Search results

AbstractIn this article I criticize a prominent account for resisting the extension of egalitarian justice to global politics. For Andrea Sangiovanni it is the reciprocity requirement generated by the provision of basic public goods that grounds egalitarian justice. Such basic public goods provision is absent internationally and this entails that egalitarian justice is only appropriate between citizens of the same political community. This article highlights the problematic empirical assumptions on which Sangiovanni's work builds. It proposes a more ample class of basic public goods necessary to act on a plan of life and maintains that whatever list we adopt, in a globalized world, basic public goods provision is often dependent on the international system. It goes on to suggest that the role of equality beyond borders is an important topic not only for relations between persons at the global level but also for inter‐state interactions and that what we really should be worried about is the instrumental effects that inequality has when it comes to issues concerning poverty reduction and the shape of international regimes and institutions.

Zorgbibe untersucht politische und rechtliche Aspekte bei der Einrichtung und Arbeit des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs für Ruanda, des Sondergerichtshofs für Sierra Leone und das Verhalten afrikanischer Staaten gegenüber internationalen Gerichtshöfen und Schiedsgerichten. Ruandas Präsident, Paul Kagamé, kritisiert im Interview das Arusha-Tribunal für Ruanda als ineffizient und verteidigt die von seinem Regime installierten Gacaca-Gerichte. Zorgbibe untersucht politische und rechtliche Aspekte bei der Einrichtung und Arbeit des Internationalen Strafgerichtshofs für Ruanda, des Sondergerichtshof für Sierra Leone und das Verhalten afrikanischer Staaten gegenüber internationalen Gerichtshöfen und Schiedsgerichten. (DÜI-Sbd)

The examination of the ethical and moral issues surrounding the reporting of war crimes signals one of the outstanding problems facing journalism in the contemporary era. As the nature of war has changed, so has the nature of the journalism mandated to cover it, and the selection of war crimes trials, tribunals and truth commissions are key places in which to analyse these changes. Journalists and news organizations are divided over the merits of testifying at international war crimes tribunals. To some degree, the debate about appearing before war crimes courts has split along European and US lines. A number of European journalists and documentary film makers willingly testified before the war crimes tribunal in The Hague whilst US journalists tend to see the subpoena power of the tribunals as a threat to First Amendment freedoms. Based on interviews conducted with journalists, editors, lawyers and humanitarian aid workers, this article explores questions of journalistic objectivity and impartiality; the verification of journalists' stories; the safety repercussions for journalists participating in international trials; and the implications for the erosion of confidentiality of journalists' sources.