Selected Laws

Archive for the ‘National Security’ Category

History
See also: History of criminal justice
Ancient world
Ancient China
Law enforcement in Ancient China was carried out by “prefects”. The notion of a “prefect” in China has existed for thousands of years. The prefecture system developed in both the Chu and Jin kingdoms of the Spring and Autumn period. In Jin, dozens of prefects were spread across the state, each having limited authority and employment period.
In Ancient China, prefects were government officials appointed by local magistrates, who reported to higher authorities such as governors, who in turn were appointed by the head of state, usually the emperor of the dynasty. The prefects oversaw the civil administration of their “prefecture”, or jurisdiction.
Prefects usually reported to the local magistrate, just as modern police report to judges. Under each prefect were “subprefects” who helped collectively with law enforcement of the area. Some prefects were responsible for handling investigations, much like modern police detectives.
Eventually the concept of the “prefecture system” would spread to other cultures such as Korea and Japan. Law enforcement in Ancient China was also relatively progressive, allowing for female prefects. Some examples of ancient Chinese prefects include: Chong Fu – prefect of the Ying District in the East Han Dynasty and Qing Tsao – prefect of the modern Shang-tung Province. An example of a female prefect would by Lady Qu of Wuding (serving 1531-ca. 1557).
Recent portrayals of prefects in modern popular culture include Jet Li portrayal of the nameless prefect in the movie Hero.
Pre-medieval Europe
Ancient Greece
In Ancient Greece, publicly-owned slaves were used by magistrates as police. In Athens, a group of 300 Scythian slaves was used to guard public meetings to keep order and for crowd control, and also assisted with dealing with criminals, handling prisoners, and making arrests. Other duties associated with modern policing, such as investigating crimes, were left to the citizens themselves.
Roman Empire
In most of the Empire, the Army, rather than a dedicated police organization, provided security. Local watchmen were hired by cities to provide some extra security. In Rome itself, the Urban Cohorts were responsible for law and order and acted as a dedicated police force. Magistrates such as Procurator Fiscals and quaestors investigated crimes. There was no concept of public prosecution, so victims of crime or their families had to organize and manage the prosecution themselves.
Before its decline, the Roman Empire had a relatively effective law enforcement system. Under the reign of Augustus, when the capital had grown to almost one million inhabitants, 14 wards were created; the wards were protected by seven squads of 1,000 men called “Vigiles”, who guarded against fires and served as nightwatchmen. If necessary, the Vigiles might call the Praetorian Guard for assistance. Beginning in the 5th century, policing became a function of clan chiefs and heads of state.[citation needed]
European development
Medieval England
The Anglo-Saxon system of maintaining public order since the Norman conquest was a private system of tithings, led by a constable, which was based on a social obligation for the good conduct of the others; more common was that local lords and nobles were responsible to maintain order in their lands, and often appointed a constable, sometimes unpaid, to enforce the law.
Spain
Modern police in Europe has a precedent in the Hermandades, or “brotherhoods”, peacekeeping associations of armed individuals, a characteristic of municipal life in medieval Spain, especially in Castile. As medieval Spanish kings often could not offer adequate protection, protective municipal leagues began to emerge in the 12th century against bandits and other rural criminals, and against the lawless nobility or to support one or another claimant to the crown.
These organizations were intended to be temporary, but became a long-standing fixture of Spain. The first recorded case of the formation of an hermandad occurred when the towns and the peasantry of the north united to police the pilgrim road to Santiago de Compostela in Galicia, and protect the pilgrims against robber knights.
Throughout the Middle Ages such alliances were frequently formed by combinations of towns to protect the roads connecting them, and were occasionally extended to political purposes. Among the most powerful was the league of North Castilian and Basque ports, the Hermandad de las marismas: Toledo, Talavera, and Villarreal.
As one of their first acts after the war of succession, Ferdinand and Isabella established the centrally organized and efficient Holy Brotherhood (Santa Hermandad) as a national police force. They adapted an existing brotherhood to the purpose of a general police acting under officials appointed by themselves, and endowed with large powers of summary jurisdiction even in capital cases. The original brotherhoods continued to serve as modest local police units until their final suppression in 1835.
Holy Roman Empire
The Fehmic courts of Germany provided some policing in the absence of strong state institutions.
France
The Gendarmerie is the direct descendant of the Marshalcy of the ancien regime, more commonly known by its French title, the Marchausse. During the Middle Ages, there were two Grand Officers of the Kingdom of France with police responsibilities: The Marshal of France and the Constable of France. The military policing responsibilities of the Marshal of France were delegated to the Marshal’s provost, whose force was known as the Marshalcy because its authority ultimately derived from the Marshal. The marshalcy dates back to the Hundred Years War, and some historians trace it back to the early twelfth century. Another organisation, the Constabulary (French: Conntablie), was under the command of the Constable of France. The constabulary was regularised as a military body in 1337. Under King Francis I (who reigned 1515-1547), the Marchausse was merged with the Constabulary. The resulting force was also known as the Marchausse, or, formally, the Constabulary and Marshalcy of France (French: conntablie et marchausse de France). During the revolutionary period, marshalcy commanders generally placed themselves under the local constitutional authorities. As a result, the Marchausse, whose title was associated with the king, was not disbanded but simply renamed gendarmerie nationale in February 1791. Its personnel remained unchanged, and the role remained much as it was. However, from this point, the gendarmerie, unlike the marshalcy, was a fully military force.
The first police force in the modern sense was created by the government of King Louis XIV in 1667 to police the city of Paris, then the largest city in Europe. The royal edict, registered by the Parlement of Paris on March 15, 1667 created the office of lieutenant gnral de police (“lieutenant general of police”), who was to be the head of the new Paris police force, and defined the task of the police as “ensuring the peace and quiet of the public and of private individuals, purging the city of what may cause disturbances, procuring abundance, and having each and everyone live according to their station and their duties”.
This office was first held by Gabriel Nicolas de la Reynie, who had 44 commissaires de police (police commissioners) under his authority. In 1709, these commissioners were assisted by inspecteurs de police (police inspectors). The city of Paris was divided into 16 districts policed by the commissaires, each assigned to a particular district and assisted by a growing bureaucracy. The scheme of the Paris police force was extended to the rest of France by a royal edict of October 1699, resulting in the creation of lieutenants general of police in all large French cities and towns.
After the French Revolution, Napolon I reorganized the police in Paris and other cities with more than 5,000 inhabitants on February 17, 1800 as the Prefecture of Police. On March 12, 1829, a government decree created the first uniformed police in France, known as sergents de ville (“city sergeants”), which the Paris Prefecture of Police’s website claims were the first uniformed policemen in the world.
Britain and Ireland
Mounted officer of the British Metropolitan Police, the first modern police force
In England a system of sherriffs, reeves, and investigative “juries” had developed under the Anglo-Saxons to provide basic security and law enforcement.
After the Norman conquest, these institutions remained though their roles changed. Sherriffs in particular were responsible for keeping law and order, although they were responsible to the king and represented his interests.
In the United Kingdom, the development of police forces was much slower than in the rest of Europe. The British police function was historically performed by private watchmen (existing from 1500 on), thief-takers, and so on. The former were funded by private individuals and organisations and the latter by privately-funded rewards for catching criminals, who would then be compelled to return stolen property or pay restitution.
In 1737, George II began paying some London and Middlesex watchmen with tax moneys, beginning the shift to government control. In 1750, Henry Fielding began organizing a force of quasi-professional constables. The Macdaniel affair added further impetus for a publicly-salaried police force that did not depend on rewards. Nonetheless, In 1828, there were privately financed police units in no fewer than 45 parishes within a 10-mile radius of London.
The word “police” was borrowed from French into the English language in the 18th century, but for a long time it applied only to French and continental European police forces. The word, and the concept of police itself, was “disliked as a symbol of foreign oppression” (according to Britannica 1911).
Prior to the 19th century, the only official use of the word “police” recorded in the United Kingdom was the appointment of Commissioners of Police for Scotland in 1714 and the creation of the Marine Police in 1798 (set up to protect merchandise at the Port of London). Even today, many British police forces are suffixed with “Constabulary” rather than “Police”.
On June 30, 1800, the authorities of Glasgow, Scotland successfully petitioned the government to pass the Glasgow Police Act establishing the City of Glasgow Police. This was the first professional police service in the country and differed from previous law enforcement in that it was a preventive police force. Other Scottish towns soon followed suit and set up their own police forces through acts of parliament.
The first organized police force in Ireland came about through the Peace Preservation Act of 1814, but the Irish Constabulary Act of 1822 marked the true beginning of the Royal Irish Constabulary. Among its first duties was the forcible seizure of tithes during the “Tithe War” on behalf of the Anglican clergy from the mainly Catholic population as well as the Presbyterian minority.
The Act established a force in each barony with chief constables and inspectors general under the control of the civil administration at Dublin Castle. By 1841 this force numbered over 8,600 men.
The force had been rationalized and reorganized in an 1836 act and the first constabulary code of regulations was published in 1837. The discipline was tough and the pay poor. The police also faced unrest among the Irish rural poor, manifested in organizations like the Ribbonmen, which attacked landlords and their property.
In London, night watchmen were the first paid law enforcement body in the country, augmenting the force of unpaid constables. They guarded the streets since 1663. On September 29, 1829, the Metropolitan Police Act was passed by Parliament, allowing Sir Robert Peel, the then home secretary, to found the London Metropolitan Police. This promoted the preventive role of police as a deterrent to urban crime and disorder.
“Albertine at the Police Doctor’s Waiting Room”, 1885-87 painting by the Norwegian writer and painter Christian Krohg illustrating his then very controversial novel Albertine about the life of a prostitute
These police are often referred to as ‘Bobbies’ or ‘Peelers’ after Sir Robert (Bobby) Peel, who introduced the Police Act. They became a model for the police forces in most countries, such as the United States, and most of the British Empire. Bobbies can still be found in many parts of the Commonwealth of Nations. The primary role of the police in Britain was keeping the Queen’s Peace, which continues into the present day.
Development of Theory
In Western culture, the contemporary concept of a police paid by the government was developed by French legal scholars and practitioners in the 17th and early 18th centuries, notably with Nicolas Delamare’s Trait de la Police (“Treatise on the Police”), first published in 1705. The German Polizeiwissenschaft (Science of Police) was also an important theoretical formulation of police.
As conceptualized by the Polizeiwissenschaft, the police had an economic and social duty (“procuring abundance”). It was in charge of demographics concerns and of empowering the population, which, according to mercantilist theory, was to be the main strength of the state. Thus, its functions largely overreached simple law enforcement activities and included public health concerns, urban planning (which was important because of the miasma theory of disease; thus, cemeteries were moved out of town, etc.), and surveillance of prices.
Development of modern police was contemporary to the formation of the state, later defined by sociologist Max Weber as achieving a “monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force” and which was primarily exercised by the police and the military. Marxist theory situates the development of the modern state as part of the rise of capitalism, in which the police are one component of the bourgeoisie’s repressive apparatus for subjugating the working class.
British Empire
In British North America, policing was initially provided by local elected officials. For instance, the New York Sheriff’s Office was founded in 1626, and the Albany County Sheriff’s Department in the 1660s. In the colonial period, policing was provided by elected sheriffs and local militias. In Canada, the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary was founded in 1729, making it the first police force in present day Canada. It was followed in 1834 by the Toronto Police, and in 1838 by police forces in Montreal and Quebec City. A national force, the Dominion Police, was founded in 1868. Initially the Dominion Police provided security for parliament, but its responsibilities quickly grew. The famous Royal Northwest Mounted Police was founded in 1873. (See law enforcement in Canada.)
