[News] Israeli attacks designed to “terrorize” Gaza population, international law experts say
Anti-Imperialist News
news at freedomarchives.org
Tue Jul 29 10:27:12 EDT 2014
(Ismael Mohamad / United Press International)
Israeli attacks designed to “terrorize” Gaza population, international
law experts say
Submitted by Ali Abunimah on Mon, 07/28/2014 - 22:03
*http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/israeli-attacks-designed-terrorize-gaza-population-international-law-experts-say*
“The civilian population in the Gaza Strip is under direct attack,”
dozens of international law experts have warned in a statement
<http://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/israeli-attacks-designed-terrorize-gaza-population-international-law-experts-say#statement>
laying out numerous Israeli violations of the laws of war, some
amounting to war crimes.
The statement came as the death toll from Israel’s three weeks of
bombing reached 1,088 today
<http://maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=716726>, the first day of a
somber Eid al-Fitr, the holiday marking the end of the fasting month of
Ramadan.
Ten Palestinians, including at least eight children, were killed when
missiles struck a park
<http://maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=716699> in al-Shati refugee
camp as families gathered to mark the holiday.
Israel denied it was responsible for the attack and blamed misfired
Hamas rockets, but the Palestinian resistance group dismissed the
Israeli statement
<http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/middle-east-unrest/strikes-near-gazas-shifa-hospital-refugee-camp-kill-least-10-n166571>
as “a failed attempt to escape from this crime and its fears that this
crime will be exposed and held judicially accountable.”
Terrorizing civilians
“Most of the recent heavy bombings in Gaza lack an acceptable military
justification and, instead, appear to be designed to terrorize the
civilian population,” says the statement, signed by more than 140
international and criminal law scholars, human rights defenders, legal
and other experts.
Among them are John Dugard
<http://electronicintifada.net/tags/john-dugard> and Richard Falk
<http://electronicintifada.net/tags/richard-falk>, both former UN
special rapporteurs on the human rights situation in the occupied
Palestinian territories.
Others include Daniel Feierstein, president of the International
Association of Genocide Scholars; Penny Green, director of the State
Crime Initiative, King’s College London; and Karim Lahidji, president of
the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH).
“Gaza’s civilian population has been victimized in the name of a falsely
construed right to self-defense,” the statement adds.
Israel’s illegal attacks include its assault on the Gaza City
neighborhood of [Shujaiya], which the statement says “was one of the
bloodiest and most aggressive operations ever conducted by Israel in the
Gaza Strip, a form of urban violence constituting a total disrespect of
civilian innocence.”
“Pre-fabricated excuse”
The statement also points to Israel’s deliberate destruction of the
homes of thousands of people and Israel’s practice of giving “warnings”
either in the form of smaller projectiles fired at a building, or via
text message or telephone.
Despite such warnings, “it remains illegal to willfully attack a
civilian home without a demonstration of military necessity as it
amounts to a violation of the principle of proportionality,” the experts
say.
“Not only are these ‘warnings’ generally ineffective, and can even
result in further fatalities,”the statement notes, “they appear to be a
pre-fabricated excuse by Israel to portray people who remain in their
homes as ‘human shields.’”
“Israel’s illegal policy of absolute closure imposed on the Gaza Strip
has relentlessly continued, under the complicit gaze of the
international community of States,” the statement says.
The statement also denounces “the launch of rockets from the Gaza Strip,
as every indiscriminate attack against civilians, regardless of the
identity of the perpetrators, is not only illegal under international
law but also morally intolerable.”
“However,” it adds, “the two parties to the conflict cannot be
considered equal, and their actions – once again – appear to be of
incomparable magnitude.”
Accountability
Calling for accountability, the statement blames “several UN Member
States and the UN” for pressuring /de facto/ Palestinian Authority
leader Mahmoud Abbas not to seek “recourse to the International Criminal
Court (ICC).”
The statement calls on “the Governmental leaders of Palestine” –
presumably a reference to Abbas – to ratify the ICC treaty.
It also urges the UN Security Council to “exercise its responsibilities
in relation to peace and justice by referring the situation in Palestine
to the Prosecutor of the ICC” – an action that would require the support
of veto-wielding countries such as the US, France and UK, all of which
have defended Israel’s assault on Gaza.
The full statement and list of signers follow.
