims of homicide, disappearances and torture over the past decade is unparalleled in the country's recent history. According to editors Alejandro Anaya-Muñoz and Barbara Frey, the war on drugs launched in 2006 by President Felipe Calderón and the corrupting influence criminal organizations have on public institutions have empowered both state and nonstate actors to operate with impunity. Impunity, they argue, is the root cause that has enabled a human-rights crisis to flourish, creating a climate of generalized violence that is carried out, condoned, or ignored by the state and precluding any hope for justice. Mexico's Human Rights Crisis (U Pennsylvania Press, 2019) offers a broad survey of the current human rights issues that plague Mexico. Essays focus on the human rights consequences that flow directly from the ongoing war on drugs in the country, including violence aimed specifically at women, and the impunity that characterizes the government's activities. Contributors address the violation of the human rights of migrants, in both Mexico and the United States, and cover the domestic and transnational elements and processes that shape the current human rights crisis, from the state of Mexico's democracy to the influence of rulings by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the decisions of Mexico's National Supreme Court of Justice. Given the scope, the contemporaneity, and the gravity of Mexico's human rights crisis, the recommendations made in the book by the editors and contributors to curb the violence could not be more urgent. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Laura is a Legal Officer at Privacy International, where leads the work on privacy and reproductive rights. Laura contributed to Privacy International's 2020 report on data exploitation and reproductive rights, and currently supports research, advocacy and litigation efforts to hold Big Tech and governments accountable for unlawful interferences with privacy.Prior to joining PI, Laura was a Litigation Fellow at the Open Society Justice Initiative, where she supported claimant-side human rights litigation globally. Previously, Laura was a Visiting Professional at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.@lauralazc @privacyint

Maricé Morales's parents are immigrants from Peru. She lived in Peru from age 12 to 17, when she returned to the United States to attend college. She graduated from George Mason University with a bachelor's degree in Global Affairs and French and a master's degree in public policy. She received a juris doctorate from the University of Maryland School of Law and received a public service award from the law school. During this time, she was involved in legal work extended from the Public Defender's Office in New Orleans, LA to San Jose, Costa Rica at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. From canvassing neighborhoods to encouraging jury participation in Louisiana, to contributing to the international legal framework around discrimination and excessive force against Afro-descendants. Still, while in law school, Morales competed in the National Latina/o Law Student Association's sixth annual moot court competition. In 2014, she was elected to the Maryland House of Delegates, as the first Latina to represent District 19 in Montgomery County, MD. Maricé received the Governor's Award for her work combating Human Trafficking and was recognized in 2019 as one of the top 100 Most Influential Latina Leaders in the D.C., Maryland, and Virginia metropolitan area. Maricé currently practices law in the greater Washington, D.C. area, in her Law Office focusing on immigration, criminal defense, and personal injury law. She currently serves on the Montgomery College Board of Trustees, and the boards for the Jewish Council on Aging and Emerge Maryland. Mentioned in the episode: LatinoUSA episode: Foreigner at Birth - Haitians and birthright citizenship in the Dominican Republic Book recommendation: Brown is the New White by Steve Phillips Connect with Maricé Website: https://www.maricemorales.com/event IG: @morales4moco Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/morales4moco LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/maric%C3%A9-morales-6b43242a Ways to support the podcast: Give us a review on Apple Podcast Become a Listener Supporter, see link in bio Visit our Online Store and help us change the narrative with our t-shirt: “El Mejor Amigo de un Peruano es otro peruano.” Also available in feminine (“peruana”) and gender-neutral (“peruanx”) versions Follow Peruvians of USA Podcast on IG: @peruviansofusa Like our page on Facebook! --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/peruviansofusa/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/peruviansofusa/support

Das neue Jahr beginnt für viele mit guten Vorsätzen. Was das mit (regionalen) Menschenrechtsverträgen zu tun hat, erklärt Isabel im Grundlagenteil. Dabei geht sie auf die Rolle des Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (EGMR) und seine Bedeutung für den Menschenrechtsschutz in Europa ein. Erik hat mit Dr. Ximena Soley über ein anderes regionales Menschenrechtsgericht gesprochen: Den Inter-Amerikanischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (IAGMR) und dessen Einbettung in die Organisation Amerikanischer Staaten (OAS). Außerdem gibt es gute Nachrichten, über die wir uns sehr freuen: Der Völkerrechtspodcast hat den zweiten Platz in der Kategorie „Sonstige Podcasts“ im Wettbewerb von JURios gewonnen! Vielen Dank für die zahlreiche Unterstützung! Wir freuen uns über Lob, Anmerkungen und Kritik an podcast@voelkerrechtsblog.org.Abonniert unseren Podcast via RSS, über Spotify oder überall dort, wo es Podcasts gibt. Hintergrundinformationen: Keller & Kühne, Zur Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit des Europäischen Gerichtshofs für Menschenrechte Soley & Steininger, Parting ways or lashing back? Withdrawals, backlash and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights Steininger, With or Without You: Suspension, Expulsion, and the Limits of Membership Sanctions in Regional Human Rights Regimes weitere Informationen auf dem Völkerrechtsblog Moderation: Erik Tuchtfeld & Isabel Lischewski Grundlagen: Isabel Lischewski Interview: Dr. Ximena Soley & Erik Tuchtfeld Schnitt: Daniela Rau Credits: Heiko Maas, Bundestag: Aktuelle Stunde zu den jüngsten Entwicklungen in Russland, 10. Februar 2021 (gefunden über OpenParliament.TV)

Lecture summary: In a series of recent decisions related to same-sex relationships, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has stated that the American Convention on Human Rights does not advance a singular notion or closed conception of family. A 2017 Advisory Opinion from the Inter-American Court also concluded that the American Convention demands that same sex couples have equal access to de jure marriage. This lecture considers what is to be gained from more broadly contending with the question, ‘what is a family’ in the Americas’ regional human rights system. Even though the inter-American system now clearly rejects ‘a limited, stereotyped perception of the concept of the family’, it has only infrequently considered the question, ‘what is a family?’, across the diversity of the Americas. That question matters not only to determining the scope of various rights to family life in inter-American instruments. Rethinking the family as a ‘basic element of society’ (American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man), grounded in time, space, human mobility and our political-economic systems, could help us see more fully ‘who’ constitutes the Americas, which is an essential for a human rights system aspiring to be universally applicable across the Americas. Tracy Robinson is a senior lecturer at the Faculty of Law, The University of the West Indies, Mona, and serves as Deputy Dean, Graduate Studies and Research. She researches and writes in the areas of constitutional law, family law, human rights law and gender, sexuality and the law. She is a co-founder and co-coordinator (with Arif Bulkan) of the Faculty of Law UWI Rights Advocacy Project (U-RAP) that led successful strategic litigation in Belize and Guyana on the criminalization of LGBTQ persons. She served on the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights as a Commissioner, President of the body (2014-2015), Rapporteur on the Rights of Women and inaugural Rapporteur on the Rights of LGBTI people. In 2020, she was appointed as one of three experts on the Independent Fact Finding Mission on Libya, a mandate established by the UN Human Rights Council.

Lecture summary: In a series of recent decisions related to same-sex relationships, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has stated that the American Convention on Human Rights does not advance a singular notion or closed conception of family. A 2017 Advisory Opinion from the Inter-American Court also concluded that the American Convention demands that same sex couples have equal access to de jure marriage. This lecture considers what is to be gained from more broadly contending with the question, ‘what is a family’ in the Americas’ regional human rights system. Even though the inter-American system now clearly rejects ‘a limited, stereotyped perception of the concept of the family’, it has only infrequently considered the question, ‘what is a family?’, across the diversity of the Americas. That question matters not only to determining the scope of various rights to family life in inter-American instruments. Rethinking the family as a ‘basic element of society’ (American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man), grounded in time, space, human mobility and our political-economic systems, could help us see more fully ‘who’ constitutes the Americas, which is an essential for a human rights system aspiring to be universally applicable across the Americas. Tracy Robinson is a senior lecturer at the Faculty of Law, The University of the West Indies, Mona, and serves as Deputy Dean, Graduate Studies and Research. She researches and writes in the areas of constitutional law, family law, human rights law and gender, sexuality and the law. She is a co-founder and co-coordinator (with Arif Bulkan) of the Faculty of Law UWI Rights Advocacy Project (U-RAP) that led successful strategic litigation in Belize and Guyana on the criminalization of LGBTQ persons. She served on the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights as a Commissioner, President of the body (2014-2015), Rapporteur on the Rights of Women and inaugural Rapporteur on the Rights of LGBTI people. In 2020, she was appointed as one of three experts on the Independent Fact Finding Mission on Libya, a mandate established by the UN Human Rights Council.

Octavio Amezcua Noriega is a Human Rights officer with the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Mexico City, where he is in charge of the torture and criminal justice agenda. In previous roles, he worked at the Federal Government in Mexico in the design of public policies for the assistance and reparation of victims of human rights violations and as legal director of the Comisión Mexicana de Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos (CMDPDH) in Mexico, where he worked on strategic litigation on human rights. In our interview, we discuss the value and timing of undertaking a Masters degree, crafting a ‘human rights' CV and top tips for breaking into the UN. Octavio also shares details of his day-to-day life as a Human Rights Officer at the UN and his career highlights litigating cases before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. We also talk about the importance of self-care for human rights professionals.