In Australia with the passing of the Police Regulation Act, 1862, the New South Wales Police Force was established and essentially tightly regulated and centralised all of the police forces operating throughout the Colony of New South Wales.
United States
The United States has a system of policing based on the modern English (British) Form.[citation needed]
In 1789 the US Marshals Service was established, followed by other federal services such as the US Parks Police (1791) and US Mint Police (1792). The first city police services were established in Philadelphia in 1751, Richmond, Virginia in 1807, Boston in 1838, and New York in 1845. The US Secret Service was founded in 1865 and was for some time the main investigative body for the federal government.
After the civil war, policing became more para-military in character, with the increased use of uniforms and military ranks. Prior to this, sheriff’s offices had been non-uniformed organizations without a para-military hierarchy.[citation needed]
In the American Old West, policing was often very poor quality.[citation needed] The Army often provided some policing alongside poorly resourced sheriffs and temporarily organised posses which are still in use in the Southern States today.[citation needed] Public organizations were supplemented by private contractors, notably the Pinkerton National Detective Agency, which was hired by individuals, businessmen, local governments and the federal government. At its height, the Pinkerton Agency’s numbers exceeded those of the standing army of the United States.[citation needed]
In recent years, in addition to federal, state, and local forces, some special districts have been formed to provide extra police protection in designated areas. These districts may be known as neighborhood improvement districts, crime prevention districts, or security districts.
Other countries
In Lebanon, modern police were established in 1861, with creation of the Gendarmerie.
In 1566, the first police investigator of Rio de Janeiro was recruited. By the seventeenth century, most “capitanias” already had local units with law enforcement functions. In July 9, 1775 a Cavalry Regiment was created in Minas Gerais for maintaining law and order. In 1808, the Portuguese royal family relocated to Brazil, due to the French invasion of Portugal. King Joo VI established the “Intendncia Geral de Polcia” (General Police Intendancy) for investigations. He also created a Royal Police Guard for Rio de Janeiro in 1809. In 1831, after independence, each province started organizing its local “military police”, with order maintenance tasks. The Federal Railroad Police was created in 1852.
Personnel and organization
In most Western police forces, perhaps the most significant division is between preventive (uniformed) police and detectives. Terminology varies from country to country.
Police functions include protecting life and property, enforcing criminal law, criminal investigations, regulating traffic, crowd control, and other public safety duties.
Uniformed police
Brazilian Federal Highway Police at work.
Preventive Police, also called Uniform Branch, Uniformed Police, Uniform Division, Administrative Police, Order Police, or Patrol, designates the police which patrol and respond to emergencies and other incidents, as opposed to detective services. As the name “uniformed” suggests, they wear uniforms and perform functions that require an immediate recognition of an officer’s legal authority, such as traffic control, stopping and detaining motorists, and more active crime response and prevention.
Preventive police almost always make up the bulk of a police service’s personnel. In Australia and Britain, patrol personnel are also known as “general duties” officers. Atypically, Brazil’s preventive police are known as Military Police.
Detectives
New South Wales Police Force officers search the vehicle of a suspected drug smuggler at a border crossing. Wentworth, New South Wales, Australia
Police detectives are responsible for investigations and detective work. Detectives may be called Investigations Police, Judiciary/Judicial Police, and Criminal Police. In the UK, they are often referred to by the name of their department, the Criminal Investigation Department (CID). Detectives typically make up roughly 15%-25% of a police service’s personnel.
Detectives, in contrast to uniform police, typically wear ‘business attire’ in bureaucratic and investigative functions where a uniformed presence would be either a distraction or intimidating, but a need to establish police authority still exists. “Plainclothes” officers dress in attire consistent with that worn by the general public for purposes of blending in.
In some cases, police are assigned to work “undercover”, where they conceal their police identity to investigate crimes, such as organized crime or narcotics crime, that are unsolvable by other means. In some cases this type of policing shares aspects with espionage.
Despite popular conceptions promoted by movies and television, many US police departments prefer not to maintain officers in non-patrol bureaus and divisions beyond a certain period of time, such as in the detective bureau, and instead maintain policies that limit service in such divisions to a specified period of time, after which officers must transfer out or return to patrol duties.[citation needed] This is done in part based upon the perception that the most important and essential police work is accomplished on patrol in which officers become acquainted with their beats, prevent crime by their presence, respond to crimes in progress, manage crises, and practice their skills.[citation needed]
Detectives, by contrast, usually investigate crimes after they have occurred and after patrol officers have responded first to a situation. Investigations often take weeks or months to complete, during which time detectives spend much of their time away from the streets, in interviews and courtrooms, for example. Rotating officers also promotes cross-training in a wider variety of skills, and serves to prevent “cliques” that can contribute to corruption or other unethical behavior.
Auxiliary
Police may also take on auxiliary administrative duties, such as issuing firearms licenses. The extent that police have these functions varies among countries, with police in France, Germany, and other continental European countries handling such tasks to a greater extent than British counterparts.
Specialized units
After the 2008 Mumbai attacks, the Mumbai Police created specialized, quick response teams to deal with terror threats.
Specialized preventive and detective groups exist within many law enforcement organizations either for dealing with particular types of crime, such as traffic law enforcement and crash investigation, homicide, or fraud; or for situations requiring specialized skills, such as underwater search, aviation, explosive device disposal (“bomb squad”), and computer crime.
Most larger jurisdictions also employ specially-selected and trained quasi-military units armed with military-grade weapons for the purposes of dealing with particularly violent situations beyond the capability of a patrol officer response, including high-risk warrant service and barricaded suspects. In the United States these units go by a variety of names, but are commonly known as SWAT (Special Weapons And Tactics) teams.
In counter insurgency type campaigns, select and specially trained units of police armed and equipped as light infantry have been designated as police field forces who perform paramilitary type patrols and ambushes whilst retaining their police powers in areas that were highly dangerous.
Because their situational mandate typically focuses on removing innocent bystanders from dangerous people and dangerous situations, not violent resolution, they are often equipped with non-lethal tactical tools like chemical agents, “flashbang” and concussion grenades, and rubber bullets. The London Metropolitan police’s Specialist Firearms Command (CO19) is a group of armed police used in dangerous situations including hostage taking, armed robbery/assault and terrorism.
Military police
Military police may refer to:
a section of the military solely responsible for policing the armed forces (referred to as provosts)
a section of the military responsible for policing in both the armed forces and in the civilian population (most gendarmeries, such as the French Gendarmerie, the Italian Carabinieri and the Portuguese Republican National Guard also known as GNR.
a section of the military solely responsible for policing the civilian population (such as the Romanian Gendarmerie)
the civilian preventative police of a Brazilian state (Policia Militar)
Religious police
Main article: Religious police
Some Islamic societies have religious police, who enforce the application of Islamic Sharia law. Their authority may include the power to arrest unrelated males and females caught socializing, anyone engaged in homosexual behavior or prostitution; to enforce Islamic dress-codes, and store closures during Islamic prayer time.
They enforce Muslim dietary laws, prohibit the consumption or sale of alcoholic beverages and pork, and seize banned consumer products and media regarded as un-Islamic, such as CDs/DVDs of various Western musical groups, television shows and film. In Saudi Arabia, religious police actively prevent the practice or proselytizing of non-Islamic religions within Saudi Arabia, where they are banned.
Varying jurisdictions
Police forces are usually organized and funded by some level of government. The level of government responsible for policing varies from place to place, and may be at the national, regional or local level. In some places there may be multiple police forces operating in the same area, with different ones having jurisdiction according to the type of crime or other circumstances.
For example in the UK policing is primarily the responsibility of a regional police force; however specialist units exist at the national level. In the US policing there is typically a state police force, but crimes are usually handled by local police forces which usually only cover a few municipalities. National agencies, such as the FBI, only have jurisdiction over federal crimes or those with an interstate component.
In addition to conventional urban or regional police forces, there are other police forces with specialized functions or jurisdiction. In the United States, the federal government has a number of police forces with their own specialized jurisdictions.
Some example are the Federal Protective Service, which patrols and protects government buildings; the postal police, which protect postal buildings, vehicles and items; the Park Police, which protect national parks, or Amtrak Police which patrol Amtrak stations and trains..
There are also some government agencies which perform police functions in addition to other duties. The U.S. Coast Guard carries out many police functions for boaters.
In major cities, there may be a separate police agency for public transit systems, such as the New York City Port Authority Police or the MTA police, or for major government functions, such as sanitation, or environmental functions.
A Police Service of Northern Ireland/Royal Ulster Constabulary barracks in Northern Ireland. The high walls are to protect against mortar bomb attacks.
Global policing
Policing plays an increasingly important role in United Nations peacekeeping and this looks set to grow in the years ahead, especially as the international community seeks to develop the rule of law and reform security institutions in States recovering from conflict.
Transnational policing
The term transnational policing entered into use in the mid-1990s as a description for forms of policing that transcended the boundaries of the sovereign nation state (Sheptycki, 1995). It is distinguished against the terms nternational policing and lobal policing. The former term would seem to indicate only those types of policing that are formally directed by institutions usually responsible for international affairs (for example the State Department in the US, the Foreign Office in the UK, etc.). The later term would seem to indicate only those forms of policing that are fully global in scope.
Transnational policing pertains to all those forms for policing that, in some sense, transgress national borders. This includes a variety of practices, but cross-border police cooperation, criminal intelligence exchange between police agencies working in different nation-states, and police development-aid to weak, failed or failing states are the three types that have received the most scholarly attention.
Historical studies reveal that policing agents have undertaken a variety of cross-border police missions for many years (Deflem, 2004).For example, in the 19th century a number of European policing agencies undertook cross-border surveillance because of concerns about anarchist agitators and other political radicals. A notable example of this was the occasional surveillance by Prussian police of Karl Marx during the years he remained resident in London. The interests of public police agencies in cross-border co-operation in the control of political radicalism and ordinary law crime were primarily initiated in Europe, which eventually led to the establishment of Interpol prior to the second world war. There are also many interesting examples of cross-border policing under private auspices and by municipal police forces that date back to the 19th century (Nadelmann, 1993). It has been established that modern policing has transgressed national boundaries from time to time almost from its inception. It is also generally agreed that in the post-Cold war era this type of practice became more significant and frequent (Sheptycki, 2000).
Not a lot of empirical work on the practices of transnational information and intelligence sharing has been undertaken. A notable exception is James Sheptycki’s study of police cooperation in the English Channel region (2002), which provides a systematic content analysis of information exchange files and a description of how these transnational information and intelligence exchanges are transformed into police case-work. The study showed that transnational police information sharing was routinized in the cross-Channel region from 1968 on the basis of agreements directly between the police agencies and without any formal agreement between the countries concerned. By 1992, with the signing of the Schengen Treaty which formalized aspects of police information exchange across the territory of the European Union, there were worries that much, if not all, of this intelligence sharing was opaque, raising questions about the efficacy of the accountability mechanisms governing police information sharing in Europe (Joubert and Bevers, 1996).
