The United States Interaction with the International Court of Justice Over Consular Rights: How Our Refusal to Obey Is Impacting Foreign Nationals and American Citizens
On January 9, 2003, Mexico initiated proceedings before the International Court of Justice against the United States of America concerning the alleged violations of Articles 5 and 36 of the Vienna Convention; basically, claiming that the United States is not honoring the consular rights of foreign nationals within the United States . While the proceedings of this case continue on, as they will into 2004, it is engaging and instructive to look at the realities of consular notification in the United States. I have chosen to focus on Mexican and American interactions not just because they are the two countries involved in the case before ICJ, but because the countries are so close, and because the issue arises so frequently. According to Mark Warren, director of Human Rights Research, an Ottawa, Canada-based company that monitors international developments regarding the death penalty, “there are more then 50 Mexican citizens under sentence of death in the US, many of whose cases, in fact, Mexico would argue all of them, involve violations of international law” (personal interview, 10/6/03). Through an examination of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR), American interpretation of this treaty, the role of Mexican consulates in America, and the worldwide repercussions of American actions, I hope to broadly discuss this topic and possible solutions. It is further instructive to investigate the United States interactions with the World Court in previous cases, and possible implications of sub-par consular notification with respect to the current, post-9...
... middle of paper ...
...Grand Case (Germany vs. the United States). Press release June 27, 2001: The Hague
International Court of Justice. Mexico brings a case against the United States of America and requests the indication of provisional measures. Press release January 10, 2003: The Hague.
James, Anne, and Mark Warren. Equal Protection: Consular Assistance and Criminal JusticeProcedures in the USA. Woodbridge: The International Justice Project, 2002.
Rubin, James P. United States Department of State Press Statement. 4 November 1998.
Warren, Mark. “Article 36 Update: Consular Rights in America: Issue 21.” Email to Tambi Cork. 6 May 2003.
Warren, Mark. Personal Interview. 6 October 2003.
World View Commentary. Ed. Doug Cassel. 8 July 2003. Northwestern University School of
Law. 10 November 2003 <http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/ihr/issues.cfm?topicnumber=10>
Mrs. Turpin is self-absorbed natural person. She considers herself to be above those in lower social classes. Mrs. Turpin usually labels people into different social classes. Her judgmental basically comes down to race and property. Since she and her husband, own a home and land with a hog farm makes her better than everybody else. She often praises Jesus for not having made her white trash or ugly by saying, “If it’s one thing I am… It’s grateful. When I think who all I could have been besides myself and what all I got, a little of everything, and a good disposition beside, I just feel like shouting. “Thank you, Jesus, for making everything the way it is!’ It could have been different!” just because she is white, she judges herself superior to black people even though they might own property. Mrs. Turpin is far from perfect, but she is happy to be who she is.
One of the last types of ways investigators are coached to detect deception is in the behavioral attitudes of a person being interviewed such as being unconcerned or over anxious (Kassin, 2005). The success rate of looking for these cues are very successful in telling if an individual is being deceitful and has surpassed any laboratory tests conducted on the subject. The laboratory test however did reveal some interesting facts. The research showed that people who had training and experience did not score better than the control group who received no training. In fact all individuals scored at the chance level with the people who had training scored just above chance or at the chance level. To check if special training in the detection of deception was more accurate a study ...
Drumbl, M. B. (2007). International Decisions. American Society of International Law , 101 (4), 841-848.
The battle fought between the Soviet Red Army and the Nazi Wehrmacht over the “city of Stalin” for four long months in the fall and winter of 1942-3 stands as not only the most important battle of the Eastern front during World War II, but as the greatest battle ever fought. Germany’s defeat at Stalingrad ended three years of almost uninterrupted victory and signaled the beginning of the end of the Third Reich. In this way, Stalingrad’s significance was projected beyond the two main combatants, extending to all corners of the world.
B. (2010). Immigration and Nationality Law Cases and Materials (4th ed.). Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.
