Posts
What International War Crimes Tribunals Are
International war crimes tribunals are courts of law established to try individuals accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Despite the often heinous nature of the crimes that individuals commit during intractable conflicts, including genocide, torture, and rape, it has become common practice to offer the accused an opportunity to explain his or her actions in front of the victims and their families, as well as the media. Tribunals have almost entirely replaced retributive justice's summary executions. Based on generally agreed-upon international standards of acceptable human behavior, they have introduced a new ethos of liberal legalism for dealing with war crimes.[1]
Why War Crimes Tribunals Matter
Following a conflict, crimes that have exceeded the normal parameters of war behavior (jus in bello) must be dealt with before a society can begin the peacebuilding process of reconciliation. War crimes tribunals do not offer the accused a chance for forgiveness as truth and reconciliation commissions do. Tribunals do, however, offer victims and their families the opportunity to confront those responsible for what happened to them, and hopefully to put the horrors of war behind them. A tribunal can be a forum for honoring the memory of those lost, as well as punishing those responsible.
The war crimes tribunals of Nuremberg and Tokyo, in which legal justice was used to punish the upper echelons of the German and Japanese military following World War II, continue to be regarded as the most successful tribunals to date. The democratic, progressive success of both nations following these tribunals is often given as evidence of the effectiveness of war crimes tribunals in helping a society that has perpetrated war crimes to return to stable diplomatic relations and the road to peace.
The Positive Side of War Crimes Tribunals
Mark Amstutz, a professor at Wheaton College, finds fault with retributive approaches to justice because they do not pay sufficient attention to how individuals are to reconstruct their lives.
One of the arguments in support of war crimes tribunals is that they act as a deterrent to potential war criminals. In fact, this idea is one of the main arguments behind a push to construct a permanent international war crimes tribunal. Currently, tribunals have to be sponsored by an organization like the U.N. or a national government. Without a permanently-established war crimes court, military and government leaders may feel emboldened to commit crimes such as the mass murder of ethnic groups in East Timor in the 1980s and 1990s, or in Rwanda in 1994.
War crimes tribunals offer a rare chance for the world's leaders and citizens to scrutinize both the deplorable decisions made by particular leaders, and the atrocities committed by the soldiers and agents of those leaders. Without such a forum, there would be no method for assuring that the masterminds and perpetrators of genocide and other war crimes are justly punished.
Tribunals also give victims and their families an opportunity to regain a sense of power that may have been lost resulting from a war crime. It is empowering for victims to stand up in a court of law and identify those who wronged them. A war crimes tribunal can also force forgotten or hidden atrocities to be retold by survivors. In this way war criminals living free of judgment are finally forced to accept responsibility for their actions and be judged for what they have done.
For a country attempting to make a transition from a repressive regime to a democracy, war crimes tribunals offer citizens and leaders the opportunity to put their faith in an equitable rule of law. Countries that truly wish to become modern democracies must accept the rule of democratic law and apply it to even their most powerful criminals. While this process takes an enormous effort of national will, nations that successfully conduct tribunals within the bounds of such laws prove they can function without reverting to the undesirable methods of repression and violence. Thus war crimes tribunals have the potential to help emerging democracies discover the benefits of a strong legal system while reconciling past atrocities.[2]
Finally, if all members of a society can agree upon what is unacceptable by trying its war criminals, then it is easier for the society to agree on what is acceptable. A successful war crimes tribunal allows the past to be laid to rest and a peaceful future forged from its results.
The Negative Side of War Crimes Tribunals
Terrence Lyons talks about the balance that lies between providing incentives for dictators to step down and enforcing punishment mechanisms for leaders who have behaved unjustly.
Many argue that war crimes tribunals offer no deterrent to potential criminals whatsoever. People with strong convictions against a certain religious or ethnic group will likely not feel any less hatred for that group just because a possible tribunal looms in the future. Both Hitler and Pol Pot believed they would be revered by future generations for the extreme measures they took to change the makeup of their societies. These leaders were inspired by their visions of the future and it is unlikely the prospect of a war crimes tribunal would have swayed either dictator.
In fact, another argument against tribunals is that men like Hitler and Pol Pot, the leaders of violent movements, are never judged by tribunals for what they do. A war crimes tribunal that tries only middle ranking officers, soldiers, and politicians is not as effective as one that tries the mastermind behind the crimes. The trial of Slobodan Milosevic offers some hope for the future of tribunals. However, if Milosevic is acquitted, that will support another argument against tribunals: often the legal system actually helps the accused avoid punishment. Insufficient evidence, unclear testimony, unsure witnesses, and the inability to directly link crimes with individuals due to chains of command are all factors that can lead to war criminals walking free, with full grace of the court.
Another criticism of war crimes tribunals is that they do not alleviate the underlying causes of the conflict. In fact, tribunals can escalate conflict, especially in a multi-ethnic society. In cases of genocide, those accused of war crimes are usually all from one ethnic group. To this group, a war crimes tribunal can appear to be a trial against their ethnicity, not just an individual from their group. This is especially true when the judicial system fails to fairly represent the whole society. For example, Rwandan Hutus accused of killing Tutsis would doubt in the possibility of a fair trial if only Tutsis were running the tribunal. Other Hutus, including those not accused, would likely feel the same way. Thus the war crimes tribunal could act as a wedge driving the two groups further apart.
This idea leads to another complaint about war crimes tribunals: that they are ineffective in transforming a fractured society into one of stability and peace. Following the end of apartheid in South Africa, the Rev. Desmond Tutu argued against a war crimes tribunal, pushing instead for a truth and reconciliation commission. He believed that no reconciliation or transformation was possible if the accused were not forgiven. War crimes tribunals necessarily demonize individuals and sometimes whole groups, further separating parties, instead of building peace.[3]
Possibly the most powerful argument against war crimes tribunals is that they offer only the victors justice. What was most obviously missing following World War II was not Hitler at Nuremberg, but a trial for Americans, French, British, and Russian individuals who committed acts that would have been considered war crimes had the Allies lost the war. The fire bombing of Dresden and the use of atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki are clear examples of acts for which Allied leaders would have been tried had the war ended in favor of the Germans and Japanese. While it is easy and satisfying to put the enemy in prison for what he or she has done, it does not seem entirely fair if all those who participate in a war are not held to the same standards. In fact, one of the reasons that the United States has so far failed to support an international war crimes tribunal, the International Criminal Court, is fear that U.S. officers would be found guilty by the court. The United States also fears that this Court could be used for political revenge against the world's only superpower.
The Creation of an International Criminal Court
Sarah Cobb describes the importance of framing values clearly in one's narratives.
The International Criminal Court (I.C.C.) was officially established on July 1, 2002, and is located in The Hague, The Netherlands. However, all of the world's nations have not ratified the Rome Statute of the I.C.C., the document outlining the purposes, capabilities, and restrictions of the I.C.C. In fact, the United States, Russia, and Japan are among the major industrialized states that have yet to ratify this document. However, a sufficient number of nations have ratified the Rome Statute, and in accordance with its rules, the court now officially exists.
A key component of the I.C.C. is that only war crimes committed after the I.C.C.'s establishment can fall under its jurisdiction. Another aspect is that only those nations that ratify the document will fall under its jurisdiction. In general, the I.C.C. will have jurisdiction over crimes brought to its attention by outside parties or by its own investigators. The I.C.C. will not replace national tribunals, but will complement them by offering an arena for hearing claims that may be too complicated or extensive for a national court.[4]
One could argue that until all of the nations of the world ratify the Rome Statute, the Court cannot truly be considered an international criminal court. However, the establishment of the Court is a significant step toward the creation of an international system of war crimes justice.
[1] Bass, Gary Jonathan. Stay the Hand of Vengeance: The politics of war crimes tribunals. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000)
[2] Kritz, Neil J. Transitional Justice: How emerging democracies reckon with former regimes. (Washington: USIP, 1995)
[3] Tutu, Desmond Mpilo. No Future Without Forgiveness. (New York: Doubleday, 1999)
[4] Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. (United Nations, 1999-2002) [on-line] Available from http://www.un.org/law/icc/statute/romefra.htm. Accessed on January 30, 2002.
Use the following to cite this article:McMorran, Chris. "International War Crimes Tribunals." Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: July 2003 <http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/int_war_crime_tribunals/>.
