Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe extrajudicial killing of Osama bin Laden (OBL) on 2 May 2011 was greeted with jubilation in the United States. The dominant interpretation of the event – expressed in US media, by US political elites, and on the streets of US cities – was that justice had been served on the perpetrator of the 9/11 atrocity and thereby a great historical wrong had been righted. This article argues that the 'justice' deployed was a proxy for revenge, understood as the infliction of harm on those who had inflicted harm on the avenger. The argument is situated in a broader discussion of the emotional topography on which acts of state revenge are politically premised. The bin Laden case is used to explore some issues raised by the growing literature on emotions in politics and International Relations including, most importantly, how emotions are collectivised and made public.

Among the many challenges confronting the United States and its allies in Afghanistan were cohesion and communication problems in state-building programs. Merging role theory and bureaucratic politics approaches, this article argues that US Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs), the composite groups charged with implementing these programs, suffered from incompatibilities between sectors of government, among which the military was dominant. US PRTs were affected by role conflict, resulting from varying and often competing organizational cultures with divergent role conceptions.

This article offers some reflections from diverse standpoints on actual and potential developments, at global and regional levels, and possible ramifications. The article has three main sections. The first section deals with the crisis of liberalism and its implications for peace and security. The second section examines some current controversial issues and cooperation between the EU, Australia and China. The third section analyses the effects of populist movements in Europe on China and Australia.

This study examines outcomes related to a parent representation pilot program in Travis County, Texas. Participation in the pilot program was related to earlier attorney appointment, a higher percentage of attorney presence across the life of the case, and a higher percentage of permanent outcomes for children. Parents' percentage of presence at hearings across the life of the case was related to the child being returned home, dismissal of the juvenile dependency petition, and permanent management conservatorship. Early attorney appointment (i.e., less than 10 days from the initial hearing to full appointment) was related to permanent case outcomes.

This article examines how the amount of judicial personnel work hours available for each juvenile dependency case in a county may be related to the percentage of cases reaching key decision hearings in a timely manner. Panel analyses of data from Washington State indicate that, when controlling for community risk factors, counties with more judicial personnel per case held timely fact‐finding and permanency planning hearings more often and more often achieved timely adoptions. Judicial personnel per case, however, was not a significant predictor of the percentage of permanent placements completed within timeliness goals.Keypoints
Many states are not achieving the requirements of the Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA), leading to children languishing in care
The juvenile dependency system needs to examine ways in which it can increase the timeliness of safe and permanent placements for children
Courts are being overburdened with an increase in juvenile dependency petition filings without a corresponding increase in judicial personnel
Courts should increase their number of judicial staff, so they can process cases faster and meet outcome goals more easily