Boed, R. (1994). The state of the right of asylum in international law. Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, 5(1). Retrieved from http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/djcil/vol5/iss1/1
A Writ of Habeas Corpus is an authoritative order forcing governments to provide the “body” of the detainee in which the legality of their detention and individual liberties will be challenged. Historically associated with civil liberty violation and the injustice of illegally detaining potentially enemies of the state, jurisdictional issues regarding their detaining location have made justice difficult to administer and deliver. Detaining enemies for their participation, involvement, and/or ties to threats of terror towards the United States will result the confinement of combatants, as solidified by the US Constitution, however, to what extent will they be forced to stay?. Residents of Guantanamo Bay are just; enemies of the state, accused individual that have been arrested and detain with minimal civil human rights to our jurisdictional due process that we American’s hold dear; with only a Writ of Habeas Corpus as their life line to legality and freedom. Although controversial in its conception and implementation by US presidential administration, judiciary members have cordially interpreted cases of questionable detention and the legality of doing so. It is truly unfortunate when individuals are tossed into confinement illegally with no help and/or the promise of their restorative freedoms (ACLU, 2014).
Heart rate, blood pressure, and skin conductivity are monitored during the lie detector test, those responses can be controlled. Steve Elias writes, “Some people are so divorced from morality or a guilty conscience that they may test honest – because they are really good
Employment and interpretations of the polygraph poses as the greatest threat to the testing subject. It is generally agreed upon psychophysiologist's that there is no specific lie response. Basically, no specific action has been identified and allocated as an irrepressible deceptive cue. This seems to be very contradicting to the whole purpose of the polygraph test. The fact that the polygraph is wide open to interpretation crates invalidity from the start.
A false confession is an “admission plus a post admission narrative of a crime that the confessor did not commit” (Leo, 2009). Research shows that individuals falsely confess to crimes that they have not committed (Drizin & Leo, 2004; Kassin et al., 2010). Interrogations have been seen to lead to false confessions, which individuals are then incarcerated for crimes they did not commit. Some of these individuals are then later exonerated because of DNA evidence proving their innocence. Many of these cases are involving false confessions, which are given by individuals in coercive, police interrogations. “ In 15 to 20 percent of the DNA cases, police-induced false confessions were the primary cause of the wrongful conviction” (Leo, 2009). The
...es’ constitutions, the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, according to Wright, “pressed for the acceptance of its rulings in Argentine courts” (166). Not only international efforts, but also domestic efforts, to apply international jurisprudence to local courts were on the rise. For example, in 1995, CELS launched its “program for the application of international law to human right in local courts” based on the amendments to the Argentine constitution (Wright 166). Just as well, human rights lawyers pushed “courts to embrace the international principle that crimes against humanity cannot be amnestied” (Wright, 167). In sum, the International human rights lobby wanted each country to mold its human rights jurisprudence around the rulings of international human rights law, and domestic actors adopted the same goal.
A polygraph test can record a person's breathing rate, pulse, blood pressure, perspiration and other significant physiological changes that suggest a person is lying, but it should not be used as evidence in a court of law because it does not provide reliable proof of a person's physical reaction to the stress of lying.
A popular way on many crime dramas to determine if a suspect is lying or telling the truth is by hooking them up to a polygraph machine. In a matter of a minute the police are able to determine if the suspect is lying and guilty or, on the rare occasion, telling the truth and innocent. But, one has to wonder, is it really that simple? Polygraphs measure four main factors that are thought to change when a lie is told and more importantly, it is assumed that these changes indicate deception. The four main factors are blood pressure, heart beat, perspiration, and breathing and these are recorded by using simple devices. It is important to note from the beginning that those who question the reliability of polygraphs do not doubt the reliability of the measurements, but the ability of the measurements to indicate and/or prove deception. Even though doubt exists as to the reliability, polygraphs are used not only in law enforcement settings, but also in intelligence agencies, in the maintaining security of industry, and for public safety and service around the world. Despite its prevalence, there are many groups that call into question the effectiveness, reliability, and fairness of polygraph testing. This paper will explore this question by first looking into the history of polygraphs including court rulings and how polygraph tests are done, then current use, and finally looking at sources of bias and error in the test and the process.
45 Oona Hathaway, ‘Do Human Rights Treaties Make a Difference?’ (2003) 112 Yale Law Journal
...., Raič, and Thuránszky J., The International Court of Justice: its future role after fifty