Sources of Additional, In-depth Information on this Topic
Additional Explanations of the Underlying Concepts:
Online (Web) Sources
Brahm, Eric. "Burying the Past: Making Peace and Doing Justice After Civil Conflict -- Summary." Conflict Research Consortium, 2000. Available at: http://www.beyondintractability.org/booksummary/10047/.This is a summary of Nigel Biggar's "Burying the Past: Making Peace and Doing Justice After Civil Conflict."Brahm, Eric. "Closing the Books: Transitional Justice in Historical Perspective -- Summary." Conflict Research Consortium, 2000. Available at: http://www.beyondintractability.org/booksummary/10185/.This is a summary of Jon Elster's "Closing the Books: Transitional Justice in Historical Perspective."Brahm, Eric. "Confronting Past Human Rights Violations: Justice vs. Peace in Times of Transition -- Summary." Conflict Research Consortium. Available at: http://www.beyondintractability.org/booksummary/10029/.This is a summary of Chandra Lekha Sriram's "Confronting Past Human Rights Violations: Justice vs. Peace in Times of Transition"Facing History and Ourselves. Available at: http://www.facinghistory.org.This organization is based around helping people to understand the present and future by educating them about the past. It seeks to develop programs that would allow students to think critically about the past by emphasizing morality in history. The website has links to new articles discussing current world events and also provides resources for understanding these events. There are also resources like academic articles, films, books, and teaching tools provided at this site.International Criminal Court Fact Sheet. United Nations. Available at: http://www.un.org/News/facts/iccfact.htm.This United Nations site includes a helpful list of frequently asked questions about the ICC as well as a video of the press conference announcing the formal establishment of the Court. Nuremberg War Crimes Trials. Available at: http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/imt.htm.This site offers a comprehensive list of documents related to the Nuremberg war trials.Smith, Charles Anthony. "The Primacy of Politics: Justice, Power, and War Crimes Trials." Online Journal of Peace and Conflict Resolution, Vol. 2, No. 3 , 1999Available at: http://www.trinstitute.org/ojpcr/2_3smith.htm.This online article discusses the purposes behind war crimes tribunals, namely political trials versus trials seeking justice.Cassette, Jacquie. "Towards Justice in the Wake of Armed Conflicts?: The Evolution of War Crimes Tribunals." African Security Review, Vol. 9, No. 5/6 , 2000Available at: http://www.iss.co.za/Pubs/ASR/9No5And6/Cassette.html."This article traces the history and development of war crimes tribunals in the context of the development of international criminal law, with the emphasis on the establishment of the ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and in hopeful anticipation of the establishment of a permanent international criminal court." "War Crimes Tribunals/Truth Commissions." , 2002Available at: Click here for more info."International or domestic war crimes tribunals and domestic war crimes trials investigate and prosecute war crimes and genocide where massive violations of human rights have been perpetrated, usually by military, para-military and political organizations associated with a government, often having incited civilians to participate in the violations. Commissions of inquiry and truth commissions investigate and publish war crimes and genocide." This page includes all the pertinent information regarding war crimes tribunals and truth commissions as tools in conflict prevention and resolution.
Offline (Print) Sources
Biggar, Nigel, ed. Burying the Past: Making Peace and Doing Justice after Civil Conflict. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, March 2001. This is a collection of essays drawn together by Nigel Biggar (Professor of Theology at the University of Leeds) that explores the challenges of establishing democracy after a period of violent and prolonged civil conflict. Relationships within the populace must be restored so that reprisals and revenge do not undermine or subvert emerging democratic processes. Click here for more info.Elster, Jon. Closing the Books: Transitional Justice in Historical Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, September 6, 2004. This books examines historical examples of the process of transitional justice. It discusses how different countries have dealt with the fall of regimes, war criminals, and moving past the memories of conflict. Click here for more info.Sriram, Chandra Lekha. Confronting Past Human Rights Violations: Justice vs. Peace in Times of Transition. New York: Frank Cass, 2004. This book challenges transitional justice literature, which aruges that in a period of transition governments much choose between ensuring peace and attaining justice. This Sriram believes that there is a peace and justice continuum and rather than putting the two in competition with each other. Click here for more info.Akhavan, Payam. "Beyond Impunity: Can International Criminal Justice Prevent Future Atrocities?." American Journal of International Law 95:1, January 2001. Akhaven looks at the "determinate causes" of large-scale violence and determines that, despite an "inverted morality [that] has elevated otherwise 'deviant' crimes to the highest expression of group loyalty," international stigmatization of criminal conduct may have significant influence and promote post-conflict reconciliation.Weiss, Thomas G. and Don Hubert. "The Responsibility to Protect: Supplementary Volume to the Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty." Canada: International Development Research Centre, 2001. This book draws an important link between liberal democracies and the legalist use of war crimes tribunals. It offers case studies of the most historically significant war crimes tribunals.Transitional Justice: How Emerging Democracies Reckon with Former Regimes: General Considerations - Vol. 1. Herndon, VA: United States Institute of Peace Press, September 1, 1995. This volume (first in a series of three) is a compilation of works published elsewhere on the idea of transitional justice. The overall goal of the volume is to compile the many lessons learned by emerging democracies trying to use the rule of law to reckon with the atrocities of their national pasts.
Return to Top
Examples Illustrating this Topic:
Online (Web) Sources
van Metre, Lauren. Dayton Implementation: The Apprehension and Prosecution of Indicted War Criminals. United States Institute of Peace (USIP). Available at: Click here for more info.This report summarizes the recommendations of the USIP Working Group on Dayton Implementation regarding the apprehension and prosecution of war criminals in the former Yugoslavia. Prosecution must be one of the first steps in U.S. policy, since community development and reconciliation cannot begin until such justice has occurred.Wald, Patricia M. "Dealing with Witnesses in War Crime Trials: Lessons from the Yugoslav Tribunal." Yale Human Rights & Development Law Journal, Vol. 5 , 2002Available at: Click here for more info.This article argues that convictions, if they are to be legitimate, must be based on credible evidence presented in a public trial. The conflict between the right of an accused to a public trial and the exceptional pressures on victim witnesses of war crimes is omnipresent in ICTY trials.Fourth Annual Report of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda. Available at: http://www.un.org/ga/54/doc/tcir.pdf.The report addresses the activities of the Tribunal, including four judgments passed. The first of these was the first conviction for genocide ever delivered by an international court in the case of Prosecutor v. Jean Paul Akayesu.Institute for War and Peace Reporting (IWPR). Available at: http://www.history.com/.IWPR pioneers cross-community editorial projects that supports the independent press in regions in transition and informs the international debate on conflict. The focus of the Institute is on the Balkans, the Caucasus, the Central Asian states, Eastern Europe, and the former Soviet Union. They publish WarReport, and offers electronic reporting and monitoring services via the web or email. This site is searchable and has an excellent list of links.Kritz, Neil J. Rwanda: Accountability for War Crimes and Genocide. United States Institute of Peace (USIP). Available at: http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/early/rwanda1.On September 16, 1994, the USIP convened a meeting to explore options for dealing with war crimes and genocide in Rwanda. Many of the options proposed at the conference were incorporated into a UN Security Council resolution on November 8, 1994, establishing a tribunal for Rwanda. This report contains in-depth analysis of these options in the context of the resolution and makes recommendations for enhancing the effort to bring perpetrators of atrocities in Rwanda and neighboring countries to justice.Dunn, James. "The Indonesian Tribunal: A Matter of Justice or Political Diversion?." Foreign Policy in Focus , August 30, 2002Available at: http://selfdetermine.irc-online.org/crisiswatch/0208timor.html.This article discusses the Indonesian war crimes tribunal investigating events in East Timor in 1999. The author questions whether the tribunal has any real power to convict those who perpetrated the crimes, and if those convictions will stand. He also addresses the possibility that the tribunal is little more than a political stunt, with no real intentions of punishing those who committed the war crimes.
