Work On! is an occasional item about workshops, roundtables, and other fora that do not necessarily include publication:
► The Siracusa International Institute for Criminal Justice and Human Rights is pleased to launch its 2023 E-Learning Program on International Criminal Law, International Cooperation in Criminal Matters, Human Rights and Criminal Justice. It is designed for recent graduates in Law, Political Science, International Relations, or related fields and young professionals and practitioners within the international legal/political field, but it is open to all those who might be interested to expand their knowledge in the topics targeted. Each course will last 3 days for a total of 12 hours and will be broadcast live on Zoom. The E-learning Program will consist of 5 courses, but more courses might be announced in the next months: Genocide (June 23-25); International Criminal Evidence (July 7-9); Digital Rights (July 21-23); International Law and the Conflict in Ukraine (October 6-8); Understanding Modes of Individual Criminal Responsibility (October 20-22). ►Further information and the registration form are available here.
Write On! Call for Papers: Reforms at United Nations
This installment of Write On!, our periodic compilation of calls for papers, includes the following:
► Call for Papers of a book titled Reforms at United Nations jointly edited by Prof (Dr) Vesselin Popovski and Pawan Kumar to be published in October 2023.
►The idea of the book is based on the debates surrounding reforming the United Nations at the time when it turned 75 and would be celebrating its 100th anniversary in 2045. Some issues which this book would be addressing are- expanding membership of the Security Council, Caribbean, Small States, Middle Eastern, Asian, and African voices at the United Nations vis a vis Climate Change, the rise of supranational institutions etc. For more information see attachment below.
Go On! Call for Proposals and Nominations
Go On! makes note of interesting conferences, lectures, and similar events.
►The American Branch of International Law is excited to announce that the International Law Weekend 2023 Call for Panel Proposal is open as well as calls for nominations for the 2023 Outstanding Achievement Award and 2023 Book Awards.
►The American Branch of the International Law Association’s International Law Weekend will take place October 19-21, 2023 in New York City. The unifying theme for ILW 2023 is Beyond International Law, and ILW 2023 will explore this theme through a diverse set of engaging and provocative panels on a broad array of both public international law and private international law topics in each time slot. The deadline for Panel Proposals for International Law Weekend is April 17, 2023.
For more information, please see the attached PDF or visit their website. Find the LinkedIn announcement here and find their Tweet here.
►The deadline for Nominations: ABILA 2023 Outstanding Achievement Award is July 1, 2023. The American Branch is now accepting nominations for the 2023 Outstanding Achievement Award to recognize outstanding contributions in the field of international law. The inaugural winner of this award, established in 2021, was former International Criminal Court Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda. The 2022 winner was Justice Richard Goldstone. Recipients of this annual award need not be current members of the American Branch. For more information, please visit the website.
►The deadline for Nominations: 2023 ABILA Book Awards is July 1, 2023. The American Branch of the International Law Association is now accepting nominations for the 2023 ABILA Book Awards. The Book Awards Committee is pleased to offer three separate awards, as follows:
• ABILA Book of the Year Award: Awarded each year to the best book published in the previous year on international law or a topic in international law.
• ABILA Practitioners Book Award: Awarded each year to the best book published in the previous year on a technical topic in international law or on a topic likely to be of particular interest to practitioners of international law.
• ABILA New Authors Book Award: Awarded each year to the best first book published on international law or a topic in international law by an author who has not previously published a book on this or any other subject.
For more information, please visit the website.
Introducing our new Student Editors: Sophia Ramcharitar and Marina Coriale
Sophia Ramcharitar is a first-year law student at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law. She is from Long Island, NY and attended American University in Washington, D.C., where she graduated with her B.A. in International Studies. Throughout her undergraduate career, Sophia worked in various capacities at the U.S. House and Senate, U.S. Department of State and Congressional Research Service. Most recently, she served as Communications Assistant – Social Media at the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition. As Sophia begins her legal career, she is eager to learn more about international human rights issues while elevating diverse voices within discourse on international law.