The International Community Must End Israel’s Collective Punishment
of the Civilian Population in the Gaza Strip
As international and criminal law scholars, human rights defenders,
legal experts and individuals who firmly believe in the rule of law and
in the necessity for its respect in times of peace and more so in times
of war, we feel the intellectual and moral duty to denounce the grave
violations, mystification and disrespect of the most basic principles of
the laws of armed conflict and of the fundamental human rights of the
entire Palestinian population committed during the ongoing Israeli
offensive on the Gaza Strip.
We also condemn the launch of rockets from the Gaza Strip, as every
indiscriminate attack against civilians, regardless of the identity of
the perpetrators, is not only illegal under international law but also
morally intolerable. However, as also implicitly noted by the UN Human
Rights Council in its Resolution of the 23 July 2014, the two parties to
the conflict cannot be considered equal, and their actions – once again
– appear to be of incomparable magnitude.
Once again it is the unarmed civilian population, the “protected
persons” under International humanitarian law (IHL), who is in the eye
of the storm. Gaza’s civilian population has been victimized in the name
of a falsely construed right to self-defence, in the midst of an
escalation of violence provoked in the face of the entire international
community. The so-called Operation Protective Edge erupted during an
ongoing armed conflict, in the context of a prolonged belligerent
occupation that commenced in 1967. In the course of this ongoing
conflict thousands of Palestinians have been killed and injured in the
Gaza Strip during recurrent and ostensible “ceasefire” periods since
2005, after Israel’s unilateral “disengagement from the Gaza Strip. The
deaths caused by Israel’s provocative actions in the Gaza Strip prior to
the latest escalation of hostilities must not be ignored as well.
According to UN sources
<http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/humanitarian_Snapshot_24July2014_oPt_V1.pdf>,
over the last two weeks, nearly 800 Palestinians in Gaza have been
killed and more than 4,000 injured, of whom the vast majority were
civilians. Several independent sources indicate that only 15 per cent of
the casualties were combatants. Entire families have been murdered.
Hospitals, clinics, as well as a rehabilitation center for disabled
persons have been targeted and severely damaged. During one single day,
on Sunday 20 July, more than 100 Palestinian civilians were killed in
Shujaiya, a residential neighborhood of Gaza City. This was one of the
bloodiest and most aggressive operations ever conducted by Israel in the
Gaza Strip, a form of urban violence constituting a total disrespect of
civilian innocence. Sadly, this was followed only a couple of days later
by an equally destructive attack on Khuzaa, east of Khan Younis.
Additionally, the offensive has already caused widespread destruction of
buildings and infrastructure: according to the UN Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, over 3,300 houses have been
targeted resulting in their destruction or severe damage. As denounced
by the UN Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) on the Gaza conflict in the
aftermath of Israel’s “Operation Cast Lead” in 2008-2009: “While the
Israeli Government has sought to portray its operations as essentially a
response to rocket attacks in the exercise of its right to self defence,
the Mission considers the plan to have been directed, at least in part,
at a different target: The people of Gaza as a whole” (A/HRC/12/48, par.
1680). The same can be said for the current Israeli offensive.
The civilian population in the Gaza Strip is under direct attack and
many are forced to leave their homes. What was already a refugee and
humanitarian crisis has worsened with a new wave of mass displacement of
civilians: the number of IDPs [internally displaced persons] has reached
nearly 150,000, many of whom have obtained shelter in overcrowded UNRWA
schools, which unfortunately are no safe areas as demonstrated by the
repeated attacks on the UNRWA school in Beit Hanoun. Everyone in Gaza is
traumatized and living in a state of constant terror.
This result is intentional, as Israel is again relying on the “Dahiya
doctrine
<http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/12session/A-HRC-12-48.pdf>,”
which deliberately has recourse to disproportionate force to inflict
suffering on the civilian population in order to achieve political (to
exert pressure on the Hamas Government) rather than military goals.
In so doing, Israel is repeatedly and flagrantly violating the law of
armed conflict, which establishes that combatants and military
objectives may be targeted, /i.e./ “those objects which by their nature,
location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military
action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or
neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a
definite military advantage.” Most of the recent heavy bombings in Gaza
lack an acceptable military justification and, instead, appear to be
designed to terrorize the civilian population. As the ICRC clarifies,
deliberately causing terror
<http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule2> is
unequivocally illegal under customary international law.
In its Advisory Opinion in the Nuclear Weapons case, the ICJ
[International Court of Justice] stated that the principle of
distinction, which requires belligerent States to distinguish between
civilian and combatants, is one of the “cardinal principles” of
international humanitarian law and one of the “intransgressible
principles of international customary law.”