Studies of this kind outside of Europe are even rarer, so it is difficult to make generalizations, but one small-scale study that compared transnational police information and intelligence sharing practices at specific cross-border locations in North America and Europe confirmed that low visibility of police information and intelligence sharing was a common feature (Alain, 2001). Intelligence-led policing is now common practice in most advanced countries (Ratcliffe, 2007) and it is likely that police intelligence sharing and information exchange has a common morphology around the world (Ratcliffe, 2007).) James Sheptycki has analyzed the effects of the new information technologies on the organization of policing-intelligence and suggests that a number of rganizational pathologies have arisen that make the functioning of security-intelligence processes in transnational policing deeply problematic. He argues that transnational police information circuits help to ompose the panic scenes of the security-control society (p. 70). The paradoxical effect is that, the harder policing agencies work to produce security, the greater are feelings of insecurity.
Police development-aid to weak, failed or failing states is another form of transnational policing that has garnered attention. This form of transnational policing plays an increasingly important role in United Nations peacekeeping and this looks set to grow in the years ahead, especially as the international community seeks to develop the rule of law and reform security institutions in States recovering from conflict (Goldsmith and Sheptycki, 2007) With transnational police development-aid the imbalances of power between donors and recipients are stark and there are questions about the applicability and transportability of policing models between jurisdictions (Hills, 2009).
Perhaps the greatest question regarding the future development of transnational policing is: in whose interest? At a more practical level, the question translates into one about how to make transnational policing institutions democratically accountable (Sheptycki, 2004). For example, according to the Global Accountability Report for 2007 (Lloyd, et al. 2007) Interpol had the lowest scores in its category (IGOs), coming in tenth with a score of 22% on overall accountability capabilities (p.19). As this report points out, and the existing academic literature on transnational policing seems to confirm, this is a secretive area and one not open to civil society involvement.
Equipment
Weapons
In many jurisdictions, police officers carry firearms, primarily handguns, in the normal course of their duties. In the United Kingdom, Ireland, Norway, and New Zealand, with the exception of specialist units, officers do not carry firearms as a matter of course.
Police often have specialist units for handling armed offenders, and similar dangerous situations, and can (depending on local laws), in some extreme circumstances, call on the military (since Military Aid to the Civil Power is a role of many armed forces). Perhaps the most high-profile example of this was, in 1980 the Metropolitan Police handing control of the Iranian Embassy Siege to the Special Air Service.
They can also be equipped with non-lethal (more accurately known as “less than lethal” or “less-lethal”) weaponry, particularly for riot control. Non-lethal weapons include batons, riot control agents, rubber bullets and electroshock weapons. The use of firearms or deadly force is typically a last resort only to be used when necessary to save human life, although some jurisdictions (such as Brazil) allow its use against fleeing felons and escaped convicts. Police officers often carry handcuffs to restrain suspects.
Communications
Modern police forces make extensive use of radio communications equipment, carried both on the person and installed in vehicles, to co-ordinate their work, share information, and get help quickly. In recent years, vehicle-installed computers have enhanced the ability of police communications, enabling easier dispatching of calls, criminal background checks on persons of interest to be completed in a matter of seconds, and updating the officer’s daily activity log and other required reports on a real-time basis. Other common pieces of police equipment include flashlights/torches, whistles, and police notebooks and “ticketbooks” or citations.
Vehicles
Main article: Police transportation
A Ford Crown Victoria, one of the most recognizable models of American police car. This unit belongs to Houston METRO Police
Police vehicles are used for detaining, patrolling and transporting. The common Police patrol vehicle is an improved four door sedan (saloon in British English). Police vehicles are usually marked with appropriate logos and are equipped with sirens and lightbars to aid in making others aware of police presence.
Unmarked vehicles are used primarily for sting operations or apprehending criminals without alerting them to their presence. Some police forces use unmarked or minimally marked cars for traffic law enforcement, since drivers slow down at the sight of marked police vehicles and unmarked vehicles make it easier for officers to catch speeders and traffic violators. This practice is controversial, with for example, New York State banning this practice in 1996 on the grounds that it endangered motorists who might be pulled over by people impersonating police officers.
Motorcycles are also commonly used, particularly in locations that a car may not be able to access, to control potential public order situations involving meetings of motorcyclists and often in escort duties where the motorcycle policeman can quickly clear a path for the escorted vehicle. Bicycle patrols are used in some areas because they allow for more open interaction with the public. In addition, their quieter operation can facilitate approaching suspects unawares and can help in pursuing them attempting to escape on foot.
Police departments use an array of specialty vehicles such as helicopters, airplanes, watercraft, command post, vans, trucks, all terrain vehicles, motorcycles, and SWAT armored vehicles.
Strategies
The advent of the police car, two-way radio, and telephone in the early 20th century transformed policing into a reactive strategy that focused on responding to calls for service. With this transformation, police command and control became more centralized.
In the United States, August Vollmer introduced other reforms, including education requirements for police officers. O.W. Wilson, a student of Vollmer, helped reduce corruption and introduce professionalism in Wichita, Kansas, and later in the Chicago Police Department. Strategies employed by O.W. Wilson included rotating officers from community to community to reduce their vulnerability to corruption, establishing of a non-partisan police board to help govern the police force, a strict merit system for promotions within the department, and an aggressive recruiting drive with higher police salaries to attract professionally qualified officers. During the professionalism era of policing, law enforcement agencies concentrated on dealing with felonies and other serious crime, rather than broader focus on crime prevention.
Anti-riot armoured vehicle of the police of the Canton of Vaud in Lausanne, Switzerland
The Kansas City Preventive Patrol study in the 1970s found this approach to policing to be ineffective. Patrol officers in cars were disconnected from the community, and had insufficient contact and interaction with the community. In the 1980s and 1990s, many law enforcement agencies began to adopt community policing strategies, and others adopted problem-oriented policing.
Broken windows policing was another, related approach introduced in the 1980s by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling, who suggested that police should pay greater attention to minor “quality of life” offenses and disorderly conduct. This method was first introduced and made popular by New York City Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, in the early 1990s.
The concept behind this method is simple: broken windows, graffiti, and other physical destruction or degradation of property, greatly increases the chances of more criminal activities and destruction of property. When criminals see the abandoned vehicles, trash, and deplorable property, they assume that authorities do not care and do not take active approaches to correct problems in these areas. Therefore, correcting the small problems prevents more serious criminal activity.
Building upon these earlier models, intelligence-led policing has emerged as the dominant philosophy guiding police strategy. Intelligence-led policing and problem-oriented policing are complementary strategies, both which involve systematic use of information. Although it still lacks a universally accepted definition, the crux of intelligence-led policing is an emphasis on the collection and analysis of information to guide police operations, rather than the reverse.
Power restrictions
Main article: Police misconduct
ACT Police breath testing and command truck in Canberra Australia
In many nations, criminal procedure law has been developed to regulate officers’ discretion, so that they do not arbitrarily or unjustly exercise their powers of arrest, search and seizure, and use of force. In the United States, Miranda v. Arizona led to the widespread use of Miranda warnings or constitutional warnings.
Police in the United States are also prohibited from holding criminal suspects for more than a reasonable amount of time (usually 72 hours) before arraignment, using torture, abuse or physical threats to extract confessions, using excessive force to effect an arrest, and searching suspects’ bodies or their homes without a warrant obtained upon a showing of probable cause.
Using deception for confessions is permitted, but not coercion. There are exceptions or exigent circumstances such as an articulated need to disarm a suspect or searching a suspect who has already been arrested (Search Incident to an Arrest). The Posse Comitatus Act severely restricts the use of the military for police activity, giving added importance to police SWAT units.
British police officers are governed by similar rules, particularly those introduced under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), but generally have greater powers. They may, for example, legally search any suspect who has been arrested, or their vehicles, home or business premises, without a warrant, and may seize anything they find in a search as evidence.
All police officers in the United Kingdom, whatever their actual rank, are ‘constables’ in terms of their legal position. This means that a newly appointed constable has the same arrest powers as a Chief Constable or Commissioner. However, certain higher ranks have additional powers to authorize certain aspects of police operations, such as a power to authorize a search of a suspect’s house (section 18 PACE) by an officer of the rank of Inspector, or the power to authorize a suspect’s detention beyond 24 hours by a Superintendent.
Conduct and accountability
This section needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2009)
April 21 2001: Police fire CS gas at protesters during the Quebec City Summit of the Americas. The Commission for Public Complaints against the RCMP later concluded the use of tear gas against demonstrators at the summit constituted “excessive and unjustified force”.[citation needed]
Crashed 2004 Cincinnati Police units
Police services commonly include units for investigating crimes committed by the police themselves. These units are typically called Inspectorate-General, or in the USA, “internal affairs”. In some countries separate organizations outside the police exist for such purposes, such as the British Independent Police Complaints Commission.
Likewise, some state and local jurisdictions, for example, Springfield, Illinois have similar outside review organizations. The Police Service of Northern Ireland is investigated by the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, an external agency set up as a result of the Patten report into policing the province. In the Republic of Ireland the Garda Sochna is investigated by the Garda Sochna Ombudsman Commission, an independent force that replaced the Garda Complaints Board in May 2007.
The Special Investigations Unit of Ontario, Canada, is one of only a few civilian agencies around the world responsible for investigating circumstances involving police and civilians that have resulted in a death, serious injury, or allegations of sexual assault.
In Hong Kong, any allegations of corruption within the police will be investigated by the Independent Commission Against Corruption, an agency independent of the police force.
Use of force
Police forces also find themselves under criticism for their use of force, particularly deadly force. Specifically, tension increases when a police officer of one ethnic group harms or kills a suspect of another one.[citation needed] In the United States, such events occasionally spark protests and accusations of racism against police and allegations that police departments practice racial profiling.
In the United States since the 1960s, concern over such issues has increasingly weighed upon law enforcement agencies, courts and legislatures at every level of government. Incidents such as the 1965 Watts Riots, the videotaped 1991 beating by Los Angeles Police officers of Rodney King, and the riot following their acquittal have been suggested by some people to be evidence that U.S. police are dangerously lacking in appropriate controls.
The fact that this trend has occurred contemporaneously with the rise of the US civil rights movement, the “War on Drugs”, and a precipitous rise in violent crime from the 1960s to the 1990s has made questions surrounding the role, administration and scope of police authority increasingly complicated.[citation needed]
Police departments and the local governments that oversee them in some jurisdictions have attempted to mitigate some of these issues through community outreach programs and community policing to make the police more accessible to the concerns of local communities, by working to increase hiring diversity, by updating training of police in their responsibilities to the community and under the law, and by increased oversight within the department or by civilian commissions.