Offline (Print) Sources
Magnarella, Paul J. Justice in Africa, Rwanda's Genocide, Its Courts, and the UN Criminal Tribunal. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Company, February 1, 2000. This book outlines the historical background leading up to the Rwandan genocide of 1994, as well as the subsequent establishment of a UN-sponsored International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Arusha, Tanzania, designed to deal with the atrocities. The resource includes a discussion of the criticisms that followed the Tribunal's establishment.Tutu, Desmond Mpilo. No Future Without Forgiveness. Doubleday, 2000. Desmond Tutu's book outlines the reasons why South Africa preferred a truth and reconciliation commission to a war crimes tribunal. The most compelling reason is that reconciliation is easier following forgiveness and that reconciliation is most important for a nation wishing to build peace from such a negative pastReconciliation via the War Crimes Tribunal?. Aldershot, England: Ashgate Publishing Ltd, 2000. Critical examination of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia Click here for more info.Bass, Gary Jonathan. Stay the Hand of Vengeance: The Politics of War Crimes Tribunals. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2000. Comprehensive study of the history of war crimes tribunals. He argues that the vigor with which war criminals are pursued is directly related to the degree to which troups from liberal democracies will be in harms way in apprehending criminals. Has chapters on St. Helena, Leipzig, Constantinople, Nuremberg, and Yugoslavia.
Return to Top
Audiovisual Materials on this Topic:
Offline (Print) Sources
The Court. First Run Icarus Films. 1982. This film uses case studies to show now the International Court of Justice deals with countries and their leaders, when they commit unjust humanitarian acts. Click here for more info.The Pinochet Case. Directed and/or Produced by: Guzman, Patricio. First Run Icarus Films. 2001. This film follows the international criminal case against Augusto Pinochet of Chile. Click here for more info.Yellow Wasps: Anatomy of a War Crime. Directed and/or Produced by: Ziv, Ilan. First Run Icarus Films. 1995. This film questions whether justice can be found today in a world of global politics, as it monitors the Serbian war crimes trial against the Serbian paramilitary group know as the Yellow Wasps who were involved in atrocities of ethnic cleansing, and who received light sentences for their actions. Click here for more info
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
ICC a hybrided civil system of evidence
Why do you believe that the tribunals lack evidentiary standards (cite?)? Recall that the vast majority of the world community does not adhere to a Common Law system, but rather relies on the judge-made law of the Civil Law system. Many would sugest that the tribunals actually have a larger body of law to draw upon (conceiveably anything in International Law), and would therefore be more likely to come to a just outcome that the ICC which (if bound by rules of stare decisis, as you suggest below) would have a much more limited body of decisions from which to draw its reasoning.
Finally, tribunals are not perceived by many as being conceived ex nihilio (or, "out of nothing" for those new to latin...lol), but rather, out of the context of a more traditional international prosecution. While the ICC may be very "comfortable" to americans, as it contains some of the aspects of our legal system (as described above), we must remain aware that in the context of international prosecution (or International Law in the larger sense...), this is a very new concept/institution.
Prof Cummings
Prof. Cummings
The evidentiary standards of the ICC are much more delineated and specified to preset definitions and standards than in the trials of the ICJ where cases do not allude to former case law as one would expect in a civil system, you are quite right. However, the ICC does adhere to a specific format regarding admissibility in adhering to stages of proceedings as noted below which is not present in the ICJ procedings. Such procedings bespeaks to my mind a more than coincidental correlation to federal standards of evidence as I have purviewed them on Lexis..In chapter 4,section 1,rules 63-75 below alluded to are rules enunciated as principles not present in the ICJ lexicon, to be sure.This earmarks more than a civil system, but a hybrid composed of the elements of common law rulings on evidence which have been codified in anglo american law and stare decisis,but codified from their ulings in specific court cases and statutes.Note the underlined sectons below regarding admissibility,inspection and disclosure. The similarity of standards ,though encased in a civil type of system. are resonated in our discovery and evidentiary standards in our common law,but established by ruies of the court and by the Rome statute.Note epecially rule 73 regarding priveleged communications. These rules were stated not capriciously, but with the intent of focus not heretofore made in the canons of international law as applied to the specific crimes over which the ICC has jurisdiction.They have taken common law standards more in focus and enabled statutes in a civil frame of reference.The need for this was made manifest in the Rome statute dealing with thee unique crimes.The larger body of law to draw upon has not been done in the modus opeerandi of stare decisis as has occured in U.S. Supreme Court decisions , and that is what I indicated by the term "ex nihilo" insofar a a clear citing of allusions has not occured as in our Supreme Court cases explaining the holdings of cases specifically. The ad hoc manner contains a lack of such explication, though exegesis is done differently in the civil asystem. The borrowings are evident and hybrided into a statute arrangement in the civil mode, I believe.The larger body of law has not been sytematized to fit the specific crimes under which the ICC has suzerainty nor codified into specific digests of compilation as has occured in our law.The limited body of law to draw on by the ICC would not be applicable as the ICC could still draw on the resources of the ICJ through their cooperative agreements whch was why those agreements were made iniotially but applied to a recodified civil system of the Rome statute and the rules of the ICC.
Finally, tribunals are not perceived by many as being conceived ex nihilio (or, "out of nothing" for those new to latin...lol), but rather, out of the context of a more traditional international prosecution. While the ICC may be very "comfortable" to americans, as it contains some of the aspects of our legal system (as described above), we must remain aware that in the context of international prosecution (or International Law in the larger sense...), this is a very new concept/institution.
Prof Cummings
Prof. Cummings
The evidentiary standards of the ICC are much more delineated and specified to preset definitions and standards than in the trials of the ICJ where cases do not allude to former case law as one would expect in a civil system, you are quite right. However, the ICC does adhere to a specific format regarding admissibility in adhering to stages of proceedings as noted below which is not present in the ICJ procedings. Such procedings bespeaks to my mind a more than coincidental correlation to federal standards of evidence as I have purviewed them on Lexis..In chapter 4,section 1,rules 63-75 below alluded to are rules enunciated as principles not present in the ICJ lexicon, to be sure.This earmarks more than a civil system, but a hybrid composed of the elements of common law rulings on evidence which have been codified in anglo american law and stare decisis,but codified from their ulings in specific court cases and statutes.Note the underlined sectons below regarding admissibility,inspection and disclosure. The similarity of standards ,though encased in a civil type of system. are resonated in our discovery and evidentiary standards in our common law,but established by ruies of the court and by the Rome statute.Note epecially rule 73 regarding priveleged communications. These rules were stated not capriciously, but with the intent of focus not heretofore made in the canons of international law as applied to the specific crimes over which the ICC has jurisdiction.They have taken common law standards more in focus and enabled statutes in a civil frame of reference.The need for this was made manifest in the Rome statute dealing with thee unique crimes.The larger body of law to draw upon has not been done in the modus opeerandi of stare decisis as has occured in U.S. Supreme Court decisions , and that is what I indicated by the term "ex nihilo" insofar a a clear citing of allusions has not occured as in our Supreme Court cases explaining the holdings of cases specifically. The ad hoc manner contains a lack of such explication, though exegesis is done differently in the civil asystem. The borrowings are evident and hybrided into a statute arrangement in the civil mode, I believe.The larger body of law has not been sytematized to fit the specific crimes under which the ICC has suzerainty nor codified into specific digests of compilation as has occured in our law.The limited body of law to draw on by the ICC would not be applicable as the ICC could still draw on the resources of the ICJ through their cooperative agreements whch was why those agreements were made iniotially but applied to a recodified civil system of the Rome statute and the rules of the ICC.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Particle Physics and Experiments with antimatter
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20110605/sc_livescience/ephemeralantimattertrappedforamazinglylong16minutes
Ephemeral Antimatter Trapped for Amazingly Long 16 Minutes
YAHOO = window.YAHOO {}; YAHOO.Media = YAHOO.Media {}; YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons = YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons {};
(function(){
var o_facebook_iframe_url="http://l.yimg.com/b/social_buttons/facebook-share-iframe.php?u={url}&t={title}";
YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons.conf = {
tracking: {
_S: 97631923,
pkg: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/livescience\/20110605\/sc_livescience\/ephemeralantimattertrappedforamazinglylong16minutes",
intl: 'us', lang: 'en-US', ct:'a'
},
content: {
url: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/livescience\/20110605\/sc_livescience\/ephemeralantimattertrappedforamazinglylong16minutes",
title: "Ephemeral+Antimatter+Trapped+for+Amazingly+Long+16+Minutes+-+Yahoo%21+News",
mail_locale: "us",
mail_property: "news",
mail_meta: "&h1=livescience/20110605/sc_livescience/ephemeralantimattertrappedforamazinglylong16minutes&h2=T&h3=2838",
print_url: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/livescience\/20110605\/sc_livescience\/ephemeralantimattertrappedforamazinglylong16minutes\/print" },
config: { facebook_iframe_url: o_facebook_iframe_url }
};
})();
Share
retweet
Email
Print
LiveScience StaffLiveScience.com Livescience Stafflivescience.com – Mon Jun 6, 2:25 am ET
Antimatter, an elusive type of matter that's rare in the universe, has now been trapped for more than 16 minutes — an eternity in particle physics.
