Harvard ILJ

[T]those who are a part of the Christian Iraqi diaspora are hesitant to return to their homeland due to the systematic violence and discrimination they have faced and may face again. Can international action or internal, government programs do anything to save Christianity in Iraq?

[T]his Commentary considers some possible explanations for the international community’s continuing inability to negotiate an effective agreement to crack down on firms that bribe foreign officials. The Commentary concludes by speculating that an institutionalized enforcement mechanism might provide impetus for an agreement.

This commentary examines the Kiobel decision against other recent interpretations of the ATS, especially those following the Supreme Court’s decision in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain. Although corporate immunity makes little sense doctrinally, this commentary attempts to provide a rationale for the Second Circuit’s decision.

The decision of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia to sentence Duch, the brutal Chairman of S-21 and the Killing Fields at Choeung Ek, to a mere nineteen years in prison exemplifies the disturbing tendency of international criminal tribunals to issue sentences of pedestrian severity to the world’s very worst criminals. This article examines the sociopolitical roots of this phenomenon. Drawing on insights from the political science literature to engage in a comparative analysis of the relationship between democracy and punishment, the article concludes that international criminal tribunals’ lenience likely stems, at least in part, from excessive insulation from, and insensitivity to, democratic pressures.

On November 21, 2007, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights will hear the case of Yumak and Sadak v. Turkey. The question for the Council of Europe’s highest court will be whether Turkey’s 10% electoral threshold amounts to a denial of free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature, thereby constituting a violation of Article 3 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

China’s new international adoption law, set to take effect on May 1, 2007, will prohibit international adoption of Chinese children by single adults. International adoption is a popular avenue for prospective adoptive parents in the United States, and because China has been a major source of internationally adopted children, these new laws will significantly impact the steady trend of U.S. citizens adopting abroad.