Marina Coriale is a first year law student at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York City, and is a representative on the executive board of the Cardozo International Law Society. Marina grew up in upstate New York, and graduated summa cum laude at the University at Buffalo, with a B.A. in Psychology, Political Science, and International Studies, while also earning her certificate in Paralegal Studies. During her time at UB, Marina conducted her own research and thesis centered around violence against women, and participated in a research lab concerning women’s reproductive and sexual health. She has a particular interest in the intersection between gender-based violence and international human rights in the MENA region. Before entering law school, Marina worked at an immigration firm during the past year, working primarily on asylum and visa cases, and previously worked at the New York Division of Human Rights and the Buffalo Federal Courthouse. Overall, Marina approaches her work with a trauma-informed lens, and hopes to work in tandem with underrepresented communities to help heal the deep gashes of inequality in systems of power around the world.
Heartfelt Welcome!
Addressing Officer-Perpetrated Gender-Based Violence and Ending the “Blue Wall of Silence”
Despite the challenges of 2022, it closed with an important milestone for women’s rights. The European Court of Human Rights issues a groundbreaking decision, taking a bold stand to address officer-perpetrated gender-based violence (GBV).
Officer-perpetrated GBV is a major issue across the globe and yet so often invisible and rarely addressed. In many cases, it is met with a “blue wall of silence,” where police departments protect fellow officers from investigation. This completely undermines the state’s response to GBV and is particularly troubling since many states rely on law enforcement as frontline responders to GBV.
At the very least, the justice system should not be a perpetrator of abuse. We need the equivalent of the “first, do no harm” guiding principle we have for physicians.
The European Court of Human Rights acknowledged this in the Case of A & B v. Georgia. In this case, a woman experienced regular physical and psychological abuse by her former partner, a police officer. He threatened to kill her and her family, repeatedly “flaunted his service pistol,” referred to his “official status as a police officer and strong connections within the police,” and threated to bring false charges against her father and brother if she dared to report the violence.
Nonetheless, over the course of three years, the woman and her family made multiple calls to the police and the woman filed a complaint with various state departments to stop the abuse. However, officers called to investigate interviewed the woman while her former partner was present, mocking and threatening her, and they left together in the same car. Even worse: officers told the woman that “wife-beating was commonplace” and of “not much importance”; and that she should not contact them in the future “without a valid reason or face being fined for wasting police time as they were busy with other, more serious matters.”
In 2014, the former partner tragically shot and killed the woman. Her mother and son brought a case that went before the European Court of Human Rights.
Our Human Rights Clinic at the University of Miami School of Law had the opportunity to collaborate with the European Human Rights Advocacy Center (EHRAC) on this case. We filed an intervention, along with partners, arguing for heightened state responsibility in cases of officer-perpetrated GBV. Officers are uniquely positioned to use their state authority, training, and access to weapons and resources to facilitate abuse in their relationship. Moreover, heightened vigilance by the state is required to prevent impunity and safeguard the justice system’s integrity.
Human rights law has already recognized that officer influence can facilitate GBV in the context of detention and custody. We argued that this also pertains to officers committing private acts of violence within their relationship, which also leverage their official positions. Moreover, human rights law recognizes officers’ particular role and authority with regards to GBV, mandating trainings on professionalism and sensitivity.
: Addressing Officer-Perpetrated Gender-Based Violence and Ending the “Blue Wall of Silence”The European Court of Human Rights agreed. The Court stated that it “expects Member States to be all the more stringent when investigating . . . their own law-enforcement officers for the commission of serious crimes, including domestic violence and violence against women in general, than they are with ordinary offenders, because what is at stake is not only the issue of the individual criminal-law liability of the perpetrators but also the State’s duty to combat any sense of impunity felt by the offenders by virtue of their very office, and maintain public confidence in and respect for the law-enforcement system.” The Court further referred to a “heightened duty to tackle prejudice-motivated crimes.”
The Court awarded damages to the plaintiffs. While it recognized the need for policy measures, it said it was up to the State of Georgia, supervised by the Committee of Ministers, to determine “the exact means to address gaps and “the discriminatory passivity” of law enforcement.
Our Human Rights Clinic has called for:
- A “zero-tolerance policy” for GBV perpetrated by officers
- Internal structures in police departments that:
- Prevent the hiring of individuals with a history of GBV
- Monitor current officers for signs of abuse
- Handle investigation against fellow officers, including the removal of weapons during the investigation
- Enhanced data collection on officer-perpetrated GBV
- Online or anonymous reporting to better protect survivor safety
- Programs supporting officer mental health, including stress managements and confidential crisis counseling.