In fact, scientists who've been trapping antihydrogen atoms at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Geneva say isolating the exotic particles has become so routine that they expect to soon begin experiments on this rare substance.
Antimatter is like a mirror image of matter. For every matter particle (a hydrogen atom, for example), a matching antimatter particle is thought to exist (in this case, an antihydrogen atom) with the same mass, but the opposite charge.
"We've trapped antihydrogen atoms for as long as 1,000 seconds, which is forever" in the world of high-energy particle physics, said Joel Fajans, a University of California, Berkeley professor of physics who is a faculty scientist at California's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and a member of the ALPHA (Antihydrogen Laser Physics Apparatus) experiment at CERN.
Trapping antimatter is difficult, because when it comes into contact with matter, the two annihilate each other. So a container for antimatter can't be made of regular matter, but is usually formed with magnetic fields.
In the ALPHA project, the researchers captured antihydrogen by mixing antiprotons with positrons — antielectrons — in a vacuum chamber, where they combine into antihydrogen atoms.
The whole process occurred within a magnetic "bottle" that takes advantage of the magnetic properties of the antiatoms to keep them contained. An actual bottle, made of ordinary matter, would not be able to hold antimatter because when the two types of matter meet they annihilate.
After the researchers had trapped antimatter in the magnetic bottle, they could then detect the trapped antiatoms by turning off the magnetic field and allowing the particles to annihiliate with normal matter, which creates a flash of light.
The team has now managed to capture 112 antiatoms in this new trap for times ranging from one-fifth of a second to 1,000 seconds, or 16 minutes and 40 seconds. (To date, since the beginning of the project, Fajans and his colleagues have trapped 309 antihydrogen atoms in various traps.)
And the researchers plan to improve on that, with the "hope that by 2012 we will have a new trap with laser access to allow spectroscopic experiments on the antiatoms," Fajans said in a statement. Those experiments would give researchers more information on the antimatter's properties.
In that way, it could help to answer a question that has long plagued physicists: Why is there only ordinary matter in our universe? Scientists think antimatter and matter should have been produced in equal amounts during the Big Bang that created the universe 13.6 billion years ago. [The Coolest Little Particles in Nature]
Today, however, there is no evidence of antimatter galaxies or clouds, and antimatter is seen rarely and for only short periods, for example, during some types of radioactive decay before it annihilates in a collision with normal matter.
The researchers detail their work on the antimatter trap in a new paper published online June 5 in the journal Nature Physics.
Follow LiveScience for the latest in science news and discoveries on Twitter @livescience and on Facebook.
Strange Quarks and Muons, Oh My! Nature's Tiniest Particles Dissected
Wacky Physics: The Coolest Little Particles in Nature
Twisted Physics: 7 Mind-Blowing Findings
Ephemeral Antimatter Trapped for Amazingly Long 16 Minutes
YAHOO = window.YAHOO {}; YAHOO.Media = YAHOO.Media {}; YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons = YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons {};
(function(){
var o_facebook_iframe_url="http://l.yimg.com/b/social_buttons/facebook-share-iframe.php?u={url}&t={title}";
YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons.conf = {
tracking: {
_S: 97631923,
pkg: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/livescience\/20110605\/sc_livescience\/ephemeralantimattertrappedforamazinglylong16minutes",
intl: 'us', lang: 'en-US', ct:'a'
},
content: {
url: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/livescience\/20110605\/sc_livescience\/ephemeralantimattertrappedforamazinglylong16minutes",
title: "Ephemeral+Antimatter+Trapped+for+Amazingly+Long+16+Minutes+-+Yahoo%21+News",
mail_locale: "us",
mail_property: "news",
mail_meta: "&h1=livescience/20110605/sc_livescience/ephemeralantimattertrappedforamazinglylong16minutes&h2=T&h3=2838",
print_url: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/livescience\/20110605\/sc_livescience\/ephemeralantimattertrappedforamazinglylong16minutes\/print" },
config: { facebook_iframe_url: o_facebook_iframe_url }
};
})();
Share
retweet
LiveScience StaffLiveScience.com Livescience Stafflivescience.com – Mon Jun 6, 2:25 am ET
Antimatter, an elusive type of matter that's rare in the universe, has now been trapped for more than 16 minutes — an eternity in particle physics.
In fact, scientists who've been trapping antihydrogen atoms at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Geneva say isolating the exotic particles has become so routine that they expect to soon begin experiments on this rare substance.
Antimatter is like a mirror image of matter. For every matter particle (a hydrogen atom, for example), a matching antimatter particle is thought to exist (in this case, an antihydrogen atom) with the same mass, but the opposite charge.
"We've trapped antihydrogen atoms for as long as 1,000 seconds, which is forever" in the world of high-energy particle physics, said Joel Fajans, a University of California, Berkeley professor of physics who is a faculty scientist at California's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and a member of the ALPHA (Antihydrogen Laser Physics Apparatus) experiment at CERN.
Trapping antimatter is difficult, because when it comes into contact with matter, the two annihilate each other. So a container for antimatter can't be made of regular matter, but is usually formed with magnetic fields.
In the ALPHA project, the researchers captured antihydrogen by mixing antiprotons with positrons — antielectrons — in a vacuum chamber, where they combine into antihydrogen atoms.
The whole process occurred within a magnetic "bottle" that takes advantage of the magnetic properties of the antiatoms to keep them contained. An actual bottle, made of ordinary matter, would not be able to hold antimatter because when the two types of matter meet they annihilate.
After the researchers had trapped antimatter in the magnetic bottle, they could then detect the trapped antiatoms by turning off the magnetic field and allowing the particles to annihiliate with normal matter, which creates a flash of light.
The team has now managed to capture 112 antiatoms in this new trap for times ranging from one-fifth of a second to 1,000 seconds, or 16 minutes and 40 seconds. (To date, since the beginning of the project, Fajans and his colleagues have trapped 309 antihydrogen atoms in various traps.)
And the researchers plan to improve on that, with the "hope that by 2012 we will have a new trap with laser access to allow spectroscopic experiments on the antiatoms," Fajans said in a statement. Those experiments would give researchers more information on the antimatter's properties.
In that way, it could help to answer a question that has long plagued physicists: Why is there only ordinary matter in our universe? Scientists think antimatter and matter should have been produced in equal amounts during the Big Bang that created the universe 13.6 billion years ago. [The Coolest Little Particles in Nature]
Today, however, there is no evidence of antimatter galaxies or clouds, and antimatter is seen rarely and for only short periods, for example, during some types of radioactive decay before it annihilates in a collision with normal matter.
The researchers detail their work on the antimatter trap in a new paper published online June 5 in the journal Nature Physics.
Follow LiveScience for the latest in science news and discoveries on Twitter @livescience and on Facebook.
Strange Quarks and Muons, Oh My! Nature's Tiniest Particles Dissected
Wacky Physics: The Coolest Little Particles in Nature
Twisted Physics: 7 Mind-Blowing Findings
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Mladic's arraignment
Mladic's arraignment
THE HAGUE — For years Ratko Mladic impressed friends and foes with his barking voice and commanding presence. But in the dock on Friday, he seemed much diminished — the swagger gone, his speech slurred, the feared warrior now an infirm and elderly man.
Enlarge This Image
Dado Ruvic/Reuters
Bosnian women from Srebrenica, sitting in a room in Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina, filled with pictures of people who died in the town from 1992-95, watched the proceedings at The Hague.
Readers' Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Read All Comments (75) »
Mr. Mladic, a former Bosnian Serb general who was arrested in Serbia eight days ago after 16 years on the run, made his long-awaited appearance on Friday before an international court here that has accused him of genocide and multiple other atrocities. He quickly dismissed the charges read out to him as “obnoxious” and “monstrous.”