The Cambridge Pro Bono Project (CPP) was delighted to welcome Pablo Gonzalez, Lawyer at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to speak on the topic 'Pro Bono Work at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights' on 9 March 2021.For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk/

The Cambridge Pro Bono Project (CPP) was delighted to welcome Pablo Gonzalez, Lawyer at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to speak on the topic 'Pro Bono Work at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights' on 9 March 2021.For more information about the Cambridge Pro Bono Project, see https://www.cpp.law.cam.ac.uk/

In this episode, Dr Eve Massingham talks with Dr Cordula Droege about some of the challenges new technologies pose to international humanitarian law. They discuss nuclear weapons, autonomous weapons systems, cyber operations, and the importance of carrying out weapon reviews. They also consider some of the uses of technology for humanitarian purposes, including the rewards and risks of using biometric data.Dr Cordula Droege is the chief legal officer and head of the legal division of the ICRC, where she leads the ICRC's efforts to uphold, implement and develop international humanitarian law. She joined the ICRC in 2005 and has held a number of positions in the field and at headquarter, including as head of the legal advisers to operations, and most recently as chief of staff to the President of the ICRC. She has some twenty years of experience in the field of international law, and in her earlier career worked for the International Commission of Jurists, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the Max Planck Institute for International Law. She holds a law degree and a PhD from the University of Heidelberg and an LL.M from the London School of Economics.Further reading:The ICRC's page on New Technologies and IHL

Lecture summary: This lecture will explore how the Inter-American Court of Human Rights produces cognitive categories that deeply influence the way in which states, activists and victims understand their own reality, and decide their strategies therein. Moreover, it will discuss how the Inter-American Court triggers the production of domestic knowledge, which in turn influences the Court’s understanding of local reality, and the Court’s role in it. Further information: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-journal-of-internationa... René Urueña is an Associate Professor and Director of Research at the Universidad de Los Andes School of Law (Colombia). He holds a doctoral degree (exima cum laude) from the University of Helsinki, has been several times an expert witness before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and served as an adviser of the Selection Committee of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (Colombia)

Lecture summary: This lecture will explore how the Inter-American Court of Human Rights produces cognitive categories that deeply influence the way in which states, activists and victims understand their own reality, and decide their strategies therein. Moreover, it will discuss how the Inter-American Court triggers the production of domestic knowledge, which in turn influences the Court’s understanding of local reality, and the Court’s role in it. Further information: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-journal-of-internationa... René Urueña is an Associate Professor and Director of Research at the Universidad de Los Andes School of Law (Colombia). He holds a doctoral degree (exima cum laude) from the University of Helsinki, has been several times an expert witness before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and served as an adviser of the Selection Committee of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (Colombia)

Award-winning journalist Jineth Bedoya has survived multiple violent attacks during her efforts to get at the truth. In 2009 Jineth broke her silence and became a leading advocate for survivors of sexual violence in Colombia. Jineth tells us about her involvement in the historic peace agreement signed in Colombia in 2016 and how it is impacting women activists today. She also updates us on the case against her perpetrators, which last year was elevated to the Inter-American Court on Human Rights. It is the first time the court will hear a case about a woman journalist in armed conflict. Jineth is the winner of the World Press Freedom Prize (2020) and the Courage in Journalism Award (2001). You can follow her at @jbedoyalima.Season two of Seeking Peace is produced by Georgetown University's Institute for Women, Peace and Security and Adonde Media, in collaboration with Our Secure Future. Find all of our episodes and transcripts at SeekingPeacePodcast.com. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

What is “unborn human life” and what kind of court cases, not only in the US but abroad, illuminate the matter from the standpoint of the many fields in which the term is employed: law, bioethics, and philosophy among others? These questions are addressed by a distinguished group of scholars in the 2019 book, Unborn Human Life and Fundamental Rights: Leading Constitutional Cases Under Scrutiny (Peter Lang, 2019) In this fascinating collection of case studies from countries such as Argentina, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Italy, Poland and Spain as well as the United States we learn that abortion is not always the catalyst for landmark constitutional cases in many lands. So are such concerns as the moral questions raised by in vitro fertilization and the morning-after pill. Not only does the book provide a look into the workings and worldviews of various constitutional courts and legal systems in many countries, it also shows how activists on both sides of the issue of unborn human life (and there are those who take issue with the term itself) draw on or oppose rulings and/or proclamations over the past decades of such international legal bodies as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the European Court on Human Rights to make their cases. Anyone interested in real-world, high-profile applications of international law generally and human rights laws specifically should read this book. Those interested in the many legal and philosophical arguments about when life begins and who is deemed worthy of the dignity of life and endowed with rights should read this book. Anyone interested in reproductive health law globally should, too. The book includes a powerful concluding essay by a giant of natural law thinking, John Finnis, that addresses the many moral and jurisprudential issues discussed by the contributors to this important book. In this interview, one of the editors of the book, William L. Saunders, will discuss how this panoply of judges and legislators wrestled with thorny issues that ranged from embryology and the latest in reproductive technology and the ethical and practical issues surrounding it (such as what is to be done with the surplus embryos now in a cruel limbo in labs the world over) to what Finnis refers to as “fundamental civility and humanity.” Give a listen. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What is “unborn human life” and what kind of court cases, not only in the US but abroad, illuminate the matter from the standpoint of the many fields in which the term is employed: law, bioethics, and philosophy among others? These questions are addressed by a distinguished group of scholars in the 2019 book, Unborn Human Life and Fundamental Rights: Leading Constitutional Cases Under Scrutiny (Peter Lang, 2019) In this fascinating collection of case studies from countries such as Argentina, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Italy, Poland and Spain as well as the United States we learn that abortion is not always the catalyst for landmark constitutional cases in many lands. So are such concerns as the moral questions raised by in vitro fertilization and the morning-after pill. Not only does the book provide a look into the workings and worldviews of various constitutional courts and legal systems in many countries, it also shows how activists on both sides of the issue of unborn human life (and there are those who take issue with the term itself) draw on or oppose rulings and/or proclamations over the past decades of such international legal bodies as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the European Court on Human Rights to make their cases. Anyone interested in real-world, high-profile applications of international law generally and human rights laws specifically should read this book. Those interested in the many legal and philosophical arguments about when life begins and who is deemed worthy of the dignity of life and endowed with rights should read this book. Anyone interested in reproductive health law globally should, too. The book includes a powerful concluding essay by a giant of natural law thinking, John Finnis, that addresses the many moral and jurisprudential issues discussed by the contributors to this important book. In this interview, one of the editors of the book, William L. Saunders, will discuss how this panoply of judges and legislators wrestled with thorny issues that ranged from embryology and the latest in reproductive technology and the ethical and practical issues surrounding it (such as what is to be done with the surplus embryos now in a cruel limbo in labs the world over) to what Finnis refers to as “fundamental civility and humanity.” Give a listen. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What is “unborn human life” and what kind of court cases, not only in the US but abroad, illuminate the matter from the standpoint of the many fields in which the term is employed: law, bioethics, and philosophy among others? These questions are addressed by a distinguished group of scholars in the 2019 book, Unborn Human Life and Fundamental Rights: Leading Constitutional Cases Under Scrutiny (Peter Lang, 2019) In this fascinating collection of case studies from countries such as Argentina, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Italy, Poland and Spain as well as the United States we learn that abortion is not always the catalyst for landmark constitutional cases in many lands. So are such concerns as the moral questions raised by in vitro fertilization and the morning-after pill. Not only does the book provide a look into the workings and worldviews of various constitutional courts and legal systems in many countries, it also shows how activists on both sides of the issue of unborn human life (and there are those who take issue with the term itself) draw on or oppose rulings and/or proclamations over the past decades of such international legal bodies as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the European Court on Human Rights to make their cases. Anyone interested in real-world, high-profile applications of international law generally and human rights laws specifically should read this book. Those interested in the many legal and philosophical arguments about when life begins and who is deemed worthy of the dignity of life and endowed with rights should read this book. Anyone interested in reproductive health law globally should, too. The book includes a powerful concluding essay by a giant of natural law thinking, John Finnis, that addresses the many moral and jurisprudential issues discussed by the contributors to this important book. In this interview, one of the editors of the book, William L. Saunders, will discuss how this panoply of judges and legislators wrestled with thorny issues that ranged from embryology and the latest in reproductive technology and the ethical and practical issues surrounding it (such as what is to be done with the surplus embryos now in a cruel limbo in labs the world over) to what Finnis refers to as “fundamental civility and humanity.” Give a listen. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We are pleased to introduce the first edition of the REDRESS Podcast, bringing you the latest in our efforts to secure justice for survivors of torture as featured in our monthly newsletter. In this podcast, we set out our concerns for Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Jagtar Singh Johal and their right to medical treatment during the Covid-19 outbreak. We also warn of the implications of the possible pardon and release of the former dictator of Chad Hissène Habré, who is currently serving a life sentence in Senegal, and Sudan's Omar al-Bashir, who is wanted by the ICC for crimes against humanity and genocide committed during his 30-year rule. We also discuss the recent landmark judgement in the case of Azul Rojas Marín, a transgender woman who was beaten and raped by several police officers in Peru in 2008 because of her sexual orientation. In March, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights found Peru responsible for her torture and ordered measures to eradicate systemic discrimination against the LGBT+ community in Peru. This is the first judgement by a human rights court on LGBT+ discriminatory torture, and creates a much-needed precedent for this community in the Americas and beyond. The REDRESS Podcast is also available on our YouTube account. You can subscribe to our newsletter on redress.org/newsletter-signup. REDRESS is grateful to Sarah Khan, who presented and produced this podcast.

An Aussie drag star penetrates the COVID quarantine; the Inter-American Court finds Peru guilty of queer torture, Panamanian trans people fall between COVID-19 quarantine cracks, gay Irish P.M. Leo Varadkar re-joins the medical register to fight the pandemic, more U.S. activists are lost to the virus, lesbian/woman Phyllis Lyon climbs her last “Ladder”, Malaysian condom factories re-open as “essential businesses” during the pandemic lockdowns, Dr. Anthony Fauci praises queer AIDS activists, and more global LGBTQ news!