We have also expanded our analysis of law enforcement responses to GBV in a human rights framework report and case studies focused on Canada and Brazil. The report and case studies address accountability for officer-perpetrated GBV, trauma-informed interactions with survivors, effective investigation of GBV reports, and intersecting discrimination.
As we celebrate another International Women’s Day, let’s take a step closer to addressing GBV, ending state impunity, and ensuring a safe existence for all.
Introducing Tamar Ezer
It is our pleasure to introduce our new contributor Tamar Ezer. She is the Acting Director of the Human Rights Clinic and the Faculty Director of the Human Rights Program at the University of Miami School of Law. Focus areas of her work in the Human Rights Clinic include gender justice, Indigenous women’s rights, and the rights to health and housing. Prior to that, Tamar taught and supervised projects at Yale Law School with the Schell Center for International Human Rights and the Solomon Center for Health Law and Policy, as well as Georgetown University Law Center’s International Women’s Human Rights Clinic, where she supervised test cases challenging discriminatory laws and oversaw fact-finding and legislative projects in Nigeria, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, and the Philippines.
Additionally, Professor Ezer served as Deputy Director of the Law and Health Initiative of the Open Society Public Health Program, where she focused on legal advocacy to advance health and human rights in Eastern and Southern Africa, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia. This encompassed work on reproductive health, violations in health care settings, HIV, palliative care, drug policy, and intersections between access to justice and health. Professor Ezer also clerked for Judge Robert Sweet at the Southern District of New York and Justice Dorit Beinisch at the Supreme Court of Israel. She graduated from Stanford University and Harvard Law School, where she was the editor-in-chief of the Harvard Human Rights Journal.
Heartfelt welcome!
Write On! Call for Papers: Professionals and Professionalism in International Criminal Justice
This installment of Write On!, our periodic compilation of calls for papers, includes calls to present at International Workshops, as follows:
► The University of Leeds has issued a call for papers for a workshop on “Professionals and Professionalism(s) in International Criminal Justice,” to be held in Leeds on July 14, 2023. The deadline for submitting abstracts is April 17, 2023. The call is here.
COVID-19 hate crimes: Identifying the Real Virus that infects us [Part – II]
Actions taken by the USA to control COVID-19 hate crimes
COVID-19 hate crimes act in the US
To address the nationwide spike in hate crimes against Asian Americans in 2022, US President Joe Biden signed the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act in May 2022. Following expert testimony about the spike in crime and grassroots pressure to defend Asian-American neighborhoods, the bipartisan measure was signed. The new Bill aims to enhance law enforcement’s ability to deal with hate crimes through public education campaigns, hate crime hotlines, and training for recognizing hate crimes. The Justice Department will quicken investigations and improve data gathering. The legislation aims to increase public awareness and accessibility of hate crime reporting at local levels.
Overview of the Act
The Congressional Research Service’s description of the Act lists five important provisions:
- A designated DOJ officer must expedite the review of hate crimes and related reports.
- State, local, and tribal law enforcement must receive DOJ guidance on setting up reporting procedures for online hate crimes and gathering information on protected characteristics.
- The DOJ and HHS must release recommendations to increase awareness of hate crimes during the COVID-19 pandemic.
- The Act creates funds for state-run hotlines, crime reduction initiatives, law enforcement programs, and the National Incident-Based Reporting System.
- Judges may impose community service or educational requirements as a condition of supervised release for those found guilty of a hate crime charge on probation.
Criticism of the Act
Stop AAPI Hate criticized the new law for giving law enforcement more authority, saying that it will only address hate crimes rather than significant hate incidents since it focuses on criminal law enforcement authorities in its remedies. They urged the federal government to address systemic racism and oppression through funding community-based organizations, enhancing civil rights laws, investing in mental health and immigration services, and supporting all communities’ voices and historical events.
Activities undertaken post the Act’s enactment
On the first anniversary of the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act, the Department of Justice launched initiatives to prevent and address hate crimes and bias-related occurrences. They released new guidelines in collaboration with the HHS to increase understanding of COVID-19-related hate crimes, distributed grant requests for state-run hotlines and neighborhood-based strategies, and hired their first Language Access Coordinator.
Law enforcement systems for reporting, tracking and tackling hate crimes
The COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act was passed to enhance hate crime reporting, response, and prevention at the federal level. However, there is a trust issue between Asian American communities and the police. Some states, such as New York City, have acted to improve this relationship by creating specialized teams to respond to pandemic-related violence and harassment and to educate people about their rights.