As Mr. Mladic, one of Europe’s most wanted men before his arrest, shuffled into court, two guards helped him into his chair. He looked around, a bit bewildered, then listened, sometimes rubbing his face or flashing a mocking smile.
Asked if he wanted to exercise his right to have the 37-page indictment read aloud in court, he said, “I do not want a single letter or sentence of that indictment read to me.” But the presiding judge, Alphons Orie of the Netherlands, went on to read from the 11 counts of crimes attributed to Mr. Mladic, a grave list that recounts unrelenting assaults on civilians by the troops under his command during the 1992-95 Bosnian war.
But Mr. Mladic seemed most interested in his health. A few minutes into the 90-minute hearing, he told the judge: “I am a gravely ill man. I need a bit more time. Please be patient with me.” Later, he had a long private exchange with the judge about his ailments, which may well affect the course of his trial.
Aleksandar Aleksic, a lawyer for Mr. Mladic in The Hague, said Mr. Mladic had experienced three strokes and suffered from high blood pressure and from an intestinal hernia that required surgery.
Even so, Mr. Mladic tried to maintain some measure of decorum. With his right arm impaired by a stroke, he gave the judges a left-handed military salute as they entered the court.
At one point he straightened himself and told the court, “I am here defending my country and my people, not Ratko Mladic.” That drew a quick response from Judge Orie, who said, “I would like to remind you that you are charged as an individual.”
Mr. Mladic asked for more time to enter a plea, and the judge agreed, ordering him to appear in court again on July 4.
In the public gallery, separated from the courtroom by a wall of bulletproof glass, women who had traveled from Bosnia occasionally shouted abuse. “Butcher of the Balkans, you killed my son,” said one woman in a loud voice. “He has the devil inside him,” said another, before being told by guards to keep silent.
Outside the courtroom, Zumra Sahomerovic, of Srebrenica, Bosnia, the scene of the worst massacre that was said to have been ordered by Mr. Mladic, described the scene as pathetic. “Such a big general, and he’s now complaining about his health and how much stress he has,” she said.
Mr. Mladic’s arrival is expected to extend the life of the tribunal by several years. Created by the United Nations Security Council in 1993 to deal with war crimes cases related to the breakup of Yugoslavia, the tribunal had been scheduled to close in 2014.
Given the time it will take for Mr. Mladic and his lawyers to prepare his defense, the trial itself is not expected to begin for months. Prosecutors were debating whether to break out one or several segments from the indictment, which encompasses four broad sets of crimes: the violent campaign in 1992 to drive non-Serbs from large parts of Bosnia to create a region for Serbs only; the shelling and sniping during the 44-month siege of Sarajevo; the Srebrenica massacre; and the taking of Dutch troops from the United Nations peacekeeping force as hostages before overrunning Srebrenica.
Serge Brammertz, the lead prosecutor for the tribunal, said this week that Mr. Mladic “has come late, but not too late.” If anything, tribunal lawyers say, it may be easier for the prosecution to prove its case now than if he had arrived a decade earlier.
The violence during the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s affected other regions, but Bosnia’s “ethnic cleansing” campaigns and the massacre at Srebrenica became the war’s overriding nightmares. Much evidence has been amassed and tested in trials of events that involve Mr. Mladic. Two of his close aides have received life sentences — the maximum the tribunal can impose — for their role in the Srebrenica massacre. Two others received life sentences for their role in the siege of Sarajevo, in which about 10,000 people died. Other underlings have also been tried and given a range of prison sentences.
In addition to extensive film footage that puts Mr. Mladic on the scene at the time of military action, the tribunal last year received the contents of secret material found in his Belgrade home. It included recordings of Mr. Mladic during meetings and telephone calls, and, most surprising to investigators, his military wartime diaries, adding up to some 4,000 pages.
With this great volume of material, the challenge for the prosecution will be to keep the trial manageable, since Mr. Mladic’s health may deteriorate if the proceedings run long.
Prosecutors have recently revised and updated the Mladic indictment to bring it broadly in line with that of Radovan Karadzic, the Bosnia Serb political leader who is already on trial here.
Each man now faces two counts of genocide as well as counts of extermination and murder; deportation; terrorism and unlawful attacks; persecution; and one count of hostage-taking of more than 200 United Nations peacekeepers.
One option now being studied is to try Mr. Mladic and Mr. Karadzic together on the Srebrenica charges. Mr. Karadzic’s trial, which began 18 months ago, has been focused on the Sarajevo siege and the abduction of the peacekeepers.
Geoffrey Nice, the lead prosecutor in the case of Slobodan Milosevic, the former Serbian president, said he believed that Mr. Mladic could be tried relatively quickly. “Srebrenica is such a grave offense that, if proved, just that would clearly be sufficient to obtain a sentence,” he said. Limiting the trial “would probably be wise, especially in view of Mladic’s age and health,” he said.
Peter Robinson, the legal adviser to Mr. Karadzic, who acts as his own lawyer, said there were “pros and cons to a joint trial.”
“Dr. Karadzic has not yet decided,” he said. “He thought it would be best to discuss this with Mladic.”
Enlarge This Image
Dado Ruvic/Reuters
Bosnian women from Srebrenica, sitting in a room in Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina, filled with pictures of people who died in the town from 1992-95, watched the proceedings at The Hague.
Readers' Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Read All Comments (75) »
Mr. Mladic, a former Bosnian Serb general who was arrested in Serbia eight days ago after 16 years on the run, made his long-awaited appearance on Friday before an international court here that has accused him of genocide and multiple other atrocities. He quickly dismissed the charges read out to him as “obnoxious” and “monstrous.”
As Mr. Mladic, one of Europe’s most wanted men before his arrest, shuffled into court, two guards helped him into his chair. He looked around, a bit bewildered, then listened, sometimes rubbing his face or flashing a mocking smile.
Asked if he wanted to exercise his right to have the 37-page indictment read aloud in court, he said, “I do not want a single letter or sentence of that indictment read to me.” But the presiding judge, Alphons Orie of the Netherlands, went on to read from the 11 counts of crimes attributed to Mr. Mladic, a grave list that recounts unrelenting assaults on civilians by the troops under his command during the 1992-95 Bosnian war.
But Mr. Mladic seemed most interested in his health. A few minutes into the 90-minute hearing, he told the judge: “I am a gravely ill man. I need a bit more time. Please be patient with me.” Later, he had a long private exchange with the judge about his ailments, which may well affect the course of his trial.
Aleksandar Aleksic, a lawyer for Mr. Mladic in The Hague, said Mr. Mladic had experienced three strokes and suffered from high blood pressure and from an intestinal hernia that required surgery.
Even so, Mr. Mladic tried to maintain some measure of decorum. With his right arm impaired by a stroke, he gave the judges a left-handed military salute as they entered the court.
At one point he straightened himself and told the court, “I am here defending my country and my people, not Ratko Mladic.” That drew a quick response from Judge Orie, who said, “I would like to remind you that you are charged as an individual.”
Mr. Mladic asked for more time to enter a plea, and the judge agreed, ordering him to appear in court again on July 4.
In the public gallery, separated from the courtroom by a wall of bulletproof glass, women who had traveled from Bosnia occasionally shouted abuse. “Butcher of the Balkans, you killed my son,” said one woman in a loud voice. “He has the devil inside him,” said another, before being told by guards to keep silent.
Outside the courtroom, Zumra Sahomerovic, of Srebrenica, Bosnia, the scene of the worst massacre that was said to have been ordered by Mr. Mladic, described the scene as pathetic. “Such a big general, and he’s now complaining about his health and how much stress he has,” she said.
Mr. Mladic’s arrival is expected to extend the life of the tribunal by several years. Created by the United Nations Security Council in 1993 to deal with war crimes cases related to the breakup of Yugoslavia, the tribunal had been scheduled to close in 2014.
Given the time it will take for Mr. Mladic and his lawyers to prepare his defense, the trial itself is not expected to begin for months. Prosecutors were debating whether to break out one or several segments from the indictment, which encompasses four broad sets of crimes: the violent campaign in 1992 to drive non-Serbs from large parts of Bosnia to create a region for Serbs only; the shelling and sniping during the 44-month siege of Sarajevo; the Srebrenica massacre; and the taking of Dutch troops from the United Nations peacekeeping force as hostages before overrunning Srebrenica.