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听Todd: Katia, we've been talking about law and international law. Now you worked in Argentina for an NGO, a non-government organization, related to law. What kind of courts did you work for or work with?Katia: Actually it's one court. The Inter-American Court but also before bringing a case into the court, we had to work with the Commission, with the Inter-American Commission first so it's two different entities, the Commission and the Court.Todd: Can you first explain the Court, so Inter-American Court that's all the countries in South America?Katia: Actually this is the countries of South America, Central America and North America, so it's North and South America.Todd: So how does the Court work?Katia: Well, the judges are from different countries of Latin American countries and the US for example or Canada and once a case is seen by the Commission, the Inter-American Commission, if the person that is suing wants to continue the sue or the state has not done what it is supposed to do, then it can be taken into the Court and then the Court will decide whether the state has committed or it's in fault or not and will give a sentence.Todd: So does this Court has a lot of power, like for example can other smaller countries or can any country just ignore it, ignore the ruling?Katia: Well yes they can ignore it but it will not be seen very good by other countries. It's not an obligation. You cannot force the country to do something but it's very rare for this to happen. Maybe it takes a long time for a state to pay the victim or to do something regarding the decision but usually, they do obey, most of the time.

更多英语知识，请关注微信公众号: VOA英语每日一听Todd: Katia, we've been talking about law and international law. Now you worked in Argentina for an NGO, a non-government organization, related to law. What kind of courts did you work for or work with?Katia: Actually it's one court. The Inter-American Court but also before bringing a case into the court, we had to work with the Commission, with the Inter-American Commission first so it's two different entities, the Commission and the Court.Todd: Can you first explain the Court, so Inter-American Court that's all the countries in South America?Katia: Actually this is the countries of South America, Central America and North America, so it's North and South America.Todd: So how does the Court work?Katia: Well, the judges are from different countries of Latin American countries and the US for example or Canada and once a case is seen by the Commission, the Inter-American Commission, if the person that is suing wants to continue the sue or the state has not done what it is supposed to do, then it can be taken into the Court and then the Court will decide whether the state has committed or it's in fault or not and will give a sentence.Todd: So does this Court has a lot of power, like for example can other smaller countries or can any country just ignore it, ignore the ruling?Katia: Well yes they can ignore it but it will not be seen very good by other countries. It's not an obligation. You cannot force the country to do something but it's very rare for this to happen. Maybe it takes a long time for a state to pay the victim or to do something regarding the decision but usually, they do obey, most of the time.

Dr. Mikulak is accomplished in several fields. First, she is a concert pianist with an MFA in music performance, with a number of solo piano recordings to her credit. Prior to her Ph.D, Dr. Mikulak created and directed Santa Fe Research, an organization dedicated to the investigation of learning and potential in children, examining ways in which children diagnosed with ‘learning disabilities’ could reach their unique potentials. This work has been cross-culturally informed and supported by private grants and fellowships, with research in Zimbabwe and Mali, Africa on the culture of ‘childhood.’It is her concern with children that eventually moved her from music to anthropology. In the fall of 2002 Dr. Mikulak received her Ph.D. in Cultural Anthropology from the University of New Mexico. Her doctoral research began in Rio de Janeiro in 1998 and was supported by a Tinker Foundation grant, research grants from the Latin American Studies Institute, a Challenge Grant, The Frieda Butler Lectureship Award, and other grants from UNM, a grant from Sigma Xi, the Scientific Research Committee, and the Johann Jacobs Foundation Young Investigator Grant in Switzerland. Her doctoral fieldwork in Minas Gerais, Brazil with street and working children incorporated innovative musical projects that included the design and construction of experimental musical instruments, improvisational techniques, theater, and story telling. She has been a Brazil country specialist with Amnesty International since 2007, and is currently a Brazil consultant for Amnesty International.Dr. Mikulak has extensive research experience in sexual assault and domestic violence. In 2002 she worked with New Mexico Department of Health, Injury Prevention, and Emergency Medical Services Bureau on the first state-wide assessment on violence against women in the state of New Mexico and authored of final qualitative report. She has worked closely with diabetes training programs for Native Americans across the United states, based on traditional Native American healthy life-styles, and teen tobacco use among Hispanic, Mexican American, and Native American youth in Albuquerque, New Mexico for the Center for Disease Control. He long time research with the Xukuru Nation in Pernambuco, Brazil has assisted in achieving a land mark human rights case won in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR), finding the Brazilian government in violation of inter-continental human rights agreements.Dr. Mikulak has several publications, her most recent is her book titled “Childhood Unmasked: The Agency of Brazil’s Street and Working Children published in 2015 with Cognella Academic Publishing. She is currently Professor Emerita of Anthropology at the University of North Dakota in the Department of Anthropology.In this episode, Dr. Mikulak answers these questions and touches upon:Why did she become a linguistic anthropologist?What is a linguistic anthropologist?How does language influence our identity?How do words take on meaning in our culture?Does language have power?How does culture influence the interpretation of words?How gender is a social construct.How the word senior can be a pejorative word in our culture. the word senior repulsive to some but acceptable to others.And so much more...Practical Tips:Rather than the usual mind-body-spirit tip, here are my conclusions from this episode.Words have power because we give it to them. Therefore, we have the agency to change their meaning. We start by noticing what we are saying, how we are processing the power of language in our lives, and how words impact the people around us. That takes empathy.So I would like to have a dialogue with you, about the power of words. Follow the prompts on all of my social media channels, FB, LI, and IG (look for Yogi MD) and let’s chat!Dr. Mikulak’s Work:UND anthropologist/social justice advocate Marcia Mikulak extols recent decision from inter-American court as victory for Brazilian indigenous community, reflects on role in making it happenThe Symbolic Power of Color: Constructions of Race, Skin-Color, and Identity in BrazilColonial Subjugation and Human Rights Abuses: Twenty-First Century Violations Against Brazil’s Rural Indigenous Xukuru NationChildhood Unmasked - Cognella Academic PressUND Professor Seeks Human Rights i Dangerous Corners of the WorldUND Youtube video on learning, music, and anthropologyMusic of Dane Rudhyar

Familia! esperamos esten de lo mejor, aquí les dejamos una pequeña investigación sobre los feminicidios de Ciudad Juárez, en realidad este es uno de esos episodios muy difíciles de hacer, pues la información para lograrlo es muy limitada, intentamos hacer lo mejor que pudimos, sepan que los queremos y que este si fue un caso muy triste para las dos!..NO SE OLVIDEN DE SEGUIRNOS EN NUESTRAS REDES SOCIALES INSTAGRAM @juegodeasesinos_podcastFacebook: juego de asesinos podcast..Fuentes utilizadas para la realización de este episodio:.1. ^ Jump up to: a b c d "Mexico: Justice fails in Ciudad Juárez and the city of Chihuahua". Amnesty International. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 19 March 2012.2. ^ Jump up to: a b Widyono, Monique (2008). "Conceptualizing Femicide" (PDF). Strengthening Understanding of Femicide: Using Research to Galvanize Action and Accountability: 7–25. Retrieved 14 March 2012.3. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Simmons, William (2006). "Remedies for the Women of Ciudad Juárez through the Inter-American Court of Human Rights" (PDF). Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights. 4 (3): 492517. Retrieved 19 March 2012.4. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p Livingston, Jessica (2004). "Murder in Juárez: Gender, Sexual Violence, and the Global Assembly Line". Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies. 25 (1): 59–76. doi:10.1353/fro.2004.0034. JSTOR 3347254.5. ^ Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (April 2002). "Serial Sexual Femicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993-2001" (PDF). Debate Feminista. 25. Retrieved 14 March 2012.6. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t Pantaleo, Katherine (2010). "Gendered Violence: An Analysis of the Maquiladora Murders". International Criminal Justice Review. 20 (4): 349365. doi:10.1177/1057567710380914.7. ^ "Ten years of abductions and murders of women in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua: Developments as of September 2003". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012.8. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Ortega Lozano, Marisela (24 August 2011). "130 women killed in Juárez this year; Chihuahua AG says fight for women's rights painful and slow". El Paso Times. Archived from the original on 22 January 2013. Retrieved 14 March 2012.9. ^ Jump up to: a b "Annual Report: Mexico 2011". Amnesty International. Retrieved 14 March 2012.10. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (2008). "An Analysis of Feminicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993–2007" (PDF). Strengthening Understanding of Femicide: Using Research to Galvanize Action and Accountability: 78–84. Retrieved 14 March 2012.11. ^ Jump up to: a b "Molly Molloy: The Story of the Juarez Femicides is a 'Myth'". The Texas Observer. 2014-01-09. Retrieved 2019-10-18.12. ^ "Molly Molloy - LibGuides at New Mexico State University". nmsu.libguides.com.13. ^ "Juárez murders: Impunity regardless of gender : Grassroots Press". Retrieved 2019-10-18.14. ^ Albuquerque, Pedro H.; Vemala, Prasad (2015-11-09). "Femicide Rates in Mexican Cities along the US-Mexico Border: Do the Maquiladora Industries Play a Role?". Rochester, NY. SSRN 1112308. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)15. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j Olivera, Mercedes (2006). "Violencia Femicida : Violence Against Women and Mexico's Structural Crisis". Latin American Perspectives. 33 (104): 104–114. doi:10.1177/0094582X05286092.16. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (April 2002). "Serial Sexual Femicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993-2001" (PDF). Debate Feminista. 25. Retrieved 14 March 2012.17. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Wright, Melissa M. (2006). "Public Women, Profit, and Femicide in Northern Mexico". South Atlantic Quarterly. 1054 (4): 681–698. doi:10.1215/00382876-2006-003.18. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h Sokhi-Bulley, Bal (2006). "The Optional Protocol to CEDAW: First Steps". Human Rights Law Review. 6 (1): 143–159. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngi029. Retrieved 14 March 2012.19. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e "Mexico - Amnesty International Report 2010". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012.20. ^ Jump up to: a b "Ten years of abductions and murders of women in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua: Developments as of September 2003". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012.21. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m Simmons, William (2006). "Remedies for the Women of Ciudad Juárez through the Inter-American Court of Human Rights" (PDF). Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights. 4 (3): 492517. Retrieved 19 March 2012.22. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Pantaleo, Katie (2006). "Gendered Violence: Murder in the Maquiladoras" (PDF). Sociological Viewpoints. Retrieved 1 April 2012.23. ^ "Matan a la activista que pedía justicia por su hija". Informador.com.mx. Retrieved 31 December 2013.24. ^ "Matahan a activista Marixsela Escobedo". El Universal. digital edition. 16 December 2010. Retrieved 31 December 2013.25. ^ Jump up to: a b c Wright, Melissa W. (December 2002). "A Manifest against Femicide". Antipode. 33 (3): 550–566. doi:10.1111/1467-8330.00198. PMID 19165968.26. ^ Blanco, Lorenzo; Sandra M. Villa (October 2008). "Sources of crime in the state of Veracruz: The role of female labor force participation and wage inequality". Feminist Economics. 14 (3): 51–75. doi:10.1080/13545700802075143.27. ^ Vulliamy, Ed (2014-05-04). "Painted back to life: Brian Maguire's portraits of the victims of Mexico's 'feminocidio'". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2019-10-18.28. ^ "TWIABP: 'January 10, 2014'".29. ^ Alicia Gaspar de Alba (2010-10-15). "Home - Desert Blood: The Juarez Murders". Desert Blood. Retrieved 2012-11-06.30. ^ Rodríguez, Teresa; Montané, Diana; Pulitzer, Lisa (2007). The Daughters of Juárez: A True Story of Serial Murder South of the Border. Atria Books. pp. passim. ISBN 978-0-7432-9203-0.31. https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Daughters_of_Ju%C3%83_rez/2bUAIrwHJjkC?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover32. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/ramona-morales-wears-a-photo-of-her-16-year-old-daughter-news-photo/5157661733. https://rfkhumanrights.org/news/silvia-elena-rivera-morales-et-al-v-mexico-case-summarmusica: Lonesome Journey' by Keys of Moon Music is under a Creative Commons license (CC BY 3.0)Music promoted by BreakingCopyright: https://youtu.be/p5cWMxzzMdAContact links:Keys of Moon Music https://soundcloud.com/keysofmoonBreakingCopyrightTwitter: https://twitter.com/BreakingCopy