The principle of distinction is codified in Articles 48, 51(2) and 52(2)
of the Additional Protocol I of 1977 to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, to
which no reservations have been made. According to Additional Protocol
I, “attacks” refer to “acts of violence against the adversary, whether
in offence or in defence” (Article 49). Under both customary
international law and treaty law, the prohibition on directing attacks
against the civilian population or civilian objects is absolute. There
is no discretion available to invoke military necessity as a justification.
Contrary to Israel’s claims, mistakes resulting in civilian casualties
cannot be justified: in case of doubt as to the nature of the target,
the law clearly establishes that an object which is normally dedicated
to civilian purposes (such as schools, houses, places of worship and
medical facilities), are presumed as not being used for military purposes.
During these past weeks, UN officials and representatives have
repeatedly called on Israel to strictly abide by the principle of
precaution in carrying out attacks in the Gaza Strip, where risks are
greatly aggravated by the very high population density, and maximum
restraint must be exercised to avoid civilian casualties. Human Rights
Watch has noted
<http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/07/17/dispatches-explaining-four-dead-boys-gaza-beach>
that these rules exist to minimize mistakes “when such mistakes are
repeated, it raises the concern of whether the rules are being disregarded.”
Moreover, even when targeting clear military objectives, Israel
consistently violates the principle of proportionality:
<http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule14> this is
particularly evident with regard to the hundreds of civilian houses
destroyed by the Israeli army during the current military operation in
Gaza. With the declared intention to target a single member of Hamas,
Israeli forces have bombed and destroyed houses although occupied as
residences by dozens of civilians, including women, children, and entire
families.
It is inherently illegal under customary international law to
intentionally target civilian objects, and the violation of such a
fundamental tenet of law can amount to a war crime. Issuing a “warning”
– such as Israel’s so-called roof knocking technique, or sending an SMS
five minutes before the attack – does not mitigate this: it remains
illegal to wilfully attack a civilian home without a demonstration of
military necessity as it amounts to a violation of the principle of
proportionality. Moreover, not only are these “warnings” generally
ineffective, and can even result in further fatalities, they appear to
be a pre-fabricated excuse by Israel to portray people who remain in
their homes as “human shields.”
The indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks, the targeting of
objectives providing no effective military advantage, and the
intentional targeting of civilians and civilian houses have been
persistent features of Israel’s long-standing policy of punishing the
entire population of the Gaza Strip, which, for over seven years, has
been virtually imprisoned by Israeli imposed closure.
Such a regime amounts to a form of collective punishment, which
<http://www.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule103> violates the
unconditional prohibition set forth in Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva
Convention and has been internationally condemned for its illegality.
However, far from being effectively opposed by international actors,
Israel’s illegal policy of absolute closure imposed on the Gaza Strip
has relentlessly continued, under the complicit gaze of the
international community of States.
As affirmed in 2009 by the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict:
“Justice and respect for the rule of law are the indispensable basis for
peace. The prolonged situation has created a justice crisis in the
Occupied Palestinian Territory that warrants action” (A/HRC/12/48, para.
1958) Indeed: “long-standing impunity has been a key factor in the
perpetuation of violence in the region and in the reoccurrence of
violations, as well as in the erosion of confidence among Palestinians
and many Israelis concerning prospects for justice and a peaceful
solution to the conflict” (A/HRC/12/48, para. 1964).
Therefore,
*
We welcome the Resolution
<http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/SpecialSessions/Session21/Pages/21stSpecialSession.aspx>
adopted on 23 July 2014 by the UN Human Rights Council, in which an
independent, international commission of inquiry was established to
investigate all violations of international humanitarian law and
international human rights law in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
*
We call upon the United Nations, the Arab League, the European
Union, individual States, in particular the United States of
America, and the international community in its entirety and with
its collective power to take action in the spirit of the utmost
urgency to put an end to the escalation of violence against the
civilian population of the Gaza Strip, and to activate procedures to
hold accountable all those responsible for violations of
international law, including political leaders and military
commanders. In particular:
*
All regional and international actors should support the immediate
conclusion of a durable, comprehensive, and mutually agreed
ceasefire agreement, which must secure the rapid facilitation and
access of humanitarian aid and the opening of borders to and from Gaza;
*
All High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions must be
urgently and unconditionally called upon to comply with their
fundamental obligations, binding at all times, and to act under
common Article 1, to take all measures necessary for the suppression
of grave breaches, as clearly imposed by Article 146 and Article 147
of the Fourth Geneva Convention; these rules are applicable by all
interested parties as well;
*
Moreover, we denounce the shameful political pressures exerted by
several UN Member States and the UN on President Mahmoud Abbas, to
discourage recourse to the International Criminal Court (ICC), and
we urge the Governmental leaders of Palestine to invoke the
jurisdiction of the ICC, by ratifying the ICC treaty and in the
interim by resubmitting the declaration under Article 12(3) of the
Rome Statute, in order to investigate and prosecute the serious
international crimes committed on the Palestinian territory by all
parties to the conflict; and
*
The UN Security Council must finally exercise its responsibilities
in relation to peace and justice by referring the situation in
Palestine to the Prosecutor of the ICC.