Serge Brammertz, the lead prosecutor for the tribunal, said this week that Mr. Mladic “has come late, but not too late.” If anything, tribunal lawyers say, it may be easier for the prosecution to prove its case now than if he had arrived a decade earlier.
The violence during the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s affected other regions, but Bosnia’s “ethnic cleansing” campaigns and the massacre at Srebrenica became the war’s overriding nightmares. Much evidence has been amassed and tested in trials of events that involve Mr. Mladic. Two of his close aides have received life sentences — the maximum the tribunal can impose — for their role in the Srebrenica massacre. Two others received life sentences for their role in the siege of Sarajevo, in which about 10,000 people died. Other underlings have also been tried and given a range of prison sentences.
In addition to extensive film footage that puts Mr. Mladic on the scene at the time of military action, the tribunal last year received the contents of secret material found in his Belgrade home. It included recordings of Mr. Mladic during meetings and telephone calls, and, most surprising to investigators, his military wartime diaries, adding up to some 4,000 pages.
With this great volume of material, the challenge for the prosecution will be to keep the trial manageable, since Mr. Mladic’s health may deteriorate if the proceedings run long.
Prosecutors have recently revised and updated the Mladic indictment to bring it broadly in line with that of Radovan Karadzic, the Bosnia Serb political leader who is already on trial here.
Each man now faces two counts of genocide as well as counts of extermination and murder; deportation; terrorism and unlawful attacks; persecution; and one count of hostage-taking of more than 200 United Nations peacekeepers.
One option now being studied is to try Mr. Mladic and Mr. Karadzic together on the Srebrenica charges. Mr. Karadzic’s trial, which began 18 months ago, has been focused on the Sarajevo siege and the abduction of the peacekeepers.
Geoffrey Nice, the lead prosecutor in the case of Slobodan Milosevic, the former Serbian president, said he believed that Mr. Mladic could be tried relatively quickly. “Srebrenica is such a grave offense that, if proved, just that would clearly be sufficient to obtain a sentence,” he said. Limiting the trial “would probably be wise, especially in view of Mladic’s age and health,” he said.
Peter Robinson, the legal adviser to Mr. Karadzic, who acts as his own lawyer, said there were “pros and cons to a joint trial.”
“Dr. Karadzic has not yet decided,” he said. “He thought it would be best to discuss this with Mladic.”
Saturday, June 4, 2011
Probable cause (US Standard) v Reasonable Basis (International Criminal Court)
http://angel04.gcu.edu/section/default.asp?id=554405
In your own words, explain the differences between the American law system of probable cause, and the reasonable basis standard required by the prosecutor in the International Criminal Court to bring charges.
The U.S. definition of probable cause has been measured by the U.S. Supreme Court in interpreting the fourth amendment of the bill of rights in its case determinations and these have served as criteria for the lower courts to follow in the proper application of probable cause as applicable to a plethora of local and federal laws and topics.It is necessarily a subjective standard to follow the guidelines of Terry v Ohio , the seminal case establishing the definition of probable cause . A particular suspicion on the part of law enforcement linked to a set of facts must lead a "reasonable person" to conclude that arrest and detention of a suspect is in order and that a possible illegal act has been committed.This excludes generalized suspicions not linked to a specific fact scenario.In 1968, the Supreme Court included in the definition of reasonable suspicion the following grounds and criteria:a law offcer's expertise an experience,a suspect's reputation, anonymous tips supported by other facts. These factors comprise the test of rasonableness in assessing probable cause to justify arrest of a suspect.
The reasonable basis standard of the International Court of Justice is similar in some respects to probable cause ,but is not so much based on legakl case preedent but proceeds on a case basis.The procedure i more intricate tan probable cause arrest and is initiated by the prosecutor and evaluated by the pretrial chamber on information in the prosecutor's possession fromreliable organs such as UN organs, NGO's, Guidelines are given in Article 15(2) and 15(3) of the Rome statute where standards are more spelled out, yet there is a wide latitude of standards , and the judges must approve of the pretrial investigation according to article 15(3).The reasonable basis standard is detailed in 15(4) and is a lower standard of evidence that does not require it to be foregone as to its conclusions ,but that it be reasonable (the subjective standard again) that a crime has been committed over which the ICC has jurisdiction: wa crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, and aggression. The crime must have been committed after the Rome Statute has been enacted (July 1,2002) by a "National of a State Party".Other requirements requisite to enabling ICC jurisdiction are: "complementarity": are other national courts ivestigating re: alleged crimes or persons charged with those crimes. If the state is unwilling to investigate the crime(s), then Article 17 would empower the ICC to take jurisdiction; the "gravity" requirement to justify ICC intervention, including the persons, nature of their crimes and their modus operandi.The prosecutor need not etablish interests of justice as a provision for the investigation.Then tghe pretrial chamber may review the interest of victims and the gravity of the crimes involved. This basis is a much more detailed and thorough investigaion as to process (Article 53) which is spelled out than what is involved in assessing probable cause.
I might add that venue establishment is more primary in ICC assessments than in the jurisdictional determinations in state and local courts in the U.S.The Demjanjuk case is being tried in a German national court whereas the Mladic case is being taken to the ICC for want of prosecution by the national state of Belgrade Serbia. (http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=6671724644852957271&postID=5177308667314487895) ( http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110529/ap_on_re_eu/eu_serbia_mladic )
http://www.answers.com/topic/probable-cause
http://www.peaceandjusticeinitiative.org/implementation-resources/proprio-motu-investigation-by-the-icc-prosecutor
In your own words, explain the differences between the American law system of probable cause, and the reasonable basis standard required by the prosecutor in the International Criminal Court to bring charges.
The U.S. definition of probable cause has been measured by the U.S. Supreme Court in interpreting the fourth amendment of the bill of rights in its case determinations and these have served as criteria for the lower courts to follow in the proper application of probable cause as applicable to a plethora of local and federal laws and topics.It is necessarily a subjective standard to follow the guidelines of Terry v Ohio , the seminal case establishing the definition of probable cause . A particular suspicion on the part of law enforcement linked to a set of facts must lead a "reasonable person" to conclude that arrest and detention of a suspect is in order and that a possible illegal act has been committed.This excludes generalized suspicions not linked to a specific fact scenario.In 1968, the Supreme Court included in the definition of reasonable suspicion the following grounds and criteria:a law offcer's expertise an experience,a suspect's reputation, anonymous tips supported by other facts. These factors comprise the test of rasonableness in assessing probable cause to justify arrest of a suspect.
The reasonable basis standard of the International Court of Justice is similar in some respects to probable cause ,but is not so much based on legakl case preedent but proceeds on a case basis.The procedure i more intricate tan probable cause arrest and is initiated by the prosecutor and evaluated by the pretrial chamber on information in the prosecutor's possession fromreliable organs such as UN organs, NGO's, Guidelines are given in Article 15(2) and 15(3) of the Rome statute where standards are more spelled out, yet there is a wide latitude of standards , and the judges must approve of the pretrial investigation according to article 15(3).The reasonable basis standard is detailed in 15(4) and is a lower standard of evidence that does not require it to be foregone as to its conclusions ,but that it be reasonable (the subjective standard again) that a crime has been committed over which the ICC has jurisdiction: wa crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, and aggression. The crime must have been committed after the Rome Statute has been enacted (July 1,2002) by a "National of a State Party".Other requirements requisite to enabling ICC jurisdiction are: "complementarity": are other national courts ivestigating re: alleged crimes or persons charged with those crimes. If the state is unwilling to investigate the crime(s), then Article 17 would empower the ICC to take jurisdiction; the "gravity" requirement to justify ICC intervention, including the persons, nature of their crimes and their modus operandi.The prosecutor need not etablish interests of justice as a provision for the investigation.Then tghe pretrial chamber may review the interest of victims and the gravity of the crimes involved. This basis is a much more detailed and thorough investigaion as to process (Article 53) which is spelled out than what is involved in assessing probable cause.