Furthermore, many Asian Americans lack confidence that local police will treat them with respect and courtesy, with only 24% feeling very confident. 73% support training law enforcement to recognize anti-Asian American and Pacific Islander bias should be given. Additionally, there is a need to increase the number of Asian American police officers in locations with large Asian American populations since they make up 6% of the US workforce but only 2% of police officers.
As a positive intervention, states like New York City have established special response teams to address pandemic-related hate crimes and improve trust with the Asian-American community by providing education, referrals, and investigations.
Provision of health care facilities, especially mental health services
Health systems need to be prepared to provide culturally and linguistically suitable services (CLAS) to Asian American patients who may have experienced trauma. Clinicians of Asian American origins may need to establish trust with patients who have experienced violence and discrimination. Online services like the Asian Mental Health Project and the National Asian American Pacific Islander Mental Health Association can link Asian Americans with culturally sensitive practitioners. Medical education should emphasize cultural sensitivity, and providers should inquire about prejudice, violence, and mental health issues with patients, as well as be aware of the social isolation and financial difficulties brought on by the pandemic. A responsive mental health workforce is critical, as many Americans of Asian origin may be hesitant to seek treatment.
Devoted research and funding
Only 0.17% of the National Institutes of Health’s research budget is allocated to studying the health requirements of AANHPI despite making up 7.0% of the US population. The Asian American Foundation has pledged significant multimillion-dollar community investments to address bullying in schools and engage interfaith leaders and journalists.
Education in schools
DOJ and the Department of Education offer resources to combat COVID-19-related harassment in schools, while school-based interventions can reduce racism and hate speech. 73% of Asian Americans support initiatives to educate the public on recognizing anti-AAPI bias to address their historical underrepresentation in society. AANHPI’s historical contributions to the US must be recognized, and more awareness is needed to combat entrenched prejudice and conflicts.
Removing public health reporting of bias
WHO and CDCP had cautioned that racially discriminatory rhetoric during COVID-19 can result in victimization, stigmatization, and division of people. President Biden signed an executive order directing agencies to prevent racism and xenophobia against AANHPIs. Furthermore, the new White House Initiative on Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders, co-chaired by Xavier Becerra and Katherine Tai, aims to resolve bullying and discrimination, improve quality and fragmentation, expand language translation, and better understand multigenerational household needs. Some local governments have approved resolutions condemning xenophobia.
INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS
1. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
This convention requires nations to “condemn” and eradicate racial discrimination and improve tolerance among all races.
2. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) calls for governments to formally reject hate speech and launch awareness programs and educational policies to combat racism. Training for the police and legal systems is also important to ensure familiarity with international obligations protecting free speech and expression while safeguarding against hate speech. Human Rights Watch recommends that all governments establish action plans to address new forms of discrimination and xenophobia, with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights providing guidelines for best practices.
Analysis and Conclusion
The incidents of brutality that are pursued in a developed, liberal and tolerant country like the United States put the whole world in a terrible shock. Though change has been brought across the nation to curb the discrimination and hatred towards the Asian-American community, future steps are required to address the growing public health concern of violence against Asian Americans, eradicate prejudice and hatred against Asian Americans, assess new tactics, and determine the future’s most effective methods of health and healing.
Read On! Australian Feminist Law Journal
►The Editorial Board of the Australian Feminist Law Journal is pleased to announce the publication of its latest issue. The articles in this issue examine some of the most timely and urgent contemporary problems: human milk banking; tampon tax in Australia; rethinking queerness and culture in India; environmental violence and GBV in Colombia; critical and mainstream feminist coalitions at the ECtHR; cultural-legal analysis of Netflix’s series ‘13 Reasons Why’; and Muslim women in Australian navigating the legal system and DFV. The AFLJ accepts submissions, and publishes articles on a rolling basis.
►For further information see their Aim & Scope.
COVID-19 Hate Crimes: Identifying the Real Virus that infects us [Part – I]
Asian Americans have reported a surge in hate crimes, including physical violence and harassment, since the outbreak of COVID-19. Health crises such as pandemics have historically been linked to stigmatization and discrimination against Asian people. From their arrival in America in the late 1700s, Asian Americans have faced verbal and physical abuse driven by personal racism and xenophobia. Discriminatory rhetoric and exclusionary policies have also been supported by the state, sustaining this violence at the institutional level. Insecurity and fear of foreigners have been exacerbated by COVID-19, leading to an increase in anti-Asian hate crimes, perpetuating inequality at individual and institutional levels.