Familia! esperamos esten de lo mejor, aquí les dejamos una pequeña investigación sobre los feminicidios de Ciudad Juárez, en realidad este es uno de esos episodios muy difíciles de hacer, pues la información para lograrlo es muy limitada, intentamos hacer lo mejor que pudimos, sepan que los queremos y que este si fue un caso muy triste para las dos!..NO SE OLVIDEN DE SEGUIRNOS EN NUESTRAS REDES SOCIALES INSTAGRAM @juegodeasesinos_podcastFacebook: juego de asesinos podcast..Fuentes utilizadas para la realización de este episodio:.1. ^ Jump up to: a b c d "Mexico: Justice fails in Ciudad Juárez and the city of Chihuahua". Amnesty International. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 19 March 2012.2. ^ Jump up to: a b Widyono, Monique (2008). "Conceptualizing Femicide" (PDF). Strengthening Understanding of Femicide: Using Research to Galvanize Action and Accountability: 7–25. Retrieved 14 March 2012.3. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Simmons, William (2006). "Remedies for the Women of Ciudad Juárez through the Inter-American Court of Human Rights" (PDF). Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights. 4 (3): 492517. Retrieved 19 March 2012.4. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p Livingston, Jessica (2004). "Murder in Juárez: Gender, Sexual Violence, and the Global Assembly Line". Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies. 25 (1): 59–76. doi:10.1353/fro.2004.0034. JSTOR 3347254.5. ^ Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (April 2002). "Serial Sexual Femicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993-2001" (PDF). Debate Feminista. 25. Retrieved 14 March 2012.6. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t Pantaleo, Katherine (2010). "Gendered Violence: An Analysis of the Maquiladora Murders". International Criminal Justice Review. 20 (4): 349365. doi:10.1177/1057567710380914.7. ^ "Ten years of abductions and murders of women in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua: Developments as of September 2003". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012.8. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Ortega Lozano, Marisela (24 August 2011). "130 women killed in Juárez this year; Chihuahua AG says fight for women's rights painful and slow". El Paso Times. Archived from the original on 22 January 2013. Retrieved 14 March 2012.9. ^ Jump up to: a b "Annual Report: Mexico 2011". Amnesty International. Retrieved 14 March 2012.10. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (2008). "An Analysis of Feminicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993–2007" (PDF). Strengthening Understanding of Femicide: Using Research to Galvanize Action and Accountability: 78–84. Retrieved 14 March 2012.11. ^ Jump up to: a b "Molly Molloy: The Story of the Juarez Femicides is a 'Myth'". The Texas Observer. 2014-01-09. Retrieved 2019-10-18.12. ^ "Molly Molloy - LibGuides at New Mexico State University". nmsu.libguides.com.13. ^ "Juárez murders: Impunity regardless of gender : Grassroots Press". Retrieved 2019-10-18.14. ^ Albuquerque, Pedro H.; Vemala, Prasad (2015-11-09). "Femicide Rates in Mexican Cities along the US-Mexico Border: Do the Maquiladora Industries Play a Role?". Rochester, NY. SSRN 1112308. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)15. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j Olivera, Mercedes (2006). "Violencia Femicida : Violence Against Women and Mexico's Structural Crisis". Latin American Perspectives. 33 (104): 104–114. doi:10.1177/0094582X05286092.16. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (April 2002). "Serial Sexual Femicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993-2001" (PDF). Debate Feminista. 25. Retrieved 14 March 2012.17. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Wright, Melissa M. (2006). "Public Women, Profit, and Femicide in Northern Mexico". South Atlantic Quarterly. 1054 (4): 681–698. doi:10.1215/00382876-2006-003.18. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h Sokhi-Bulley, Bal (2006). "The Optional Protocol to CEDAW: First Steps". Human Rights Law Review. 6 (1): 143–159. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngi029. Retrieved 14 March 2012.19. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e "Mexico - Amnesty International Report 2010". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012.20. ^ Jump up to: a b "Ten years of abductions and murders of women in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua: Developments as of September 2003". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012.21. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m Simmons, William (2006). "Remedies for the Women of Ciudad Juárez through the Inter-American Court of Human Rights" (PDF). Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights. 4 (3): 492517. Retrieved 19 March 2012.22. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Pantaleo, Katie (2006). "Gendered Violence: Murder in the Maquiladoras" (PDF). Sociological Viewpoints. Retrieved 1 April 2012.23. ^ "Matan a la activista que pedía justicia por su hija". Informador.com.mx. Retrieved 31 December 2013.24. ^ "Matahan a activista Marixsela Escobedo". El Universal. digital edition. 16 December 2010. Retrieved 31 December 2013.25. ^ Jump up to: a b c Wright, Melissa W. (December 2002). "A Manifest against Femicide". Antipode. 33 (3): 550–566. doi:10.1111/1467-8330.00198. PMID 19165968.26. ^ Blanco, Lorenzo; Sandra M. Villa (October 2008). "Sources of crime in the state of Veracruz: The role of female labor force participation and wage inequality". Feminist Economics. 14 (3): 51–75. doi:10.1080/13545700802075143.27. ^ Vulliamy, Ed (2014-05-04). "Painted back to life: Brian Maguire's portraits of the victims of Mexico's 'feminocidio'". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2019-10-18.28. ^ "TWIABP: 'January 10, 2014'".29. ^ Alicia Gaspar de Alba (2010-10-15). "Home - Desert Blood: The Juarez Murders". Desert Blood. Retrieved 2012-11-06.30. ^ Rodríguez, Teresa; Montané, Diana; Pulitzer, Lisa (2007). The Daughters of Juárez: A True Story of Serial Murder South of the Border. Atria Books. pp. passim. ISBN 978-0-7432-9203-0.31. https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Daughters_of_Ju%C3%83_rez/2bUAIrwHJjkC?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover32. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/ramona-morales-wears-a-photo-of-her-16-year-old-daughter-news-photo/5157661733. https://rfkhumanrights.org/news/silvia-elena-rivera-morales-et-al-v-mexico-case-summarmusica: Lonesome Journey' by Keys of Moon Music is under a Creative Commons license (CC BY 3.0)Music promoted by BreakingCopyright: https://youtu.be/p5cWMxzzMdAContact links:Keys of Moon Music https://soundcloud.com/keysofmoonBreakingCopyrightTwitter: https://twitter.com/BreakingCopy