I might add that venue establishment is more primary in ICC assessments than in the jurisdictional determinations in state and local courts in the U.S.The Demjanjuk case is being tried in a German national court whereas the Mladic case is being taken to the ICC for want of prosecution by the national state of Belgrade Serbia. (http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=6671724644852957271&postID=5177308667314487895) ( http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110529/ap_on_re_eu/eu_serbia_mladic )
http://www.answers.com/topic/probable-cause
http://www.peaceandjusticeinitiative.org/implementation-resources/proprio-motu-investigation-by-the-icc-prosecutor
Ancient world dictionary finished — after 90 years
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110604/ap_on_re_us/us_postcard_the90_year_dictionary_project
Ancient world dictionary finished — after 90 years
YAHOO = window.YAHOO {}; YAHOO.Media = YAHOO.Media {}; YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons = YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons {};
(function(){
var o_facebook_iframe_url="http://l.yimg.com/b/social_buttons/facebook-share-iframe.php?u={url}&t={title}";
YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons.conf = {
tracking: {
_S: 8903239,
pkg: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/ap\/20110604\/ap_on_re_us\/us_postcard_the90_year_dictionary_project",
intl: 'us', lang: 'en-US', ct:'a'
},
content: {
url: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/ap\/20110604\/ap_on_re_us\/us_postcard_the90_year_dictionary_project",
title: "Ancient+world+dictionary+finished+%26%23151%3B+after+90+years+-+Yahoo%21+News",
mail_locale: "us",
mail_property: "news",
mail_meta: "&h1=ap/20110604/ap_on_re_us/us_postcard_the90_year_dictionary_project&h2=T&h3=519",
print_url: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/ap\/20110604\/ap_on_re_us\/us_postcard_the90_year_dictionary_project\/print" },
config: { facebook_iframe_url: o_facebook_iframe_url }
};
})();
Share
retweet
Email
Print
By SHARON COHEN, AP National Writer Sharon Cohen, Ap National Writer – Sat Jun 4, 9:56 am ET
CHICAGO – It was a monumental project with modest beginnings: a small group of scholars and some index cards. The plan was to explore a long-dead language that would reveal an ancient world of chariots and concubines, royal decrees and diaries — and omens that came from the heavens and sheep livers.
The year: 1921. The place: The University of Chicago. The project: Assembling an Assyrian dictionary based on words recorded on clay or stone tablets unearthed from ruins in Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey, written in a language that hadn't been uttered for more than 2,000 years. The scholars knew the project would take a long time. No one quite expected how very long.
Decades passed. The team grew. Scholars arrived from Vienna, Paris, Copenhagen, Jerusalem, Berlin, Helsinki, Baghdad and London, joining others from the U.S. and Canada. One generation gave way to the next, one century faded into the next. Some signed on early in their careers; they were still toiling away at retirement. The work was slow, sometimes frustrating and decidedly low-tech: Typewriters. Mimeograph machines. And index cards. Eventually, nearly 2 million of them.
And now, 90 years later, a finale. The Chicago Assyrian Dictionary is now officially complete — 21 volumes of Akkadian, a Semitic language (with several dialects, including Assyrian) that endured for 2,500 years. The project is more encyclopedia than glossary, offering a window into the ancient society of Mesopotamia, now modern-day Iraq, through every conceivable form of writing: love letters, recipes, tax records, medical prescriptions, astronomical observations, religious texts, contracts, epics, poems and more.
Why is there a need for a dictionary of a language last written around A.D. 100 that only a small number of scholars worldwide know of? Gil Stein, director of the university's Oriental Institute (the dictionary's home), has a ready answer:
"The Assyrian Dictionary gives us the key into the world's first urban civilization," he says. "Virtually everything that we take for granted ... has its origins in Mesopotamia, whether it's the origins of cities, of state societies, the invention of the wheel, the way we measure time, and most important the invention of writing.
"If we ever want to understand our roots," Stein adds, "we have to understand this first great civilization."
The translated cuneiform texts — originally written with wedged-shaped characters — reveal a culture where people expressed joy, anxiety and disappointment about the same events they do today: a child's birth, bad harvests, money troubles, boastful leaders.
"A lot of what you see is absolutely recognizable — people expressing fear and anger, expressing love, asking for love," says Matthew Stolper, a University of Chicago professor who worked on the project on and off over three decades. "There are inscriptions from kings that tell you how great they are, and inscriptions from others who tell you those guys weren't so great. ... There's also lot of ancient versions of `your check is in the mail.' And there's a common phrase in old Babylonian letters that literally means `don't worry about a thing.'"
There were omens, too — ways of divining the future by reading smoke patterns, the stars, the moon and sheep livers.
"Like all people at all times, they wanted to try to find some way of controlling their world," says Martha Roth, the dictionary's editor-in-charge and dean of humanities. "It's very difficult to draw the line between actually believing and being superstitious."
Robert Biggs, professor emeritus at the university, devoted nearly a half century to the dictionary, sometimes uncovering tablets on digs in the Iraq desert, sometimes poring over texts in museums in London and Baghdad. His specialty is Babylonian medicine. For almost an entire year, he studied thousands of references to sheep livers.
For example: If a sheep's gallbladder — part of the liver — was long and pointed, it meant the defeat of the enemy king. If there was a certain kind of crease on the liver, it could mean the king was going on a journey. A lunar eclipse could mean danger for a king.
But the tablets reached far beyond royalty. Biggs says they included everything from a disputed paternity case to agricultural loans to famine, where desperate people sold their children for cash. "Life was very fragile ... it was much more risky that it is now," he says.
Making sense of it all was painstaking work. Some of the wedge-shaped characters changed over the thousands of years, and the tablets excavated from ancient temples, palaces and cities were frequently crumbling. Often there was no punctuation, so it was hard to know where one word ended and the other began.
"You'd sit in a room with a good light and turn the tablet in various directions to see as much as possible," Biggs explains. "Quite often the tablets were broken so you might see part of a sign. And different people looking at the same thing would see something different because of the way you'd hold it."
"Sometimes it got to be very tedious," he adds. "Other times there was a sense of exhilaration if you could solve some problem or figure out what a rare word means."
Regardless, the work continued.
"You always saw the light at the end of the tunnel," Biggs says. "But the end of the tunnel kept getting further and further away."
An early 10-year completion deadline was soon deemed unrealistic. "Scholars always underestimated how difficult it would be," Roth says. "People always expected the project would end in their lifetime. What can I tell you? That's not always the way it goes."
There was much to research, much to record. By 1935, scholars already had 1 million index cards. It would take more than 30 years before the first of the 21 volumes was published. Most cover a single letter. The entire collection spans about 10,000 pages and 28,000 words. The definitions are more fitting for an encyclopedia; they provide cultural and historical context, similar to those in the Oxford English Dictionary.
"It's not such a word means king," Roth says. "It's a matter of understanding the thousands and thousands of references to the word king in every document in every period."
Roth notes that after arriving at the university in 1979, she asked to work on the word witness or witnessing. That took four to five years. On the other hand, there might be just a dozen references to a jar holding grain and that research could be complete in an afternoon.
Now that the dictionary is finished, Roth says there's a feeling of tremendous accomplishment and "a little bit of a sense of loss.... This has occupied my waking and sleeping moments for 32 years. You dream this stuff."
The end also brings a realization as more tablets are unearthed, more discoveries will be made.
"It's like driving a Porsche off the lot and looking in the Blue Book (listing a car's worth) and seeing how much value it's lost," Stolper says. "The moment it's done, it's out of date."
Biggs says the scholars are satisfied with the final version, but there is that lingering temptation.
"It might be nice to start over," he says, "but no one has the courage to do it anymore."
___
Online:
Chicago Assyrian Dictionary: http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/projects
Ancient world dictionary finished — after 90 years
YAHOO = window.YAHOO {}; YAHOO.Media = YAHOO.Media {}; YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons = YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons {};
(function(){
var o_facebook_iframe_url="http://l.yimg.com/b/social_buttons/facebook-share-iframe.php?u={url}&t={title}";
YAHOO.Media.SocialButtons.conf = {
tracking: {
_S: 8903239,
pkg: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/ap\/20110604\/ap_on_re_us\/us_postcard_the90_year_dictionary_project",
intl: 'us', lang: 'en-US', ct:'a'
},
content: {
url: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/ap\/20110604\/ap_on_re_us\/us_postcard_the90_year_dictionary_project",
title: "Ancient+world+dictionary+finished+%26%23151%3B+after+90+years+-+Yahoo%21+News",
mail_locale: "us",
mail_property: "news",
mail_meta: "&h1=ap/20110604/ap_on_re_us/us_postcard_the90_year_dictionary_project&h2=T&h3=519",
print_url: "http:\/\/news.yahoo.com\/s\/ap\/20110604\/ap_on_re_us\/us_postcard_the90_year_dictionary_project\/print" },
config: { facebook_iframe_url: o_facebook_iframe_url }
};
})();
Share
retweet
By SHARON COHEN, AP National Writer Sharon Cohen, Ap National Writer – Sat Jun 4, 9:56 am ET
CHICAGO – It was a monumental project with modest beginnings: a small group of scholars and some index cards. The plan was to explore a long-dead language that would reveal an ancient world of chariots and concubines, royal decrees and diaries — and omens that came from the heavens and sheep livers.