In cases in which such measures have been lacking or absent, civil law suits have been brought by the United States Department of Justice against local law enforcement agencies, authorized under the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. This has compelled local departments to make organizational changes, enter into consent decree settlements to adopt such measures, and submit to oversight by the Justice Department.[citation needed]
Protection of individuals
The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled numerous times since 1856 that law enforcement officers have no duty to protect any individual, despite the motto “protect and serve”. Their duty is to enforce the law in general. The first such case was in 1856 (South v. Maryland) and the most recent in 2005 (Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales).
In contrast, the police are entitled to protect private rights in some jurisdictions. To ensure that the police would not interfere into the regular competencies of the courts of law, some police acts require that the police may only interfere in such cases where protection from courts cannot be obtained in time, and where, without interference of the police, the realization of the private right would be impeded. This would, for example, allow police to establish a restaurant guest’s identity and forward it to the inn-keeper in a case where the guest cannot pay the bill at nighttime because his wallet had just been stolen from the restaurant table.
In addition, there are Federal Law Enforcement agencies in the United States whose mission includes providing protection for executives such as the President and accompanying family members, visiting foreign dignitaries, and other high-ranking individuals. Such agencies include The United States Secret Service and the United States Park Police.
International forces
Main article: Law enforcement by country
AFP -ACT Police vehicle and uniformed officers in Canberra, Australia
In many countries, particularly those with a federal system of government, there may be several police or police-like organizations, each serving different levels of government and enforcing different subsets of the applicable law. The United States has a highly decentralized and fragmented system of law enforcement, with over 17,000 state and local law enforcement agencies.
Some countries, such as Chile, Israel, the Philippines, France, Austria, New Zealand and South Africa, use a centralized system of policing. Other countries have multiple police forces, but for the most part their jurisdictions do not overlap. In the United States however, several different law enforcement agencies may have authority in a particular jurisdiction at the same time, each with their own command.
Other countries where jurisdiction of multiple police agencies overlap, include Guardia Civil and the Polica Nacional in Spain , the Polizia di Stato and Carabinieri in Italy and the Police Nationale and National Gendarmerie in France.
Most countries are members of the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol), established to detect and fight trans-national crime and provide for international co-operation and co-ordination of other police activities, such as notifying relatives of the death of foreign nationals. Interpol does not conduct investigations nor arrests by itself, but only serves as a central point for information on crime, suspects and criminals. Political crimes are excluded from its competencies.
See also
Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Police
Look up police in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Chief of police
Constable
Criminal justice
Fraternal Order of Police
Highway Patrol
Law enforcement agency
Law enforcement and society
Law enforcement by country
The Officer Down Memorial Page, Inc
Police academy
Police brutality
Police certificate
Police state
Police training officer
Private Police
Public administration
Public Security
Sheriff
State Police
Lists
List of basic law enforcement topics
List of countries by size of police forces
List of law enforcement agencies
List of protective service agencies
Police rank
References
^ “The Role and Responsibilities of the Police”. Policy Studies Institute. p. xii. http://www.psi.org.uk/publications/archivepdfs/Role pol/INDPOL-0.P.pdf. Retrieved 2009-12-22. 
^ “Police”. http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=police&searchmode=none. Retrieved 2007-02-08. 
^ Walker, Samuel (1977). A Critical History of Police Reform: The Emergence of Professionalism. Lexington, MT: Lexington Books. p. 143. ISBN 978-0-6690-1292-7. 
^ Neocleous, Mark (2004). Fabricating Social Order: A Critical History of Police Power. Pluto Press. pp. 9394. ISBN 978-0-7453-1489-1. 
^ Siegel, Larry J. (2005). Criminolgy. Thomson Wadsworth. pp. 515,516.  Google Books Search
^ Whittaker, Jake. “UC Davis East Asian Studies”. University of California, Davis. UCdavis.edu
^ Hunter, Virginia J. (1994). Policing Athens: Social Control in the Attic Lawsuits, 420-320 B.C.. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-1-4008-0392-7. http://press.princeton.edu/titles/5349.html. 
^ “Bicentenaire : theme_expo4″. Prefecture-police-paris.interieur.gouv.fr. http://www.prefecture-police-paris.interieur.gouv.fr/documentation/bicentenaire/theme_expo4.htm. Retrieved 2009-06-21. 
^ a b Brodeur, Jean-Paul; Eds., Kevin R. E. McCormick and Livy A. Visano (1992). igh Policing and Low Policing: Remarks about the Policing of Political Activities, Understanding Policing. Canadian Scholars Press. pp. 284285, 295. ISBN 1-55130-005-2. 
^ “Glasgow Police”. Scotia-news.com. http://www.scotia-news.com/issue5/ISSUE05a.htm. Retrieved 2009-06-21. 
^ “Respect – Homepage”. Together.gov.uk. http://www.together.gov.uk/article.asp?c=442&aid=1275. Retrieved 2009-06-21. [dead link]
^ Michel Foucault, Security, Territory, Population, 1977-78 course (published 2004)
^ “The history of the Park Police”. National Park Service. http://www.nps.gov/uspp/. Retrieved February 24, 2010. 
^ “United States Mint Police”. United States Mint. http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_mint/mint_police/. Retrieved February 24, 2010. 
^ “Department History”. Philadelphia Police Department. http://www.ppdonline.org/hq_history.php. Retrieved February 24, 2010. 
^ “History of the Richmond Police Department”. City of Richmond. http://www.ci.richmond.va.us/Police/HistoryPoliceDepartment.aspx. Retrieved February 24, 2010. 
^ “A Brief History of The B.P.D.”. City of Boston. http://www.cityofboston.gov/police/about/history.asp. Retrieved February 24, 2010. 
^ “New York City Police Department”. New York Daily News. http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/New+York+City+Police+Department. Retrieved February 24, 2010. 
^ “Secret Service History”. United States Secret Service. http://www.secretservice.gov/history.shtml. Retrieved February 24, 2010. 
^ Census.gov
^ “Historical overview”. Interior Security Forces (Lebanon). http://www.isf.gov.lb/English/LeftMenu/General+Info/History/. Retrieved 2007-06-26. 
^ a b c Bayley, David H. (1979). “Police Function, Structure, and Control in Western Europe and North America: Comparative and Historical Studies”. Crime & Justice 1: 109143. doi:10.1086/449060. NCJ 63672. 
^ “PMMG”. Policiamilitar.mg.gov.br. https://www.policiamilitar.mg.gov.br/_pmmg.htm. Retrieved 2009-06-21. 
^ p.Davies, Bruce & McKay, Gary The Men Who Persevered:The AATTV 2005 Bruce & Unwin
^ formerly named SO19 “Metropolitan Police Service – Central Operations, Specialist Firearms unit (CO19)”. Metropolitan Police Service. http://www.met.police.uk/co19/. Retrieved 2008-08-04. 
^ SAUDI ARABIA Catholic priest arrested and expelled from Riyadh – Asia News
^ BBC NEWS | Middle East | Saudi minister rebukes religious police
^ SAUDI ARABIA Catholic priest arrested and expelled from Riyadh – Asia News
^ BBC NEWS | Middle East | Saudi minister rebukes religious police
^ SAUDI ARABIA Catholic priest arrested and expelled from Riyadh – Asia News
^ BBC NEWS | Middle East | Saudi minister rebukes religious police
^ “Top UN police, rule of law officials meet in Italy to discuss global policing”. Un.org. 2008-02-07. http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=25538&Cr=UN&Cr1=police. Retrieved 2009-06-21. 
^ Sheptycki, J. (1995) ‘Transnational Policing and the Makings of a Postmodern State’, British Journal of Criminology, 1995, Vol. 35 No. 4 Autumn, pp. 613-635
^ Deflem, M. (2004) Policing World Society; Historical Foundations of International Police Cooperation, Oxford: Calrendon
^ Nadelmann, E. A. (1993) Cops Across Borders; the Internationalization of US Law Enforcement, Pennsylvania State University Press
^ Sheptycki, J. (2000) Issues in Transnational Policing, London; Routledge
^ Sheptycki, J. (2002) In Search of Transnational Policing, Aldershot: Ashgate
^ Joubert, C. and Bevers, H. (1996) Schengen Investigated; The Hague: Kluwer Law International
^ Alain, M. (2001) he Trapeze Artists and the Ground Crew – Police Cooperation and Intelligence Exchange Mechanisms in Europe and North America: A Comparative Empirical Study, Policing and Society, 11/1: 1-28
^ Ratcliffe, J. (2007) Strategic Thinking in Criminal Intelligence, Annadale, NSW: The Federation Press
^ Ratcliffe, J. (2007) Strategic Thinking in Criminal Intelligence, Annadale, NSW: The Federation Press
^ Sheptycki, J. (2007) igh Policing in the Security Control Society Policing; a Journal of Policy and Practice, (Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 70-79 doi:10.1093/police/pam005 Oxfordjournals.org
^ Goldsmith, A. and Sheptycki, J. (2007) Crafting Transnational Policing; State-Building and Global Policing Reform, Oxford: Hart Law Publishers
^ Hills, A. (2009) he Possibility of Transnational Policing, Policing and Society, Vol. 19 No. 3 pp. 300-317
^ Sheptycki, J. (2004) he Accountability of Transnational Policing Institutions: The Strange Case of Interpol The Canadian Journal of Law and Society, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 107-134
^ Lloyd, R. Oatham, J. and Hammer, M. (2007) 2007 Global Accountability Report: London: One World Trust
^ Dao, James (1996-04-18). “Pataki Curbs Unmarked Cars’ Use – The”. New York Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9800E1DB1E39F93BA25757C0A960958260&n=Top/Reference/Times Topics/Subjects/R/Roads and Traffic. Retrieved 2009-06-21. 
^ Reiss Jr, Albert J. (1992). “Police Organization in the Twentieth Century”. Crime and Justice 51: 51. doi:10.1086/449193. NCJ 138800. 
^ “Finest of the Finest”. TIME Magazine. February 18, 1966. http://jcgi.pathfinder.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,899019,00.html. 
^ “Guide to the Orlando Winfield Wilson Papers, ca. 1928-1972″. Online Archive of California. http://content.cdlib.org/view?docId=tf3v19n6s0&doc.view=entire_text. Retrieved 2006-10-20. 
^ “Chicago Chooses Criminologist to Head and Clean Up the Police”. United Press International/The New York Times. February 22, 1960. 
^ Kelling, George L., Mary A. Wycoff (December 2002). Evolving Strategy of Policing: Case Studies of Strategic Change. National Institute of Justice. NCJ 198029. 
^ Kelling, George L., Tony Pate, Duane Dieckman, Charles E. Brown (1974). “The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment – A Summary Report” (PDF). Police Foundation. http://www.policefoundation.org/pdf/kcppe.pdf. 
^ Kelling, George L., James Q. Wilson (March 1982). “Broken Windows” (subscription). Atlantic Monthly. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/198203/broken-windows. 
^ Tilley, Nick (2003). Problem-Oriented Policing, Intelligence-Led Policing and the National Intelligence Model. Jill Dando Institute of Crime Science, University College London. http://www.jdi.ucl.ac.uk/publications/short_reports/problem_oriented_policing.php. 
^ “Intelligence-led policing: A Definition”. Royal Canadian Mounted Police. http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/crimint/intelligence_e.htm. Retrieved 2007-06-15. 
^ Amanda Reavy. “Police review board gets started”. The State Journal-Register Online. http://www.sj-r.com/sections/news/stories/112655.asp. 
^ Walker, Samuel (2005). The New World of Police Accountability. Sage. pp. 5. 
^ “Castle Rock v. Gonzales”. Cornell University Law School. http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-278.ZS.html. Retrieved 2009-03-21. 
^ See e.g. 1 section 2 of the Police Act of North Rhine-Westphalia:”Police Act of the German state of North Rhine-Westphalia” (in German). polizei-nrw.de. Land Nordrhein-Westfalen. http://www1.polizei-nrw.de/im/Recht/Polizeigesetz/. Retrieved 2008-08-10. 
^ The United States Park Police Webpage, NPS.gov
^ “Law Enforcement Statistics”. Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://www.ojp.gov/bjs/lawenf.htm. Retrieved 2007-05-23. 
^ Das, Dilip K., Otwin Marenin (2000). Challenges of Policing Democracies: A World Perspective. Routledge. pp. 17. 
External links
United Nations Police Division.
v  d  e
Law
Core subjects
Administrative law  Constitutional law  Contract  Criminal law  Evidence  Law of obligations  Property law  Public international law  Public law  Restitution  Tort  Trust law
Other subjects
Admiralty law  Aviation law  Banking law  Bankruptcy  Commercial law  Competition law  Conflict of laws  Consumer protection  Corporate law  Environmental law  Family law  Human rights  Immigration law  Intellectual property  International criminal law  Labour law  Media law  Military law  Procedure (Civil  Criminal)  Product liability  Space law  Sports law  Tax law  Unjust enrichment  Wills
Legal systems
Canon law  Civil law  Common law  Comparative law  Halakha  Roman law  Sharia  Socialist law  Statutory law  Xeer
Legal theory
Critical legal studies  Economic analysis  History  International legal theory  Philosophy  Sociology
Legal institutions
Bureaucracy  Civil society  Executive  Judiciary  Legal profession  Legislature  Military  Police
Category  Portal Categories: Law enforcement | Legal professions | Crime prevention | Public safety | National security | Security | SurveillanceHidden categories: All articles with dead external links | Articles with dead external links from June 2009 | Articles needing cleanup from December 2009 | All pages needing cleanup | Wikipedia introduction cleanup from December 2009 | Articles needing cleanup from July 2009 | Articles with limited geographic scope | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements from November 2007 | Articles with unsourced statements from February 2010 | Articles with unsourced statements from July 2008 | Articles needing additional references from March 2009 | All articles needing additional references | Articles with unsourced statements from December 2009 | Articles with unsourced statements from December 2008