*Signers:*
Please note that institutional affiliations are for identification
purposes only.
1. John Dugard, Former UN Special Rapporteur on human rights situation
in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
2. Richard Falk, Former UN Special Rapporteur on human rights situation
in the Occupied Palestinian Territory
3. Alain Pellet, Professor of Public International Law, University
Paris Ouest, former Member of the United Nations International Law
Commission, France
4. Georges Abi-Saab, Emeritus Professor of International Law, Graduate
Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Former
Judge on the ICTY
5. Vera Gowlland-Debbas, Emeritus Professor of International Law,
Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva,
Switzerland
6. Chantal Meloni, Adjunct Professor of International Criminal Law,
University of Milan, Italy (Rapporteur)
7. Roy Abbott, Consultant in International Humanitarian Law and
International Human Rights Law, Australia
8. Lama Abu-Odeh, Law Professor, Georgetown University Law Center, USA
9. Susan M. Akram, Clinical Professor and supervising attorney,
International Human rights Program, Boston University School of Law, USA
10. Taris Ahmad, Solicitor at Jones Day, London, UK
11. Maria Anagnostaki, PhD candidate, Law School University of Athens,
Greece
12. Antony Anghie, Professor of Law, University of Utah, USA
13. Nizar Ayoub, Director, Al-Marsad, Arab Human Rights Centre in Golan
Heights
14. Valentina Azarov, Lecturer in Human Rights and International Law, Al
Quds Bard College, Palestine
15. Ammar Bajboj, Lecturer in Law, University of Damascus, Syria
16. Samia Bano, SOAS School of Law, London, UK
17. Asli Ü Bali, Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law, USA
18. Jakub Micha? Baranowski, Phd Candidate, Universita’ degli Studi Roma
Tre, Italy
19. Frank Barat, Russell Tribunal on Palestine
20. Emma Bell, Coordinator of the European Group for the Study of
Deviance and Social Control, Université de Savoie, France
21. Barbara Giovanna Bello, Post-doc Fellow, University of Milan, Italy
22. Brenna Bhandar, Senior lecturer in Law, SOAS School of Law, London, UK
23. George Bisharat, Professor of Law, UC Hastings College of Law, USA
24. Barbara Blok, LLM Candidate, University of Essex, UK
25. John Braithwaite, Professor of Criminology, Australian National
University, Australia
26. Michelle Burgis-Kasthala, lecturer in international law, University
of Edinburgh, UK
27. Eddie Bruce-Jones, Lecturer in Law, University of London, Birkbeck
College, UK
28. Sandy Camlann, LLM Candidate, Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La
Défense, France
29. Grazia Careccia, Human Rights Advocate, London, UK
30. Baris Cayli, Impact Fellow, University of Stirling, UK
31. Antonio Cavaliere, Professor of Criminal Law, University Federico
II, Naples, Italy
32. Kathleen Cavanaugh, Senior Lecturer, Irish Center for Human Rights,
National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
33. Elizabeth Chadwick, Reader in International Law, Nottingham, UK
34. Donna R. Cline, Attorney at Law, USA
35. Karen Corteen, Senior Lecturer in Criminology, University of Chester, UK
36. Andrew Dahdal, Lecturer, Faculty of Business and Economics,
Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
37. Teresa Dagenhardt, Reader in Criminology, Queen’s University
Belfast, Northern Ireland
38. Luigi Daniele, PhD candidate in Law, Italy
39. Alessandro De Giorgi, Professor of Justice Studies, San Josè State
University, USA
40. Paul de Waart, Professor Emeritus of International Law, VU
University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
41. Gabriele della Morte, Senior Lecturer in International Law,
University Cattolica, Milan, Italy
42. Max du Plessis, Professor of Law, University of Kwazulu-Natal, and
Barrister, South Africa and London, UK
43. Noura Erakat, Georgetown University, USA
44. Mohammad Fadel, Associate Professor of Law, University of Toronto
Faculty of Law, Canada
45. Mireille Fanon-Mendés France, Independent Expert UNO, Frantz Fanon
Foundation, France