Familia! esperamos esten de lo mejor, aquí les dejamos una pequeña investigación sobre los feminicidios de Ciudad Juárez, en realidad este es uno de esos episodios muy difíciles de hacer, pues la información para lograrlo es muy limitada, intentamos hacer lo mejor que pudimos, sepan que los queremos y que este si fue un caso muy triste para las dos! . . NO SE OLVIDEN DE SEGUIRNOS EN NUESTRAS REDES SOCIALES INSTAGRAM @juegodeasesinos_podcast Facebook: juego de asesinos podcast . .Fuentes utilizadas para la realización de este episodio: . 1. ^ Jump up to: a b c d "Mexico: Justice fails in Ciudad Juárez and the city of Chihuahua". Amnesty International. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 2. ^ Jump up to: a b Widyono, Monique (2008). "Conceptualizing Femicide" (PDF). Strengthening Understanding of Femicide: Using Research to Galvanize Action and Accountability: 7–25. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 3. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Simmons, William (2006). "Remedies for the Women of Ciudad Juárez through the Inter-American Court of Human Rights" (PDF). Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights. 4 (3): 492517. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 4. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p Livingston, Jessica (2004). "Murder in Juárez: Gender, Sexual Violence, and the Global Assembly Line". Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies. 25 (1): 59–76. doi:10.1353/fro.2004.0034. JSTOR 3347254. 5. ^ Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (April 2002). "Serial Sexual Femicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993-2001" (PDF). Debate Feminista. 25. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 6. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t Pantaleo, Katherine (2010). "Gendered Violence: An Analysis of the Maquiladora Murders". International Criminal Justice Review. 20 (4): 349365. doi:10.1177/1057567710380914. 7. ^ "Ten years of abductions and murders of women in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua: Developments as of September 2003". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 8. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Ortega Lozano, Marisela (24 August 2011). "130 women killed in Juárez this year; Chihuahua AG says fight for women's rights painful and slow". El Paso Times. Archived from the original on 22 January 2013. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 9. ^ Jump up to: a b "Annual Report: Mexico 2011". Amnesty International. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 10. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (2008). "An Analysis of Feminicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993–2007" (PDF). Strengthening Understanding of Femicide: Using Research to Galvanize Action and Accountability: 78–84. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 11. ^ Jump up to: a b "Molly Molloy: The Story of the Juarez Femicides is a 'Myth'". The Texas Observer. 2014-01-09. Retrieved 2019-10-18. 12. ^ "Molly Molloy - LibGuides at New Mexico State University". nmsu.libguides.com. 13. ^ "Juárez murders: Impunity regardless of gender : Grassroots Press". Retrieved 2019-10-18. 14. ^ Albuquerque, Pedro H.; Vemala, Prasad (2015-11-09). "Femicide Rates in Mexican Cities along the US-Mexico Border: Do the Maquiladora Industries Play a Role?". Rochester, NY. SSRN 1112308. Cite journal requires |journal= (help) 15. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j Olivera, Mercedes (2006). "Violencia Femicida : Violence Against Women and Mexico's Structural Crisis". Latin American Perspectives. 33 (104): 104–114. doi:10.1177/0094582X05286092. 16. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (April 2002). "Serial Sexual Femicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993-2001" (PDF). Debate Feminista. 25. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 17. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Wright, Melissa M. (2006). "Public Women, Profit, and Femicide in Northern Mexico". South Atlantic Quarterly. 1054 (4): 681–698. doi:10.1215/00382876-2006-003. 18. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h Sokhi-Bulley, Bal (2006). "The Optional Protocol to CEDAW: First Steps". Human Rights Law Review. 6 (1): 143–159. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngi029. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 19. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e "Mexico - Amnesty International Report 2010". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 20. ^ Jump up to: a b "Ten years of abductions and murders of women in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua: Developments as of September 2003". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 21. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m Simmons, William (2006). "Remedies for the Women of Ciudad Juárez through the Inter-American Court of Human Rights" (PDF). Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights. 4 (3): 492517. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 22. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Pantaleo, Katie (2006). "Gendered Violence: Murder in the Maquiladoras" (PDF). Sociological Viewpoints. Retrieved 1 April 2012. 23. ^ "Matan a la activista que pedía justicia por su hija". Informador.com.mx. Retrieved 31 December 2013. 24. ^ "Matahan a activista Marixsela Escobedo". El Universal. digital edition. 16 December 2010. Retrieved 31 December 2013. 25. ^ Jump up to: a b c Wright, Melissa W. (December 2002). "A Manifest against Femicide". Antipode. 33 (3): 550–566. doi:10.1111/1467-8330.00198. PMID 19165968. 26. ^ Blanco, Lorenzo; Sandra M. Villa (October 2008). "Sources of crime in the state of Veracruz: The role of female labor force participation and wage inequality". Feminist Economics. 14 (3): 51–75. doi:10.1080/13545700802075143. 27. ^ Vulliamy, Ed (2014-05-04). "Painted back to life: Brian Maguire's portraits of the victims of Mexico's 'feminocidio'". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2019-10-18. 28. ^ "TWIABP: 'January 10, 2014'". 29. ^ Alicia Gaspar de Alba (2010-10-15). "Home - Desert Blood: The Juarez Murders". Desert Blood. Retrieved 2012-11-06. 30. ^ Rodríguez, Teresa; Montané, Diana; Pulitzer, Lisa (2007). The Daughters of Juárez: A True Story of Serial Murder South of the Border. Atria Books. pp. passim. ISBN 978-0-7432-9203-0. 31. https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Daughters_of_Ju%C3%83_rez/2bUAIrwHJjkC?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover 32. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/ramona-morales-wears-a-photo-of-her-16-year-old-daughter-news-photo/51576617 33. https://rfkhumanrights.org/news/silvia-elena-rivera-morales-et-al-v-mexico-case-summar musica: Lonesome Journey' by Keys of Moon Music is under a Creative Commons license (CC BY 3.0) Music promoted by BreakingCopyright: https://youtu.be/p5cWMxzzMdA Contact links: Keys of Moon Music https://soundcloud.com/keysofmoon BreakingCopyright Twitter: https://twitter.com/BreakingCopy

Familia! esperamos esten de lo mejor, aquí les dejamos una pequeña investigación sobre los feminicidios de Ciudad Juárez, en realidad este es uno de esos episodios muy difíciles de hacer, pues la información para lograrlo es muy limitada, intentamos hacer lo mejor que pudimos, sepan que los queremos y que este si fue un caso muy triste para las dos! . . NO SE OLVIDEN DE SEGUIRNOS EN NUESTRAS REDES SOCIALES INSTAGRAM @juegodeasesinos_podcast Facebook: juego de asesinos podcast . .Fuentes utilizadas para la realización de este episodio: . 1. ^ Jump up to: a b c d "Mexico: Justice fails in Ciudad Juárez and the city of Chihuahua". Amnesty International. Archived from the original on 3 March 2012. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 2. ^ Jump up to: a b Widyono, Monique (2008). "Conceptualizing Femicide" (PDF). Strengthening Understanding of Femicide: Using Research to Galvanize Action and Accountability: 7–25. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 3. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Simmons, William (2006). "Remedies for the Women of Ciudad Juárez through the Inter-American Court of Human Rights" (PDF). Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights. 4 (3): 492517. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 4. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p Livingston, Jessica (2004). "Murder in Juárez: Gender, Sexual Violence, and the Global Assembly Line". Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies. 25 (1): 59–76. doi:10.1353/fro.2004.0034. JSTOR 3347254. 5. ^ Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (April 2002). "Serial Sexual Femicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993-2001" (PDF). Debate Feminista. 25. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 6. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t Pantaleo, Katherine (2010). "Gendered Violence: An Analysis of the Maquiladora Murders". International Criminal Justice Review. 20 (4): 349365. doi:10.1177/1057567710380914. 7. ^ "Ten years of abductions and murders of women in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua: Developments as of September 2003". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 8. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Ortega Lozano, Marisela (24 August 2011). "130 women killed in Juárez this year; Chihuahua AG says fight for women's rights painful and slow". El Paso Times. Archived from the original on 22 January 2013. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 9. ^ Jump up to: a b "Annual Report: Mexico 2011". Amnesty International. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 10. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (2008). "An Analysis of Feminicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993–2007" (PDF). Strengthening Understanding of Femicide: Using Research to Galvanize Action and Accountability: 78–84. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 11. ^ Jump up to: a b "Molly Molloy: The Story of the Juarez Femicides is a 'Myth'". The Texas Observer. 2014-01-09. Retrieved 2019-10-18. 12. ^ "Molly Molloy - LibGuides at New Mexico State University". nmsu.libguides.com. 13. ^ "Juárez murders: Impunity regardless of gender : Grassroots Press". Retrieved 2019-10-18. 14. ^ Albuquerque, Pedro H.; Vemala, Prasad (2015-11-09). "Femicide Rates in Mexican Cities along the US-Mexico Border: Do the Maquiladora Industries Play a Role?". Rochester, NY. SSRN 1112308. Cite journal requires |journal= (help) 15. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j Olivera, Mercedes (2006). "Violencia Femicida : Violence Against Women and Mexico's Structural Crisis". Latin American Perspectives. 33 (104): 104–114. doi:10.1177/0094582X05286092. 16. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f Monarrez Fragoso, Julia (April 2002). "Serial Sexual Femicide in Ciudad Juárez: 1993-2001" (PDF). Debate Feminista. 25. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 17. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e Wright, Melissa M. (2006). "Public Women, Profit, and Femicide in Northern Mexico". South Atlantic Quarterly. 1054 (4): 681–698. doi:10.1215/00382876-2006-003. 18. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h Sokhi-Bulley, Bal (2006). "The Optional Protocol to CEDAW: First Steps". Human Rights Law Review. 6 (1): 143–159. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngi029. Retrieved 14 March 2012. 19. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e "Mexico - Amnesty International Report 2010". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 20. ^ Jump up to: a b "Ten years of abductions and murders of women in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua: Developments as of September 2003". Amnesty International. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 21. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k l m Simmons, William (2006). "Remedies for the Women of Ciudad Juárez through the Inter-American Court of Human Rights" (PDF). Northwestern Journal of International Human Rights. 4 (3): 492517. Retrieved 19 March 2012. 22. ^ Jump up to: a b c d Pantaleo, Katie (2006). "Gendered Violence: Murder in the Maquiladoras" (PDF). Sociological Viewpoints. Retrieved 1 April 2012. 23. ^ "Matan a la activista que pedía justicia por su hija". Informador.com.mx. Retrieved 31 December 2013. 24. ^ "Matahan a activista Marixsela Escobedo". El Universal. digital edition. 16 December 2010. Retrieved 31 December 2013. 25. ^ Jump up to: a b c Wright, Melissa W. (December 2002). "A Manifest against Femicide". Antipode. 33 (3): 550–566. doi:10.1111/1467-8330.00198. PMID 19165968. 26. ^ Blanco, Lorenzo; Sandra M. Villa (October 2008). "Sources of crime in the state of Veracruz: The role of female labor force participation and wage inequality". Feminist Economics. 14 (3): 51–75. doi:10.1080/13545700802075143. 27. ^ Vulliamy, Ed (2014-05-04). "Painted back to life: Brian Maguire's portraits of the victims of Mexico's 'feminocidio'". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2019-10-18. 28. ^ "TWIABP: 'January 10, 2014'". 29. ^ Alicia Gaspar de Alba (2010-10-15). "Home - Desert Blood: The Juarez Murders". Desert Blood. Retrieved 2012-11-06. 30. ^ Rodríguez, Teresa; Montané, Diana; Pulitzer, Lisa (2007). The Daughters of Juárez: A True Story of Serial Murder South of the Border. Atria Books. pp. passim. ISBN 978-0-7432-9203-0. 31. https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Daughters_of_Ju%C3%83_rez/2bUAIrwHJjkC?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover 32. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/ramona-morales-wears-a-photo-of-her-16-year-old-daughter-news-photo/51576617 33. https://rfkhumanrights.org/news/silvia-elena-rivera-morales-et-al-v-mexico-case-summar musica: Lonesome Journey' by Keys of Moon Music is under a Creative Commons license (CC BY 3.0) Music promoted by BreakingCopyright: https://youtu.be/p5cWMxzzMdA Contact links: Keys of Moon Music https://soundcloud.com/keysofmoon BreakingCopyright Twitter: https://twitter.com/BreakingCopy