TABLE OF CONTENTS:- 

The international laws in the current aspects as viewed by most of the jurists round the globe are the laws that govern the relations of the nations with each other and the control over the individualism and freedom of these democratic as well as otherwise nations. the international laws are thought to be the governing machineries of the contemporary scenario in which the accountability of the nations for the most inhumane crimes being done by them are brought to the court. in the various books that talk of “taking the state to court” and the “mobilization” standards of the present F1 generations are being expressly interviewed. These scholar works tend to connote that the international laws are the tools that can limit the future dangers of the international insecurity and other problems of colonization etc.  faced by most of the nations of the world. These nations are threatened by the superpowers for being forced to remove their ruling strategy. The United Nations has done several peacekeeping operations and has set various organizations that intend to store the peace and spirit of coordination and cooperation in the world. The theories of the international laws that are found to be dealing with the origin and the gradual development of the international laws have been asked a lot of questions as the race for hegemony is on the peak. Growing problems of racism and international terrorism are the new challenges being faced by the international laws today. This article presents various such aspects and put the suggestions for their solutions under one umbrella. The first question before everyone is this that “what are the international laws and what purpose do they serve for humanity and international peace?” This is the most critical question that corresponds to the enforcement of international and the limits of the international courts of justice being determined. We know that the function of the national laws is to regulate the behavior of the individuals but when we intend to talk of the international laws, the shoes of individuals are wore by the states. What if the international laws are the vanishing point of the world? It is well known to the students of the international laws that the primary function of the international law is to regulate the conduct of the states while on the other hand the national laws intend to regulate the conduct of the individuals. If we examine the contours on which the body of international law is explained we could easily derive the conclusion that most of the allegations that are imposed upon the rule of international laws are concerning their applicability or jurisdiction in one way or the other. Thus the international laws are to be made more binding and the forces that provide sanctioning power to such laws are to be extending to ensure the desired obedience. The identity of the international laws another such aspect that is necessary to limit the province of international laws. The state and non-sate actors are also the key aspects that correspond to the applicability of the international laws. We here mean the kinds of acts performed by the international superpowers and other small newly independent states. In various cases of hegemonic expansion and colonialism, it could be traced that the war-crimes and crimes against humanity are recorded.