The year: 1921. The place: The University of Chicago. The project: Assembling an Assyrian dictionary based on words recorded on clay or stone tablets unearthed from ruins in Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey, written in a language that hadn't been uttered for more than 2,000 years. The scholars knew the project would take a long time. No one quite expected how very long.
Decades passed. The team grew. Scholars arrived from Vienna, Paris, Copenhagen, Jerusalem, Berlin, Helsinki, Baghdad and London, joining others from the U.S. and Canada. One generation gave way to the next, one century faded into the next. Some signed on early in their careers; they were still toiling away at retirement. The work was slow, sometimes frustrating and decidedly low-tech: Typewriters. Mimeograph machines. And index cards. Eventually, nearly 2 million of them.
And now, 90 years later, a finale. The Chicago Assyrian Dictionary is now officially complete — 21 volumes of Akkadian, a Semitic language (with several dialects, including Assyrian) that endured for 2,500 years. The project is more encyclopedia than glossary, offering a window into the ancient society of Mesopotamia, now modern-day Iraq, through every conceivable form of writing: love letters, recipes, tax records, medical prescriptions, astronomical observations, religious texts, contracts, epics, poems and more.
Why is there a need for a dictionary of a language last written around A.D. 100 that only a small number of scholars worldwide know of? Gil Stein, director of the university's Oriental Institute (the dictionary's home), has a ready answer:
"The Assyrian Dictionary gives us the key into the world's first urban civilization," he says. "Virtually everything that we take for granted ... has its origins in Mesopotamia, whether it's the origins of cities, of state societies, the invention of the wheel, the way we measure time, and most important the invention of writing.
"If we ever want to understand our roots," Stein adds, "we have to understand this first great civilization."
The translated cuneiform texts — originally written with wedged-shaped characters — reveal a culture where people expressed joy, anxiety and disappointment about the same events they do today: a child's birth, bad harvests, money troubles, boastful leaders.
"A lot of what you see is absolutely recognizable — people expressing fear and anger, expressing love, asking for love," says Matthew Stolper, a University of Chicago professor who worked on the project on and off over three decades. "There are inscriptions from kings that tell you how great they are, and inscriptions from others who tell you those guys weren't so great. ... There's also lot of ancient versions of `your check is in the mail.' And there's a common phrase in old Babylonian letters that literally means `don't worry about a thing.'"
There were omens, too — ways of divining the future by reading smoke patterns, the stars, the moon and sheep livers.
"Like all people at all times, they wanted to try to find some way of controlling their world," says Martha Roth, the dictionary's editor-in-charge and dean of humanities. "It's very difficult to draw the line between actually believing and being superstitious."
Robert Biggs, professor emeritus at the university, devoted nearly a half century to the dictionary, sometimes uncovering tablets on digs in the Iraq desert, sometimes poring over texts in museums in London and Baghdad. His specialty is Babylonian medicine. For almost an entire year, he studied thousands of references to sheep livers.
For example: If a sheep's gallbladder — part of the liver — was long and pointed, it meant the defeat of the enemy king. If there was a certain kind of crease on the liver, it could mean the king was going on a journey. A lunar eclipse could mean danger for a king.
But the tablets reached far beyond royalty. Biggs says they included everything from a disputed paternity case to agricultural loans to famine, where desperate people sold their children for cash. "Life was very fragile ... it was much more risky that it is now," he says.
Making sense of it all was painstaking work. Some of the wedge-shaped characters changed over the thousands of years, and the tablets excavated from ancient temples, palaces and cities were frequently crumbling. Often there was no punctuation, so it was hard to know where one word ended and the other began.
"You'd sit in a room with a good light and turn the tablet in various directions to see as much as possible," Biggs explains. "Quite often the tablets were broken so you might see part of a sign. And different people looking at the same thing would see something different because of the way you'd hold it."
"Sometimes it got to be very tedious," he adds. "Other times there was a sense of exhilaration if you could solve some problem or figure out what a rare word means."
Regardless, the work continued.
"You always saw the light at the end of the tunnel," Biggs says. "But the end of the tunnel kept getting further and further away."
An early 10-year completion deadline was soon deemed unrealistic. "Scholars always underestimated how difficult it would be," Roth says. "People always expected the project would end in their lifetime. What can I tell you? That's not always the way it goes."
There was much to research, much to record. By 1935, scholars already had 1 million index cards. It would take more than 30 years before the first of the 21 volumes was published. Most cover a single letter. The entire collection spans about 10,000 pages and 28,000 words. The definitions are more fitting for an encyclopedia; they provide cultural and historical context, similar to those in the Oxford English Dictionary.
"It's not such a word means king," Roth says. "It's a matter of understanding the thousands and thousands of references to the word king in every document in every period."
Roth notes that after arriving at the university in 1979, she asked to work on the word witness or witnessing. That took four to five years. On the other hand, there might be just a dozen references to a jar holding grain and that research could be complete in an afternoon.
Now that the dictionary is finished, Roth says there's a feeling of tremendous accomplishment and "a little bit of a sense of loss.... This has occupied my waking and sleeping moments for 32 years. You dream this stuff."
The end also brings a realization as more tablets are unearthed, more discoveries will be made.
"It's like driving a Porsche off the lot and looking in the Blue Book (listing a car's worth) and seeing how much value it's lost," Stolper says. "The moment it's done, it's out of date."
Biggs says the scholars are satisfied with the final version, but there is that lingering temptation.
"It might be nice to start over," he says, "but no one has the courage to do it anymore."
___
Online:
Chicago Assyrian Dictionary: http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/projects
do we really need an International Criminal Court?
The United Nations has authority to set up tribunals to address criminal offenders in global society. Therefore, do we really need an International Criminal Court?
The International Criminal Court is the first permanent, treaty based, international criminal court established to help end impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community.
However, tribunals were established to try crimes committed only within a specific time-frame and during a specific conflict, there was general agreement that an independent, permanent criminal court was needed. On 17 July 1998, the international community reached an historic milestone when 120 States adopted the Rome Statute, the legal basis for establishing the permanent International Criminal Court.
I believe that we do need the ICC.
I agree with your assessment that we need a spcialized international criminal court defining the worst crimes of humanity as genocide, war crimes , and crimes against humanity,specifically defined in the Rome Statute and agreed upon by 120 nations.The UN tribunals have ad hoc situations with other than these crimes during a specific time of conflict with statutes of limitation. The ICC still adddresses a specific need spelled out by the mass incidents of genocide and war crimes during and after WWII, and hence the Hague tribunal. The uniqunessof the scenarios and crimes necessitated the Hague tribunal where specificity of the statute links with the UN charter a unprecedented and specific attention is paid to those crimes as well as a new foruth class of crimes of aggression.
The International Criminal Court is the first permanent, treaty based, international criminal court established to help end impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community.
However, tribunals were established to try crimes committed only within a specific time-frame and during a specific conflict, there was general agreement that an independent, permanent criminal court was needed. On 17 July 1998, the international community reached an historic milestone when 120 States adopted the Rome Statute, the legal basis for establishing the permanent International Criminal Court.
I believe that we do need the ICC.
I agree with your assessment that we need a spcialized international criminal court defining the worst crimes of humanity as genocide, war crimes , and crimes against humanity,specifically defined in the Rome Statute and agreed upon by 120 nations.The UN tribunals have ad hoc situations with other than these crimes during a specific time of conflict with statutes of limitation. The ICC still adddresses a specific need spelled out by the mass incidents of genocide and war crimes during and after WWII, and hence the Hague tribunal. The uniqunessof the scenarios and crimes necessitated the Hague tribunal where specificity of the statute links with the UN charter a unprecedented and specific attention is paid to those crimes as well as a new foruth class of crimes of aggression.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)