Dr. Robert A Williams Jr. (Lumbee Nation), is the E. Thomas Sullivan Professor of Law and Faculty Co-Chair of the University of Arizona Indigenous Peoples Law and Policy Program. Professor Williams received his B.A. from Loyola College (1977) and his J.D. from Harvard Law School (1980). He was named the first Oneida Indian Nation Visiting Professor of Law at Harvard Law School (2003-2004), having previously served there as Bennet Boskey Distinguished Visiting Lecturer of Law. He is the author of The American Indian in Western Legal Thought: The Discourses of Conquest (1990), which received the Gustavus Meyers Human Rights Center Award as one of the outstanding books published in 1990 on the subject of prejudice in the United States. He has also written Linking Arms Together: American Indian Treaty Visions of Law and Peace, 1600-1800 (1997) and Like a Loaded Weapon: The Rehnquist Court, Indian Rights and the Legal History of Racism in America (2005). He is co-author of Federal Indian Law: Cases and Materials (6th ed., with David Getches, Charles Wilkinson, and Matthew Fletcher, 2011). His latest book is Savage Anxieties: The Invention of Western Civilization (Palgrave Macmillan 2012). The 2006 recipient of the University of Arizona Koffler Prize for Outstanding Accomplishments in Public Service, Professor Williams has received major grants and awards from the Soros Senior Justice Fellowship Program of the Open Society Institute, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the American Council of Learned Societies, the U.S. Department of Education, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the National Institute of Justice. He has been interviewed by Bill Moyers and quoted on the front page of the New York Times. He has represented tribal groups and members before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Peoples, the United States Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court of Canada. Professor Williams served as Chief Justice for the Court of Appeals, Pascua Yaqui Indian Reservation, and as Justice for the Court of Appeals and trial judge pro tem for the Tohono O'odham Nation. He was named one of 2011's "Heroes on the Hill" by Indian Country Today for his human rights advocacy work as Lead Counsel for the Hul'qumi'num Treaty Group of Canada before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. He lives and works in Tucson, Arizona. https://law.arizona.edu/robert-williams-jr Tonight's broadcast is from a 2013 presentation on why the United States initially voted against the United Nations Declaration on Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

On 16-17 November 2018, the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, in collaboration with the Athens Public International Law Center, held a workshop entitled ‘Rethinking Reparations in International Law', organised by Dr Veronika Fikfak, fellow and director of studies at Homerton College, and Professor Photini Pazartzis, professor at the Faculty of Law at the National & Kapodistrian University of Athens. This is Panel 5, chaired by Megan Donaldson, featuring: - Berk Demirkol, University of Galatasaray: 'Is There any Room for Non-Pecuniary Remedies in Investment Treaty Arbitration?'- Brianne McGonigle Leyh and Julie Fraser, Netherlands Institute of Human Rights, Utrecht University: 'Transformative Reparations: Game Changer or Academic Hype?'- Marina Aksenova, IE University: 'Art in the Practice of Reparations at the International Criminal Court and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights'

On 16-17 November 2018, the Lauterpacht Centre for International Law, in collaboration with the Athens Public International Law Center, held a workshop entitled ‘Rethinking Reparations in International Law', organised by Dr Veronika Fikfak, fellow and director of studies at Homerton College, and Professor Photini Pazartzis, professor at the Faculty of Law at the National & Kapodistrian University of Athens. This is Panel 5, chaired by Megan Donaldson, featuring: - Berk Demirkol, University of Galatasaray: 'Is There any Room for Non-Pecuniary Remedies in Investment Treaty Arbitration?'- Brianne McGonigle Leyh and Julie Fraser, Netherlands Institute of Human Rights, Utrecht University: 'Transformative Reparations: Game Changer or Academic Hype?'- Marina Aksenova, IE University: 'Art in the Practice of Reparations at the International Criminal Court and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights'

Thomas Buergenthal saw the Nazi concentration camps through the eyes of a child. Luckily, he survived and later became a lawyer and eventually a judge on the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the International Court of Justice in The Hague in the Netherlands and the United Nations Truth Commission for El Salvador.

In episode 19, Yvette and Cynthia discuss different systems of accountability in the context of Chile, specifically the usage of documentary as a form of healing, the case against the dictator Pinochet in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the recent Vatican decision to punish priests who abused children. They examine the purpose of punishment and grapple with the challenges of truth-finding and accurate collective memory. Visit cerebronas.com for more information and links on what we discussed. Thanks to @romobeats for the intro tune! Follow us on IG and Twitter at @cerebronas Transition song: Ryan Little – Lucy’s Song

LGBT world news (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Costa Rica, Chile, British Overseas Territories, Bermuda); Psychic predictions for 2018; Movie review of “Betting on Zero.”Gay? Lesbian? Skeptical? Check out "Reality Check" - the podcast for LGBT skeptics and their allies worldwide!To download this episode, right-click on above link__________________________________________________

LGBT world news (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Costa Rica, Chile, British Overseas Territories, Bermuda); Psychic predictions for 2018; Movie review of “Betting on Zero.” http://media.rawvoice.com/joy_archives/p/joy.org.au/realitycheck/wp-content/uploads/sites/145/2018/03/Reality-Check-podcast-2-March-2018.mp3 Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 34:44 — 31.8MB) The post Episode 76 – Psychic predictions 2018 appeared first on Reality Check.

LGBT world news (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Costa Rica, Chile, British Overseas Territories, Bermuda); Psychic predictions for 2018; Movie review of “Betting on Zero.” http://media.rawvoice.com/joy_archives/p/joy.org.au/realitycheck/wp-content/uploads/sites/145/2018/04/Reality-Check-podcast-2-March-2018.mp3 Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 34:44 — 31.8MB) The post Episode 76 – The podcast for LGBT skeptics and friends appeared first on Reality Check.