02. TAKING THE STATE TO THE COURT

:-

In the contemporary growth of the international law, the growing awareness among the people of the various countries has led to the introduction of the concept of public interest litigation which has increased and widened the opportunities that even the states could be brought under the jurisdiction of the courts. In a study by the German philosopher “Hans Dembowski”, it has been concluded that the growing political unfairness and other political reasoning have led to the introduction of Judicial Activism which has led to the growth of the power and abilities accompanied with the authoritativeness of the judiciary. International laws deal with the sociology of governance and in this respect connote to the division of power between the administrative and judicial branches of the government and their interaction with society as a whole in the particular cases that have been studied. The ongoing, excited media debate about the public interest litigation and judicial activism makes this evident. This function has typical stand point in certain countries of the world. The international arena on which various countries are brought on the same standard in the international court are is seemingly an attempt to ensure fairness and security in the international contour. Let us have a look over the two important aspects that have been the focus of study in the international society.

[A]. State Sovereignty

Sovereignty, for the past several centuries, has been the foundation of interstate relations and the world order. The concept- defined as the independent and unfettered power of a state in its jurisdiction-lies at the heart of the customary international law and the UN charter. It remains both an essential component of the maintenance of international peace and security and a defense for weak states against the strong. At the same time, the concept has never been as inviolable, either in law or in practice, as a formal legal definition might imply. In his 1992 An agenda for peace, UN secretary general Boutros Boutros-Ghali pronounced that the theory of sovereignty never matched the reality. In exploring why the westphalian sovereignty is continuously ignored or violated, Stephen Kraser has noted straightforwardly that “organized hypocrisy is the normal state of affairs. Sovereignty has routinely been violated by the powerful. In today’s globalizing world, it is generally recognized that cultural, economic influences neither respect borders nor require entry visas in both powerful and the powerless countries. The concept of state sovereignty is well envisaged in the legal and the political discourse, but territorial boundaries have come under the stress. Not only technology but also communications have made the boundaries permeable, but the political dimensions of the internal disorder and suffering often can result in wider international disorder. The initial purpose of this discussion is to set out the scope and significance of state sovereignty as a foundation on which to explore the contemporary debates about intervention. The literature on this subject is vast and contentious. As one legal analyst accurately summarizes:

Few subjects in the international law and international relations are as sensitive as the notion of sovereignty. Steinberger refers to it in the Encyclopedia of Public International Law as “the most glittering and controversial notion in the history, doctrine and the practice of the international law.” On the other hand, Henkin seeks to banish it from our vocabulary and others call it ” a word that has emotive quality lacking meaningful specific content”. There is little neutral ground when it comes to sovereignty.

State sovereignty denotes the competence, independence and legal equality of the states. The concept is normally used to encompass all matters in which each state is permitted by international law to decide and act without intrusions from the other sovereign states. The scope of freedom of choice in these matters is not unlimited; it depends upon developments in international law and in international relations. The current foundations of the international law with regard to sovereignty were shaped by the agreements concluded by the European states as part of the treaties of Westphalia in 1648. the 1993 Montevideo Convention On Rights and Duties of States spells out the following main essentials: a permanent population, a defined territory, a functioning government, and the ability to enter into relations with the other states. The Montevideo definition includes both empirical (population and effective government) and juridical (borders and independence) components. There is a controversy regarding the accurate sovereignty of the states in Africa which has been the problem in the enforcement of the principles of the convention. These states are sovereign de jure but not de facto. As a hallmark of statehood, the territorial sovereignty is a must in the international system. An act of aggression is unlawful for two reasons: it undermines the international order, and states have exercised their sovereignty to outlaw war in the UN charter. The failure or the weakening of the state capacity brings tragedies and international insecurity. In sum, sovereignty is the key constitutional safeguard of the contemporary international order. Despite the pluralisation of the international relations resulting from the proliferation of the non-state actors which is evidenced by globalization, democratizationand privatization worldwide- the sate remains the fundamental guarantor of human rights locally as well as building block of international society.

Critical Issues

Instead of the heavy recommendations on the maintenance and enforcement of sovereignty among the states, this constitutional aspect of every nation is subject to limitation in the statements of the United Nations which have dealt heavily upon the matters concerning the world peace and a definite civil order in the international community. These limitations are as described under:-

Firstly, the charter of the United Nations contains collective international obligations for the maintenance of international peace and security. According to Chapter VII, sovereignty is not a barrier to Security Council action in response to ” a threat to peace, a breach of the peace or an act of aggression.”

Secondly, sovereignty may be limited by customary international law and treaties. States are responsible for their international obligations, and therefore sovereignty cannot be an excuse for not performing the duties to which they have agreed sovereignty thus carries with it responsibilities to protect the persons and property, as well as to regulate political and economic affairs. Sovereignty cannot shield internal violations of Human rights that contradict the international obligations. It has been evident in the pages of history that in a no of cases, the Security Council endorsed the use of military force for the protection of the populations in the states which were caught in the throes of war.

[B.] Changes And Continuity In The International System

Limits to the sovereignty are widely accepted-its erosion by economic, cultural and environmental factors, for example, or by customary law and voluntarily agreed treaty obligations. But Annan’s assertion of popular sovereignty was a far more radical challenge. It joined three other threats to traditional notions of state sovereignty that arose in the 1990s and are relevant for our consideration of humanitarian intervention: the right of self-determination, a broadband conception of international peace and security; and the collapse of state authority. In spite of significant change, the international system reflects substantial continuities: in centrality of state decision making and the lack of any changes overriding central authority. But situating the nature of changes and continuities is the task of political analysis and judgment. However, after the end of the cold war, these situations changed to a great extent. Firstly, the soviet union became a superpower in which Russia led the legal status of USSR, including a permanent seat on the Security Council, but 14 other states were created by the implosion of the former soviet union. Shortly, thereafter, Yugoslavia broke up into six independent states, with Serbia and Montenegro later forming the republic of Yugoslavia. Contemporary politics in developing countries is conditioned by the legacy of colonialism. The second challenge is that the broadening interpretation of threats to international peace and security, the charter’s only enshrined license to override the principle of noninterference. The third challenge was to the traditional interpretations of the sovereignty has arisen because of the incapacity of some states to exercise effective authority over their authorities and populations, a topic that is dealt extensively by the international community. For these states sovereignty is a legal fiction which never matches to reality. The political vacuum leads to the nonstate actors taking matters into their own hands and is usually accompanied by the forced displacement of the people. The United Nations confronts the same constraints today as the diplomats and politicians have since time immemorial, and certainly since the beginning of the modern efforts at the multilateral cooperation in the 19th century.

[C.] The International Court of Justice (ICJ):-

The international court of justice even though working for the enforcement of the principles behind the objective of maintenance of peace among the states of the world have been posed by various questions that are the critical areas of thought that concern the epistemology behind the working of the international courts. The states which are prosecuted in the court suffer from various discriminations and differentiations. The trials that are governed or were carried out at Nuremberg etc. follow the traditional principles i.e. TRC Act, 1995. This method has been given the name “Victor’s Justice”. The victor prosecuting the accused in his own sort of understanding and reasoning is clearly presenting the breaking of the basic norm of the law that “nobody could be a judge in his cause”. This method of trial was applied in the Saddam’s trial when USA attacked it after it had the security threats from Iraq that it possessed nuclear weapons of mass destruction. The differentiation and the discrimination which has been done against Saddam have been, clearly witnessed by the world that dreams of making a new world order that involves the concept of Justice. The influence of Gandhian thought is clearly visible in the TRC Act. The basic problem is that most of the overwhelming systems of justice of the contemporary world are penal, and having very less imports of the impressions of peace. There the troublesome atmosphere prevails in the international level. It imposes stress upon the mind that what does the phrase “Taking the state to court” means. The solution is thus provided:

01.

02.

03.

04.

05.

The concept of collective security of the nations should be enforced and that the violence as the means of achieving objectives should be destroyed to the maximum extent possible.The inter-state relations should be given more importance and the suppression of the voice of the mobilized groups should not occur. The concept that could prevent a party from giving statements should be abandoned. The method od prosecution called as “victor’s justice” should be deleted because that leads to the serious violation of the principle of “audi alterum partum” and the judgment seems to be biased. The limits over the application of the international laws and the scope of the obedience of the same should be expanded. The international laws/treaties/conventions should be accompanied with more degree of sanction. The retributive nature of punishment should be overcome and new strategies to make the international laws more humane should be attempted.There should be prosecution of the states that interfere with the enjoyment of the right of sovereignty of the other states without any firm and reasonable cause.Besides prosecuting a state for the violation of treaty or other humanitarian principles, the focus of the prosecution should be to derive a method for the solution of the problem. The same may include the support of fellow members of the UN.