46. Michelle Farrell, lecturer in law, School of Law and Social Justice,
University of Liverpool, UK
47. Daniel Feierstein, Professor and President International Association
of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), Argentina
48. Eleonor Fernández Muñoz, Costa Rica
49. J. Tenny Fernando, Attorney at Law, Sri Lanka
50. Amelia Festa, LLM Candidate, University of Naples Federico II, Italy
51. Katherine Franke, Professor of Law, Columbia Law School, USA
52. Jacques Gaillot, Bishop in partibus of Patenia
53. Katherine Gallagher, Vice President FIDH, senior attorney, Centre
for Constitutional Rights (CCR), New York, USA
54. Avo Sevag Garabet, LLM, University of Groningen, the Netherlands
55. Jose Garcia Anon, Professor of Law, Human Rights Institute,
University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain
56. Irene Gasparini, PhD candidate, Universitá Cattolica, Milan, Italy
57. Stratos Georgoulas, Assistant Professor, University of the Aegean,
Greece
58. Haluk Gerger, Professor, Turkey
59. Hedda Giersten, Professor, Universitet I Oslo, Norway
60. Javier Giraldo, Director Banco de Datos CINEP, Colombia
61. Carmen G. Gonzales, Professor of Law, Seattle University School of
Law, USA
62. Penny Green, Professor of Law and Criminology, Director of the State
Crime Initiative, King’s College London, UK
63. Katy Hayward, Senior Lecturer in Sociology, Queen’s University
Belfast, Northern Ireland
64. Andrew Henley, PhD candidate, Keele University, UK
65. Christiane Hessel, Paris, France
66. Paddy Hillyard, Professor Emeritus, Queen’s University Belfast,
Northern Ireland
67. Ata Hindi, Institute of Law, Birzeit University, Palestine
68. Francois Houtart, Professor, National Institute of Higher Studies,
Quito, Ecuador
69. Deena R. Hurwitz, Professor, General Faculty, Director International
Human Rights Law Clinic, University of Virginia School of Law, USA
70. Perfecto Andrés Ibánes, Magistrado Tribunal Supremo de Espagna, Spain
71. Franco Ippolito, President of the Permanent People’s Tribunal, Italy
72. Ruth Jamieson, Honorary Lecturer, School of Law, Queen’s University,
Belfast, Northern Ireland
73. Helen Jarvis, former member Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of
Cambodia (ECCC), member of IAGS, Cambodia
74. Ioannis Kalpouzos, Lecturer in Law, City Law School, London, UK
75. Victor Kattan, post-doctoral fellow, Law Faculty, National
University of Singapore
76. Michael Kearney, PhD, Lecturer in Law, University of Sussex, UK
77. Yousuf Syed Khan, USA
78. Tarik Kochi, Senior Lecturer in Law, School of Law, Politics and
Sociology, University of Sussex, UK
79. Anna Koppel, MSt Candidate in International Human Rights Law,
University of Oxford, UK
80. Karim Lahidji, President of the International Federation for Human
Rights (FIDH) and lawyer
81. Giulia Lanza, PhD Candidate, Università degli Studi di Verona, Italy
82. Daniel Machover, solicitor, Hickman & Rose, London, UK
83. Tayyab Mahmud, Professor of Law, Director of the Centre for Global
Justice, Seattle University School of Law, USA
84. Maria C. LaHood, Senior Staff Attorney, CCR, New York, USA
85. Louise Mallinder, Reader in Human Rights and International Law,
University of Ulster, UK
86. Triestino Mariniello, Lecturer in International Criminal Law, Edge
Hill University, UK
87. Mazen Masri, Lecturer in Law, The City Law School, City University,
London, UK
88. Siobhan McAlister, School of Sociology, Queen’s University Belfast,
Northern Ireland
89. Liam McCann, Principal Lecturer in Criminology, University of
Lincoln, UK
90. Jude McCulloch, Professor of Criminology, Monash University,
Melbourne, Australia
91. Yvonne McDermott Rees, Lecturer in Law, University of Bangor, UK
92. Cahal McLaughlin, Professor, School of Creative Arts, Queen’s
University Belfast, Northern Ireland
93. Araks Melkonyan, LLM Candidate, University of Essex, UK
94. Antonio Menna, PhD Candidate, Second University of Naples, Caserta,
Italy
95. Naomi Mezey, Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center, USA
96. Michele Miravalle, PhD candidate, University of Torino, Italy