CULS and CUSU LGBT+ are delighted to have welcomed Herman Duarte, Founding Partner at the first and only law firm in Latin America that has the express purpose of eradicating LGBT+ discrimination to the Faculty of Law on 29 January 2018. Herman also founded the Latin American Foundation for the promotion and protection of LGBT rights: Fundación Igualitos. He was named one of OUTstanding's Top 50 LGBT+ Future Leaders. Herman and his team were involved in the landmark decision of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in favour of equal marriage and transgender rights, binding on Costa Rica and over 12 states in the Inter-American jurisdiction. Herman is a vocal advocate for Equal Marriage in El Salvador, and organised the first Equal Marriage congress for the continent, in Costa Rica. He works to denounce hate crimes against LGBT+ people in the region, raising public opinion and support on the topic of marriage equality and gender recognition. There will be some filming at the event for a university social media film about CUSU LGBT+ that’s going to be put out over History Month. For more information, see: https://www.facebook.com/events/146030312849948/

Claudia Martin on The Role and Jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

Bruno Galindo, Associate Professor at the Federal University of Pernambuco (UFPE) (Brazil), gives a talk for the OTJR Seminar Series. https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/events/transitional-justice-brazil-and-jurisprudence-inter-american-court-human-rights

Ep. 98: Brian Concannon, Jr. is an attorney and the Executive Director of the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti ("IJDH").   Prior to joining the IJDH, Brian co-managed the Bureau des Avocats Internationaux ("BAI") in Haiti for eight years, from 1996-2004, and worked for the United Nations as a Human Rights Officer in 1995-1996. He founded IJDH, and has been the Director since 2004. He helped prepare the prosecution of the Raboteau Massacre trial in 2000, one of the most significant human rights cases anywhere in the Western Hemisphere. He has represented Haitian political prisoners before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and represented the plaintiff in Yvon Neptune v. Haiti, the only Haiti case ever tried before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Listen as Brian discusses with Alex the important work of the IJDH, including: working with grass­roots groups in Haiti to help develop an effective human rights advo­cacy pro­gram with global out­reach. In addition, in the U.S., IJDH collab­o­rates with grass­roots orga­ni­za­tions, includ­ing faith-based, sol­i­dar­ity, development, and human­i­tar­ian orga­ni­za­tions to coor­di­nate advo­cacy on human rights in Haiti, and net­works with sol­i­dar­ity and Hait­ian Dias­pora activists through­out the world. Their work seeks to change the inter­na­tional envi­ron­ment that allows such mas­sive dis­re­spect for social, eco­nomic, civil and polit­i­cal rights to flourish. For more on host, Alex Barnett, please check out his website: www.alexbarnettcomic.com or visit him on Facebook (www.facebook.com/alexbarnettcomic) or on Twitter at @barnettcomic To subscribe to the Multiracial Family Man, please click here: MULTIRACIAL FAMILY MAN PODCAST Intro and Outro Music is Funkorama by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons - By Attribution 3.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/      

The U.N.'s Egregious Negligence in Causing the Cholera Epidemic in Haiti and its Refusal to Accept Responsibility and Provide Redress and the Legal and Political Issues Surrounding the U.N.'s Assertion of Diplomatic ImmunityDiscussion with Brian Concannon Jr. on the U.N.'s actions in causing, covering up and refusing to accept responsibility for the cholera epidemic in Haiti. We discuss the legal and policy issues behind the U.N.'s diplomatic immunity, including the Second Circuit's decision in Georges et. al. v. the U.N., the U.N. Charter, the 1946 Convention of the Privileges and Immunities of the U.N. and the Status of Forces Agreement with Haiti. We also discuss the U.N.'s obligations under the Convention and the Status of Forces Agreement and its refusal to perform its obligations of providing redress in Haiti and throughout its other peacekeeping missions. Additionally, we look at the application of customary international law and international human rights law to the U.N.'s actions, the problems of limiting standing to member states dependent on the U.N. for the U.N.'s violations as well as issues respecting the accountability of foreign N.G.O.s on the ground in Haiti and best practices for the future. Brian Concannon, Jr., is a human rights attorney and represents the plaintiffs in Georges et. al. v the U.N. He has represented numerous plaintiffs in front of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights as well as aided the prosecution of the Raboteau massacre. Brian is currently the Executive Director of the Institute for Justice and Democracy in Haiti (IJDH). Before founding IJDH, Brian co-managed the Bureau des Avocats Internationaux (BAI) and worked for the United Nations as a Human Rights Officer. He is a member of the Editorial Board of Health and Human Rights.

CIP S1 E25 – Alastair Clarke | MB PNP | Show Notes Alastair Clarke Immigration lawyer practicing in the Province of Manitoba located in the heart of Canada. Manitoba is clearly the second best province in Canada. I lived there with my wife and two kids while I was attending law school at the University Manitoba. My whole career got its start at Robson Hall. Welcome Alastair thanks for joining us. Why don't I start off by telling our listeners a little bit about you? Alastair was born and raised in Edmonton, Canada. He has worked and lived in more than 20 cities around the world including Winnipeg (current home), Toronto (Canada), Montreal (Canada), Kingston (Canada), Victoria (Canada), Vancouver (Canada), New York City (USA), Washington, DC (USA), Tokyo (Japan), Esmeraldas (Ecuador), Brussels (Belgium), Herstmonceux (UK) and Bordeaux (France). Alastair provides legal services in English, French, Spanish and Japanese. Alastair Clarke: Legal Experience Alastair began working with immigration issues as a student leader at the University of Victoria in 1996. For almost 20 years, Alastair has been active with immigrant communities. Alastair's current legal practice encompasses all areas of immigration and refugee law, including Manitoba Provincial Nominee (MPNP) applications [ which is the topic we will be covering today], family sponsorships, another temporary resident applications. In addition, Alastair has extensive experience conducting hearings and appeals at all levels of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada and at the Federal Court of Canada including many sponsorship appeals, deportation appeals, misrepresentation appeals, and a whole host of others. Alastair and I have quite a few things in common. He was also a former Junior High School teacher before becoming a lawyer. Alastair's broad work experience helps his clients from every corner of the globe: Canadian Embassy (Washington, DC; 2002 – 2003); Inter-American Court of Human Rights (Costa Rica; 2003); Global Youth Action Network (New York City; 2003 – 2004); United Nations Millennium Development Goals Project (New York City; 2004); Canadian Lawyers for International Human Rights (Kingston, Ontario; 2007); Society of Professional and Graduate Students (Queen's University; 2007-2008) Ontario Bar Association Executive (Toronto, Ontario; 2007 – 2008); Briefly Speaking/ JUST Editorial Board (Toronto, Ontario; 2005 – 2012); Unison Health and Community Services Legal Aid clinic (Toronto, Ontario; 2009 – 2013) Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers (Toronto, Ontario; 2012 – present); Manitoba Bar Association (Winnipeg, Manitoba; 2013 – present) Alastair's career in law focuses on social justice issues, professionalism and fighting to make sure people are treated fairly. After graduating from one of Canada's top law schools, Queen's University (Faculty of Law) in Kingston, Ontario, he articled at Green and Spiegel LLP, an immigration law boutique on Bay Street in Toronto, Ontario. From 2007 to the present, Alastair has provided more than 50 presentations, on a volunteer basis, to community groups, lawyers and paralegals. In particular, he trained Legal Clinic staff at their annual training retreats in 2009 and 2010, funded by Legal Aid Ontario. In 2012, Alastair joined the faculty at Seneca College in Toronto and taught Immigration and Refugee Law to post-graduate students. In Winnipeg, Alastair has provided guest lectures to law students at the University of Manitoba (Faculty of Law). How did you get into immigration? Topics covered in the Episode: What is the Manitoba PNP - General Overview Are there any options available for foreign nationals to immigrate directly to MB without having first worked in the Province? How can the PNP be used to transition foreign workers to PR status in Canada? Are there any options for low-skill workers or is the program just restricted to skilled workers? Where do you see the MB PNP headed for the future? Any upcoming changes or things the listeners should be aware of? Top 3 - 5 practical tips for submitting applications OR Top 3 - 5 most common errors people make when submitting their applications to the MB PNP. How can people reach you? Clarke Immigration Law: http://www.apply2manitoba.ca/ Alastair's e-mail: clarke@apply2manitoba.ca Alastair's Blog: http://www.apply2manitoba.ca/blog/ “Silly Rules” of Immigration Law: http://www.apply2manitoba.ca/repost-silly-rules-immigration-law/ MPNP: From Temporary Status to PR Status: http://www.apply2manitoba.ca/mpnp-temporary-status-pr-status/ MPNP: How to Apply …. and Tips: http://www.apply2manitoba.ca/mpnp-how-to-apply/ Western Canada Line Dance Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyanG4BelGg Time Stamped Quick Reference Guide In order to help you jump to the areas of most interest to you, I have included below some time stamps for some of the significant topics covered in this episode. 3:57 – Who is Alastair Clarke? 11:28 – How he got into immigration. 16:30 – Overview of the Manitoba PNP. 18:37 – Are there any options available for foreign nationals to immigrate directly to MB without having first worked in the Province? 21:30 – How can the PNP be used to transition foreign workers to PR status in Canada? 26:52 – Are there any options for low-skill workers or is the program just restricted to skilled workers? 28:20 – Where do you see the MB PNP headed for the future? Any upcoming changes or things the listeners should be aware of? 39:06 – Top 3 practical tips for submitting applications OR Top 3 most common errors people make when submitting their applications to the MB PNP. 44:38 – How to contact Alastair Clarke.