03. DEMOCRACY AND INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY

Democracy as a norm and the promotion of democracy as an activity has become far more deeply embedded within international society in various ways. In the first place, there has been an enormous expansion in the involvement of the UN and regional organization in elections. Electoral assistance has become an established part of UN activities and has also led to development of a broad transnational and trans-governmental network of electoral assistance, party support, and monitoring.second, external actors have routinely become involved in democracy promotion as a result of the expansion in the number and scope of peacekeeping operations, whose multi dimensional character came in many places to include human rights and democracy as well as demilitarization, refugee protection and state-building. In the cases of direct international administration of territory, the assumption of the sovereign power involved both transitional administration and also democratic regime-building. Third, democratic membership criteria have been established in two regions, and, in the case of Europe, democracy, human rights, and minority rights have all played a central part of the process of EU enlargement, the conditionality policies of the EU, and its extensive programme of member-state building. Finally, an increasing body of academic writing has opened up the idea of a legal right to democratic governance. The normative expansion of the international society to include democracy was also driven by political factors. Although there were references to ‘democratic’ rights in UN Declaration, the conditions of the cold war meant that formal incorporation of political democracy into the human rights system was politically impossible. This changed as a result of the wave of transitions from authoritarian rule in Southern Europe and the developing world in the late 1970s and 1980s; and the fall of communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union; by the liberal self-confidence that followed the ending of cold war and the belief that liberal democracy and free markets were sweeping the world; and the consolidation of the place of democracy in US foreign policy. Two broader shifts need to be highlighted, both of which link academic analysis and political perceptions. The first concerns the progress of democratic change and the possibilities of democratization. During the cold war, Western governments were suspicious that the political change would be destabilizing, bringing to power either those who would ally themselves with the Soviet Union or who would challenge western economic interests. Democratization then carried with it some counter-hegemonic potential. It is also widely held in Western capitals and amongst the private sector that authoritarian governments were most suited to promoting economic development. Many academicians argued that, in any case, democracy required a wide range of ‘prerequisites’ that were lacking in many postcolonial societies. The wave of transition that began in Southern Europe and Latin America in the late 1970s ushered in a striking reassessment: democratization becomes the norm rather than the exception; the exception is of generally forward movement; and the democratization appears to be easier and less problematic than had been previously believed. A post-cold war world meant that unstable and potentially oppositional regimes could no longer look to the Soviet Union. And a globalized world meant that economic nationalism was no longer and option. The trade-offs between uncertain democratization, security interests, and economic preferences were apparently easing and a strong sense of difficulties of democracy gave way to an increased sense of ‘possiblism’. The conversion by the mid 1980s of US foreign policy was retold through a different lens that stressed the country’s historic mission to extend and promote democracy. The other important shift in thinking reflected the allegedly proven link between democracy and peace. Democratic peace theory builds on long tradition writing on international relations, often associated with Kant. However, it only formed one part of Kant’s political thought and had already become a liberal commonplace by the end of the 18th century. Other precursors of modern DPT include Karl Deutsch’s writing in the 1950s on security communities- groups of states in which there is real assurance that the members of that community will not fight each other physically but will settle their disputes in some other way. Overlooked or neglected by many studies of war causation, it became a major theme both of academic writing on international relations and of political and public debate on the nature of the post-cold war international order. Theorists argue that two sets of casual factors are important in explaining the democratic peace. In the first place, the structural constraints of democratic institutions and of democratic politics make it difficult or even impossible for war-prone leaders to drag their states into wars. They also stress the joint effect of these democratic constraints, together with the greater openness and transparency of liberal democracies. If both sides are governed by cautious, cost-sensitive politicians that only use force defensively, then conflict is far less likely to occur. Second, democratic peace theorists highlight the importance of normative mechanisms. Liberal and democratic norms include shared understandings of appropriate behavior, stabilize expectations of the future, and are embedded in both institutions and political culture. Rule-governed change is a basic principle; the use of coercive force outside the structure of rules is prescribed; and trust and reciprocity, rule of law are at the heart of democratic politics. From this view, then, the democratic peace is produced by the way in which democracies externalize their domestic political norms of tolerance and compromise into their foreign relations, thus making war with others like them unlikely. The democratic peace hypothesis rests on two claims: (a) that democracies almost never fight each other and very rarely consider the use of force in their mutual relations and (b) that other types of relations are much more conflictual including democracies’ interactions with non-democracies. The claim is almost always made in probabilistic terms. Few claim that it is a deterministic law. It is not a general theory since it is agnostic or at least much less certain about the relationship between democracies and non-democracies. But it provides some grounds for liberal optimism, even if only within the democratic zone. If true, it holds out the possibility that the homogenization of domestic political systems could transform global political order- in marked contrast both to traditional realist accounts of world politics and pluralistic accounts of international society. The main debates surrounding the democratic peace and the main issues raised by critics and skeptics include: (a) the reliability of the statistical evidence for the democratic peace, especially in the pre 1945 period; (b) the existence of alternative casual logics, especially in explaining regional clusters of peaceful states as in Europe or the Americas; (c) the difficulties of defining key terms in the theory, especially war and democracy; (d) and the problems raised by democratization processes and the evidence that, whilst fully consolidated democracies could be peaceful, democratizing states, specially in unstable areas, may be more conflict-prone than authoritarian regimes. Here are certain important issues noted from the speech (annual report) by the UN secretary general which was delivered in the General Assembly in 2007:–

01.

02.

03.

04.

05.

06.

07.

Despite these positive developments, however, efforts to expand democratic governments still face significant challenges. Many countries continue to limit fundamental freedoms, and governments face problems of the public sector efficiency, transparency and accountability. Women are playing a growing role in building democracy, but in the top leadership positions their numbers remain limited. Indigenous peoples and marginalized groups are also often excluded from power. Moreover, without vigorous participation democratic participation, official accountability, and strengthened institutional capacity, governments are unlikely to deliver on their commitments to achieve the millennium declaration, including the millennium development goals, and other internationally agreed development goals.The Un democracy fund has begun to make its mark. During first year of activities it funded 122 projects out of 1300 proposals submitted. The projects are implemented in partnership with diverse national actors. The fund’s activities encouraged transparency in government and supported national human rights institutions, civic education, electoral systems and processes, as well as political parties. There was a major focus on the participation of the youth and women in decision-making, 62 % of the submitted proposals containing a significant gender component and 37% explicitly promoting women’s rights and gender equality.The sixth international conference of new or restored democracies, held in Dolha from 29 October to 1 November 2006, reaffirmed a common commitment to democratization on the part of 100 governments, 69 parliaments and 97 civil society organization which took part. An advisory board and a nucleus secretariat were established to assist the chair of the conference in implementing the decisions of the conference.As countries enter the post-conflict phase, the focus of the UN assistance often shifts to consolidating the experience gained by newly created electoral institutions. An example is Liberia, where in September 2006 the UN mission in Liberia handed over the responsibility for long-term UN electoral assistance to UNDP.Meanwhile, the volume of technical electoral assistance to member states continued to increase. More than 30 technical assistance projects were launched in 2006, mainly through UNDP. United nations electoral assistance is often provided, moreover, in complex political environments. In the case of Mauritania, following the advice of the united Nations, the national authorities put specific measures in place that contributed to the credibility of a constitutional referendum and parliamentary and local elections in 2006, and presidential elections in 2007.Although the past year saw the scaling-down of several large and complex electoral operations, including operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and Liberia, the UN made a major contribution to the holding of historic parliamentary, presidential and provincial assembly elections in July and October 2006 in the democratic republic of the CongoThe United Nations continues to foster democracy and good governance, not only through its assistance in the holding of credible elections, but through a wide range of activities to promote democratic institutions and practices. These include support for independent judiciaries and parliaments, strong national human rights policies and institutions, transparency and accountability in government, civic education, free expression, and vibrant civil societies with opportunities for participation. In this regard, electoral processes are increasingly considered not as an end in themselves but as a bridge to peace building and sustainable development. The implementation of the United Nations convention against corruption has become a special priority for the UN system in improving the quality of governance in its member states.

Review:-

01. The situation in Iraq

[A.] The global order:-

[A.] The global order:-

01. The situation in Iraq

is causing widespread concern in the international community. The future of Iraq is vital to the stability of the region and the world. During the past year, the UN worked to foster regional engagement through initiatives including the international compact with Iraq and continued to promote national reconciliation and consensus-building, in particular through the support to the constitutional review process. UN will continue to assist Iraq through the challenges ahead. In Lebanon, the aftermath of 2006 war saw political divisions deepen, rendering more difficult the fulfillment of various UN mandates in support of the Lebanese sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence. In the Middle East, the UN continues to increase the peaceful settlements.

02. Concerns about Asia

:- in Nepal, progress was made towards resolving the conflict and its underlying causes; the UN mission in Nepal was instituted at the request of the Nepalese parties to assist in the election of the constituent assembly and the political transition.

03. Northern Uganda

:- the special envoy of the UN for the lord’s resistance army affected areas worked with the regional actors to reinvigorate peace talks. A joint African Union-UN initiative was launched to advance the political process in Dafur. There is active representative of UN in Somalia for the purpose of national reconciliation.

04. Myanmar and Fiji

:- Asia also saw the greater use of secretary general’s good offices, with renewed high level dialogue between the UN and Myanmar, and the dispatch of an inter-agency fact finding mission to fiji following the coup in December 2006.

[B.] On Peace-keeping attempts of the UN

01.

At the beginning of 2006, UN peacekeeping supported 18 peacekeeping operations and 13 other field missions and offices, involving approximately 85,000 deployed personnel. By august, 2007, this number has got considerably increased.

02.

Among the myriad challenges faced by the UN peacekeeping during 2006 was the situation in Sudan and its spillover effects into Chad and the Central African Republic. The UNMIS has been to monitor the peacekeeping agreement of 2006. Another challenge facing UN peacekeeping operations was the Kosovo status talks and the eventual transition of the UN interim administration mission in Kosovo.

03.

The UNIFIL continued to cooperate closely with the Lebanese armed forces with a view to consolidating the new strategic military and security environment in the southern Lebanon, and to prevent violations of the blue line and maintain the cessation of the hostilities. UNIFIL has created has created a stable operational area as a basis for international efforts to revitalize the political process leading to a permanent ceasefire.

04.

The growing number of similar incidents require United Nations intervention demonstrates the central importance of control over security institutions to build a legitimate state. Enhancing national capacity and institutions particularly in the security sector is a long term process involving political commitment on the part of national stakeholders and the support of international community, especially donors. A critical aspect of this process is fostering national and local ownership of reforms intended to limit the role of the military in internal security, ensure that all security forces are under the civilian control, and meet basic standards of accountability, transparency and respect for human rights. The operational record for strengthening the capacity of national security institutions has been mixed. In Sierra Leone there has been a measure of national ownership for reforming the military and the police, although UN is concerned about its self sustainability in the absence of the continuing and long-term international technical and financial support. Similar problems faced Liberia and Congo, which are in the early stages of security sector reform. Security sector reform has been also less successful in Afghanistan, where the war against the Taliban and other anti-government elements has forced the security agencies to play a larger-than-ideal role in the attempt to provide internal security.