97. Sergio Moccia, Professor of Criminal Law, University Federico II,
Naples, Italy
98. Kerry Moore, Lecturer, Cardiff University
99. Giuseppe Mosconi, Professor of Sociology, University of Padova, Italy
100. Usha Natarajan, Assistant Professor, Department of Law & Centre for
Migration and Refugee Studies, The American University in Cairo, Egypt
101. Miren Odriozola Gurrutxaga, PhD Candidate, University of the Basque
Country, Donostia - San Sebastián, Spain
102. Georgios Papanicolaou, Reader in Criminology, Teesside University, UK
103. Marco Pertile, Senior Lecturer in International Law,
104. Faculty of Law, University of Trento, Italy
105. Andreas Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, Professor of Law and Theory,
LLM, The Westminster Law and Theory Centre, UK
106. Antoni Pigrau Solé, Universitat Rovira i Virgili de Tarragona, Spain
107. Joseph Powderly, Assistant Professor of Public International Law,
Leiden University, The Netherlands
108. Tony Platt, Visiting Professor of Justice Studies, San Jose State
University, USA
109. Scott Poynting, Professor in Criminology, University of Auckland,
New Zeeland
110. Chris Powell, Professor of Criminology, University S.Maine, USA
111. Bill Quigley, Professor, Loyola University, New Orleans College of
Law, USA
112. John Quigley, Professor of Law, Ohio State University
113. Zouhair Racheha, PhD Candidate, University Jean Moulin Lyon 3, France
114. Laura Raymond, International Human Rights Advocacy Program Manager,
CCR, New York, USA
115. Véronique Rocheleau-Brosseau, LLM candidate, Laval University, Canada
116. David Rodríguez Goyes, Lecturer, Antonio Nariño and Santo Tomás
Universities, Colombia
117. Alessandro Rosanò, PhD Candidate, Università degli Studi di Padova,
Italy
118. Jamil Salem, Director Institute of Law, Birzeit University, Palestine
119. Mahmood Salimi, LLM Candidate, Moofid University, Iran
120. Nahed Samour, doctoral fellow, Humboldt University, Faculty of Law,
Berlin, Germany
121. Iain GM Scobbie, Professor of Public International Law, University
of Manchester, UK
122. David Scott, Senior Lecturer in Criminology, Liverpool John Moores
University, UK
123. Phil Scraton, Professor of Criminology, Belfast, Ireland
124. Rachel Seoighe, PhD Candidate, Legal Consultant, King’s College
London, UK
125. Tanya Serisier, School of Sociology, Queen’s University Belfast,
Northern Ireland
126. Mohammad Shahabuddin, PdD, Visiting researcher, Graduate School of
International Social Sciences, Yokohama National University, Japan
127. Dean Spade, Seattle University School of Law, USA
128. Per Stadig, lawyer, Sweden
129. Chantal Thomas, Professor of Law, Cornell University, USA
130. Kendall Thomas, Nash Professor of Law, Columbia University, USA
131. Gianni Tognoni, Lelio Basso Foundation, Rome, Italy
132. Steve Tombs, Professor of Criminology, The Open University, UK
133. Paul Troop, Barrister, Garden Court Chambers, UK
134. Valeria Verdolini, Reader in Sociology, University of Milan, Italy
135. Francesca Vianello, University of Padova, Italy
136. Aimilia Voulvouli, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Fatih
University, Turkey
137. Namita Wahi, Fellow, Centre for Policy Research, Dharma Marg,
Chanakyapuri, New Delhi, India
138. Sharon Weill, PhD, Science Po, Paris/ CERAH, Geneva, Switzerland
139. Peter Weiss, Vice President of Centre for Constitutional Rights
(CCR), New York, USA
140. David Whyte, Reader in Sociology, University of Liverpool, UK
141. Jeanne M. Woods, Henry F. Bonura, Jr. Distinguished Professor of
Law, Loyola University College of Law, New Orleans, USA
142. William Thomas Worster, Lecturer, International Law, The Hague
University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands
143. Maung Zarni, Judge, PPT on Sri Lanka and Visiting Fellow, London
School of Economics and Political Science
--
Freedom Archives 522 Valencia Street San Francisco, CA 94110 415
863.9977 www.freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20140729/386aea4e/attachment.htm>
More information about the News
mailing list