CIP S1 E25 – Alastair Clarke | MB PNP | Show Notes Alastair Clarke Immigration lawyer practicing in the Province of Manitoba located in the heart of Canada. Manitoba is clearly the second best province in Canada. I lived there with my wife and two kids while I was attending law school at the University Manitoba.  My whole career got its start at Robson Hall. Welcome Alastair  thanks for joining us. Why don’t I start off by telling our listeners a little bit about you? Alastair was born and raised in Edmonton, Canada. He has worked and lived in more than 20 cities around the world including Winnipeg (current home), Toronto (Canada), Montreal (Canada), Kingston (Canada), Victoria (Canada), Vancouver (Canada), New York City (USA), Washington, DC (USA), Tokyo (Japan), Esmeraldas (Ecuador), Brussels (Belgium), Herstmonceux (UK) and Bordeaux (France). Alastair provides legal services in English, French, Spanish and Japanese. Alastair Clarke: Legal Experience Alastair began working with immigration issues as a student leader at the University of Victoria in 1996. For almost 20 years, Alastair has been active with immigrant communities. Alastair’s current legal practice encompasses all areas of immigration and refugee law, including Manitoba Provincial Nominee (MPNP) applications [ which is the topic we will be covering today], family sponsorships, another temporary resident applications. In addition, Alastair has extensive experience conducting hearings and appeals at all levels of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada and at the Federal Court of Canada including many sponsorship appeals, deportation appeals, misrepresentation appeals, and a whole host of others. Alastair and I have quite a few things in common. He was also a former Junior High School teacher before becoming a lawyer. Alastair’s broad work experience helps his clients from every corner of the globe: Canadian Embassy (Washington, DC; 2002 – 2003); Inter-American Court of Human Rights (Costa Rica; 2003); Global Youth Action Network (New York City; 2003 – 2004); United Nations Millennium Development Goals Project (New York City; 2004); Canadian Lawyers for International Human Rights (Kingston, Ontario; 2007); Society of Professional and Graduate Students (Queen’s University; 2007-2008) Ontario Bar Association Executive (Toronto, Ontario; 2007 – 2008); Briefly Speaking/ JUST Editorial Board (Toronto, Ontario; 2005 – 2012); Unison Health and Community Services Legal Aid clinic (Toronto, Ontario; 2009 – 2013) Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers (Toronto, Ontario; 2012 – present); Manitoba Bar Association (Winnipeg, Manitoba; 2013 – present) Alastair’s career in law focuses on social justice issues, professionalism and fighting to make sure people are treated fairly. After graduating from one of Canada’s top law schools, Queen’s University (Faculty of Law) in Kingston, Ontario, he articled at Green and Spiegel LLP, an immigration law boutique on Bay Street in Toronto, Ontario. From 2007 to the present, Alastair has provided more than 50 presentations, on a volunteer basis, to community groups, lawyers and paralegals. In particular, he trained Legal Clinic staff at their annual training retreats in 2009 and 2010, funded by Legal Aid Ontario. In 2012, Alastair joined the faculty at Seneca College in Toronto and taught Immigration and Refugee Law to post-graduate students. In Winnipeg, Alastair has provided guest lectures to law students at the University of Manitoba (Faculty of Law). How did you get into immigration? Topics covered in the Episode: What is the Manitoba PNP - General Overview Are there any options available for foreign nationals to immigrate directly to MB without having first worked in the Province? How can the PNP be used to transition foreign workers to PR status in Canada? Are there any options for low-skill workers or is the program just restricted to skilled workers? Where do you see the MB PNP headed for the future? Any upcoming changes or things the listeners should be aware of? Top 3 - 5 practical tips for submitting applications OR Top 3 - 5 most common errors people make when submitting their applications to the MB PNP. How can people reach you? Clarke Immigration Law: http://www.apply2manitoba.ca/ Alastair’s e-mail: clarke@apply2manitoba.ca Alastair’s Blog: http://www.apply2manitoba.ca/blog/ “Silly Rules” of Immigration Law: http://www.apply2manitoba.ca/repost-silly-rules-immigration-law/ MPNP: From Temporary Status to PR Status: http://www.apply2manitoba.ca/mpnp-temporary-status-pr-status/ MPNP: How to Apply …. and Tips: http://www.apply2manitoba.ca/mpnp-how-to-apply/ Western Canada Line Dance Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyanG4BelGg   Time Stamped Quick Reference Guide In order to help you jump to the areas of most interest to you, I have included below some time stamps for some of the significant topics covered in this episode. 3:57 – Who is Alastair Clarke? 11:28 – How he got into immigration. 16:30 – Overview of the Manitoba PNP. 18:37 – Are there any options available for foreign nationals to immigrate directly to MB without having first worked in the Province? 21:30 – How can the PNP be used to transition foreign workers to PR status in Canada? 26:52 – Are there any options for low-skill workers or is the program just restricted to skilled workers? 28:20 – Where do you see the MB PNP headed for the future? Any upcoming changes or things the listeners should be aware of? 39:06 – Top 3 practical tips for submitting applications OR Top 3 most common errors people make when submitting their applications to the MB PNP. 44:38 – How to contact Alastair Clarke.

Forced Sterilization, the Work of the International Justice Resource Center and the Election of the New U.N. Secretary General.Discussion with Lisa Reinsberg on the incidence of forced sterilization throughout the Americas and around the world and the International Justice Resource Center's (IJRC) petition in I.V. v Bolivia to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights arguing for the need of a reformulation of forced sterilization as an autonomous core human rights violation with a need for positive measures imposed upon medical staff to ensure proper consent is provided for any sterilization procedure. We also discuss the new election process of the U.N. Secretary General. Lisa is the Executive Director of the IJRC. Before founding the IJRC, Lisa was an attorney with Prisoners’ Legal Services of Massachusetts and Rómulo Gallegos fellow at the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights where she worked on complaints of torture, extra-judicial executions and violations of criminal due process. Earlier, she represented people seeking asylum in the United States at the Cabrini Center for Immigrant Legal Assistance of Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston. POST SCRIPT: Pedro Pablo Kuczynski has been elected Peru’s President and will take office on July 28, 2016. The United Nations Security Council will begin deliberations on the new Secretary General on July 21, 2016. The September 23, 2016 training session for “The Human Rights of Migrants: Challenges and Opportunities in California” is now available for registration.

Human Rights Violations of Nicaraguan Indigenous and Afro-Caribbean Communities in the Expropriation of Their Ancestral Lands for the Development of an Environmentally Disastrous Canal Linking the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans through Nicaragua.Discussion with Professor Thomas Antkowiak on the development of the Nicaragua Canal which would link the Pacific and Atlantic oceans through Nicaragua and the concessions provided to the Chinese company HKND over the traditional lands of Afro-Caribbean communities without their informed consent and in denial of their human rights. We discuss their pending petition to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, indigenious rights as interepreted by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and their development in international law. Thomas teaches international public law and international human rights law at Seattle University's Law School. He is the Director of its Latin America Program and its International Human Rights Clinic and is currently arguing on behalf of Nicaragua's indigenous and Afro-Caribbean communities in various human rights fora, including submitting their petition to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Thomas’s previous positions include being the Senior Attorney at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of the Organization of American States and Director of the Access to Justice Program at the Due Process of Law Foundation.For More Info:International Human Rights Clinic joins fight to stop Nicaragua canal Rights, Resources, and Rhetoric: Indigenous Peoples and the Inter-American Court

You know the scenario... you have a neighbour who is deathly afraid of her spouse. She's not very social, always seems unsure of herself, displays signs of depression, and, she says it's just a rash, but you know those are bruises from being hit. At nights, you hear the shouting, the tussling, the screaming, maybe even dishes being thrown across the room. In the morning you see the tell-tale evidence of abuse. You say to her, "You don't deserve that, you need to leave!" But, nothing changes; she stays, and it happens again that night.  Is it your business to do anything over and above advice? Do you call the police? Do you confront the abuser? Or do you butt out? Is domestic violence your business? Is it a national problem?  This Sunday, June 18th at 12:30pm EDT (11:30am Jamaica time) join the team of Yardie Skeptics as we make domestic violence our business. How can the community tackle domestic violence without crossing boundaries into policing the domestic affairs of neighbours? We'll have a pre-recorded interview from Sgt. Heather McLean of the Jamaican Constabulary Force, who has launched the Facebook group "Save Our Women" to discuss issues pertaining to violence against women. Also live in studio will be judge Margarette Macaulay, formerly of the Inter-American Court of Human rights and leading figure in the establishment of the Domestic Violence Act.  To listen to this episode live, or access the archived version afterwards, simply click the link below. Feel free to call in via Skype (free of charge) or log into the live chatroom to share your views and ask questions. Email: yardieskeptics@gmail.com.  http://www.blogtalkradio.com/yardieskeptics    

Samuel Martinez, associate professor of anthropology at the University of Connecticut, discusses the ruling of the Dominican Republic's highest court that denies citizenship to Dominicans of Haitian ancestry and the mass expulsions of these people to Haiti. In 2005, Martinez submitted an expert affidavit in support of the landmark case of Yean and Bosico v. Dominican Republic presented before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Discussion of: (1) historic decision from the Inter-American Court of Human Rights affecting LGBT rights; (2) NYC case concerning transgender man's effort to obtain an amended birth certificate; and (3) whether insinuating someone is gay is still slander per se in Texas. Visit www.le-gal.org for more about LeGaL and to subscribe to Lesbian/Gay Law Notes, the most comprehensive monthly publication summarizing legal developments affecting the LGBT community here and abroad.

Institute for the Study of the Americas, Human Rights Consortium, Dr. Par Engstrom, Dr. Peter Watt,Ms. Valentina Rosendo Cantú, Mr. Santiago Aguirre, Mr Matthew Phillips

Institute for the Study of the Americas, Human Rights Consortium, Dr. Par Engstrom, Dr. Peter Watt,Ms. Valentina Rosendo Cantú, Mr. Santiago Aguirre, Mr Matthew Phillips

Robert A. Williams is the University of Arizona's E. Thomas Sullivan Professor of Law and American Indian Studies & Director of the Indigenous Peoples Law and Policy Program. He also teaches federal Indian law courses via the relaunched and renamed UANativeNet, a respected and widely used resource on issues affecting tribal nations, their members and indigenous peoples abroad. Williams, an enrolled member of the Lumbee Indian Tribe of North Carolina, is a professor in the James E. Rogers College of Law. He has represented tribal groups before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the United Nations Working Group on Indigenous Peoples. He also has served as co-counsel for Floyd Hicks in the United States Supreme Court case, Nevada v. Hicks during the 2001 term.

Headlines for May 10, 2004 * Seymour Hersh: Knowledge of Prisoner Abuse Investigation "Severely and Unusually Restricted" * In the Shadow of Abu Ghraib: Death Row Prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal On Iraq Prison Scandal * Former Military Police Officer Jailed for 17 Yrs Describes Routine Mistreatment and Brutality in U.S. Prisons * Lori Berenson's Case Goes Before the Inter-American Court of Human Rightshttp://www.archive.org/details/dn2004-0510