What does one mean by a hate crime?
Hate crimes are a pernicious form of violence that target individuals or groups based on their membership or perceived membership in certain social or racial categories, such as ethnicity, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability, in the form of physical violence, property damage, harassment, and even murder. Hate crimes are distinct from hate speech, which refers to specific types of language that incite hatred or discrimination. Furthermore, while a hate crime is a criminal act, a ‘hate incident’ is noncriminal behavior driven by prejudice, which can potentially culminate into a hate crime.
The rippling consequences of hate crimes
The psychological effects of hate crimes can be profound and far-reaching, not just for the individuals who are directly affected but also for others. Victims of hate crimes that were motivated by hate and prejudice have been shown to have higher levels of psychological distress, including symptoms of despair and anxiety, than those of crimes not perpetuated due to xenophobia or racism. The following reasons for such an evaluation were addressed in a 1999 study:
- Hate crimes cause psychological and emotional harm as well as self-esteem issues to the individual victim.
- Hate crimes create a generalized fear among the targeted group.
- Hate crimes have a ripple effect on other vulnerable groups who associate with the targeted population.
- Hate crimes cause severe melancholy and stress in the entire community.
Hate crimes witnessed during the pandemic
The manifestation of the “Othering” theory
“Othering” is a process of marginalization and exclusion that occurs when a dominant group stigmatizes and excludes non-dominant groups who are racially different or lack a sense of “civic belonging”. This process is rooted in prejudice and fear and strengthens the dominant group’s perception of their own “normalcy” while categorizing those who are different as “abnormal.” This historical and ongoing process results in the disempowerment and social exclusion of marginalized groups.
Historical experiences of “othering” by Asian Americans
The projected immigration population of Asians in the US has grown dramatically yet prejudice and hate against them have been ongoing and they are frequently blamed for spreading disease during pandemics, and Asian Americans have historically been “othered” as an edifice and falsely portrayed as a model minority. This has resulted in microaggressions, hate crimes, and other forms of discrimination, like being labeled ‘dirty’ or ‘sickly’ during the pandemic. Asian Americans have been targeted regardless of their multiethnic identity, especially during times of economic instability, adversity, insurgency, or epidemic.
Burgeoning Anti-Asian hate crimes during the COVID-19 pandemic
In addition to prosecuting racial assaults against Asians and individuals of Asian origin, governments should take immediate action to stop racist and xenophobic violence and prejudice associated with the COVID-19 outbreak, according to a statement released by Human Rights Watch. Antonio Guterres stated that a “tsunami of hate and xenophobia, scapegoating and scaremongering around the world” and he asked states to “act now to strengthen the immunity of our societies against the virus of hate“. Government officials and political parties in various countries have used the COVID-19 pandemic to spread anti-immigrant, xenophobic, and white supremacist beliefs. This has resulted in an increase in hate crimes against minorities, including Asians.
Recent COVID-19 hate crime incidents in the US
Over the past year, more than 6,600 hate crimes have been reported against Asian-Americans, according to the advocacy group Stop AAPI Hate. Over the two years that the COVID-19 virus was widespread, several cases of violence and hate crimes in public spaces came up in the US. Some of the most preposterous attacks include homicide of an 84-year-old Thai immigrant on his daily walk in San Francisco, a 91-year-old senior being pushed to the ground in Oakland, assault and setting on fire an 89-year-old Chinese woman in Brooklyn, six Asian-American women being were shot at work in Atlanta, stabbing of two Asian American ladies at a bus stand in San Francisco, among countless others.
Asian-American community lacked timely and sufficient support during the rise of hate speech in the US, possibly influenced by Trump and Pompeo’s use of “Chinese virus” and “Wuhan virus” in 2020. While Trump later stopped doing so, he did not call for government action either. In contrast, President Biden did bring out reforms to protect the Asian-American community in 2021.
Related issues with COVID-19 hate crimes in the US
Hate crimes often go unreported due to obstacles that hinder victims from reporting to local police, resulting in underreporting and a partial picture of the prevalence of hate crimes. Language barriers can also prevent Asian immigrants from reporting victimization. Additionally, mistrust of law enforcement and concerns about immigration status may deter victims from reporting hate crimes.
IntLawGrrls 