[C.] THE RULE OF LAW:-

The rule of law is a fundamental principle on which the United Nations was established. The United Nations goal continues to be a community of nations operating according to rules that promote human rights, human dignity and the settlement of the international disputes through peaceful means. International criminal justice, a concept based on the premise that the achievement of justice provides a firmer foundation for lasting peace, has become a defining aspect of the work of the organization. The international tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda continued to conduct the trials of those accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity and other war crimes. The extraordinary courts charged the defendant for the crimes against humanity and placed him in detention. The courts for Sierra Leone commenced the trials of Charles Taylor and rendered two historic judgments that convicted five defendants for war crimes. In March, the Security Council requested UN to negotiate with the government of Lebanon an agreement aimed at establishing a tribunal to bring justice those accused of the attack that killed the former prime minister of Lebanon, Rafiq Hariri. The Security Council took resolution on 30 May, 2007 for establishment of special tribunal in Lebanon.in order to better the coordinate working of these institutions, at the end of 2006, the report entitled ‘Uniting our strengths: enhancing the United Nations support for the rule of law’ announced the establishment of a rule of law coordination and resource group. The group consists of major rule of law assistance providers in the UN system, who met to ensure that programmes are carried out in a coherent manner and are of high quality commensurate with the need of those requesting the support.

04. PURSUIT OF JUSTICE:-

One of the attractions of an old fashioned state-based pluralism and of a very thin view of international society was precisely that it appeared to offer a way of dealing with diversity and disagreement. If the diversity and the value are such important features of international life, then we should seek to organize global politics in such a way as to give groups scope of the for the collective self-government and cultural autonomy in their own affairs and to reduce the degree to which they will clash over how the world should be ordered. Equally, if the dangers of predation by the powerful are deep-rooted, even if not structurally determined, then we should continue to place a heavy emphasis on sovereignty and on the balance of power. In addition, the skeptical pluralist is attracted to the idea that it might also be possible to develop a cross-cultural consensus over the minimal rules around which a such a limited international society might be built. Hence the attraction to the international society writers of Hart’s notion of a minimum content of natural law built around Hobbesian assumptions. Hence, too null’s emphasis on the ‘elementary conditions of social life’, his attempt to isolate the elementary primary, and universal goals of the society of states; and his analytical effort to link these goals to the historical institutions of the international society. Negotiating the terms of cooperation is certainly a quintessentially political exercise. But it is also an inherently normative one both because acting in the world requires that we think about morally desirable change and because moral debate forms one part of how that political exercise will unfold. As noted in many places in this book, debates on global justice within the political theory and political philosophy have increased enormously in scope and sophistication. There is an increasingly rich array of potential answers to the problems of global political theory, including those related to just war, to humanitarian intervention, distributive justice, and to global democracy. The fragility of global political order makes it unconvincing to see this challenge as a second-order issue of moral methodology.

[I.] Institutional Authority:-

There are three major reasons why institutions are so important: as a means of helping to secure the framework for mutually intelligible moral debate; as a way of securing the stable implementation of shared rules; and in terms of the potential for the progressive development of a global moral community. In the first place, if we are looking for cross-cultural universals, a good case can be made for starting with process and with near-universality of ideas about fairness of process: hearing the other side, providing arguments for one’s actions, finding some mechanism for adjudicating between conflicting moral claims. All stable societies have to find some agreed process and procedure by which more moral conflicts can be adjudicated and managed, if not resolved. Within world politics the challenge is more daunting, given the diversity and divisiveness of sentiments, attachments, languages, cultures and ways of living, combined with massive inequalities of power, wealth, and capacity. Stuart Hampshire has suggested that there is an irreducible minimum to notions of just process. Second, institutions are also necessary because rules have to be applied. The cry of the liberal solidarist or the cosmopolitan moralist is that we need new rules to meet new circumstances. Terrorism requires that international society rethink rules relating to self-defence and the use of force. The degree to which international society is affected morally and practically by the humanitarian catastrophe means that we need new rules on humanitarian intervention. There are good arguments in favour of both these propositions. But it is a myth that, for example, a new rule on humanitarian intervention would obviate the need for the institutions and institutional debate. Even if the rule is agreed and even if the background criteria for evaluation are agreed, all rules have to be interpreted and applied. The new rule of humanitarian intervention will not avoid the need for that rule to be applied to the circumstances of a new case. On the one side, this inevitability raises the fundamental political issue: who is the body that has the authority to interpret and to apply the rule? There have been certain proximities that have been put-forth by Dallymayr. On the other side, we are faced by problems intrinsic to the idea of interpretation and application. Thus cultural and historical complexity makes it difficult to read off judgments in particular cases from general or universal moral laws and there is good reason for supposing that a great deal o the debate over values and ethics in the twenty-first century will necessarily have to be context-rich and interpretative. At one level, this might simply mean that universal principles need to show sensitivity to local context. But the challenge is deeper. Thus Tully follows criticizing in those who demonstrate a contemptuous attitude to the particular case. In terms of institutionalizing global order such a position lends support to a form of practical reasoning that is constantly navigating between the general rule, whether legal or moral, and it’s always contestable application to the facts and circumstances of a particular case. Third, institutions matter because of their potential for self-reinforcing dynamic. Once created, institutions act as platforms for the ongoing normative debates, or the mobilization of concern and for debating and revising ideas about how the international society should be organized. However much social scientists insist on analyzing international institutions solely in terms of the provision of international public goods, normative issues cannot be kept out of the picture. In addition, there is an inherent tendency for all normative systems to expand and develop, and to enmesh actors within certain patterns of discourse, reasoning, and argumentation. Finally, as we have seen, there are good reasons for believing that international institutions have acted as powerful agents for the diffusion and socialization of norms. Assessing the very mixed empirical record of actually existing institutions can have important implications for our views of global justice. Thomas Nagel, for example, has developed a political conception of global justice. Drawing on Hobbesian traditions, he argues that justice arises amongst those jointly subject to coercive authority. His assessment of where international institutions and global governance are ‘for the moment’ is that they fail to meet a crucial test, namely, they are not collectively enacted and coercively imposed in the name of all the individuals whose lives they affect. Yet this view of justice places too much weight on the difference between coercive and non-coercive situations; and, more importantly, underplays the extent of the changes that have in fact taken place in the density of international institutions, in the extent to which they do in tact exercise power and can be said to be co-authored, and in the relationship of both states and individuals to those institutions.others who either deny the possibility of international distributive justice or see it only in highly constrained forms also place great emphasis on the absence or weakness of international institutions or other cooperative arrangements. Thus, society’s main political, social and economic institutions and how they fit into one unified system of social co-operation’ determine the basic structure and govern ‘the initial focus’ of how to think about the matters of justice. But the emphasis here should be on ‘initial’ since Rawls also recognizes the possibility of reinforcing change. When writing about the domestic society, there is a strong sense that the institutions play a central role in moving from self-interested cooperation towards full overlapping consensus. They have important socializing influences on the citizens and Rawls presents a psychological account of how people come to accept and internalize principles of justice. Equally- when looking at international life- change, evolution, and learning are self recognized. ‘The idea of a reasonably just society of well-ordered peoples will not have an important place in a theory of international politics until such peoples exist and have learned to coordinate their actions in wider forms of political, economic and social cooperation. A global moral community in which claims about justice can secure both authority and can be genuinely accessible to a broad swathe of humanity will be one that is built around some minimal notion of just process, that prioritizes institutions that embed procedural fairness, and that cultivates the shared political culture and the habits of argumentation and deliberation on which such institutions necessarily depend. As Judith Shklar puts it; ‘procedural justice is not merely a formal ritual, as is often charged. It is a system that in principle gives everyone some access to the agencies of rectification and, more significantly, the possibility of expressing a sense of injustice to some effect, at least occasionally. It is important here to avoid too sharp distinction between a consent-based view of international legal legitimacy and a justice based view. Procedural legitimacy is not simply about state consent. On the one hand, consent itself may be moderated and mediated by the complexities of legal process, even without disappearing entirely from the international legal order. On the other hand, there are other important values located within the processes of international law. This may be understood in terms of the old arguments about the ‘inner morality’ of law and the rule of law. Or it may involve principles of public law that can be employed to guide international and global law-making. Or, most generally, it may simply involve an insistence that the justification of a position or a case follows an articulated, discernible, and coherent pattern of legal argument that draws on analogies, precedents, and the principles that are compatible with already widely accepted values. Finally, law can be viewed as a sociologically embedded transnational cultural practice in which claims and counterclaims can be articulated and debated and from which norms can emerge that can have at least some determination and argumentative purchase. Law, then, can play a communicative and epistemic role, shaping the conditions within which claims, including justice claims can be made and debated. The modern day Grotian will be inclined to stress the ongoing, unstable and subtle interplay between the sources of law and legal process on the one hand and the content of the law and o legal rules on the other.

[II.] Political Agency:-

That we should on the institutions, on negotiation, and on dialogue and deliberation is hardly an original suggestion. Albeit with significant variation, many have been tempted to go down a broadly Habermasian road-stressing the extent to which the terms of a just global order cannot be based on coercion nor on whatever bargain states and societies happen to be able to strike with one another, but require instead critical reflexion, uncoerced agreement of rational agents via a shared process of deliberation and reasoned justification.there have also been important arguments in favour of creating global institutional frameworks which widen the boundaries of the dialogic community. Even after assuming the presence of the multiple voices, the location of a stable and shared moral vocabulary and some degree of institutional stability, one still needs to ask about the conditions of effective political agency. Within domestic society, Habermas is ambiguous as to how far the discourse principle requires changes merely in procedures of bargaining or changes to the underlying balance of bargaining power itself. But however, we might think about power within domestic society, the conditions of global society make it impossible to evade the issue of unequal bargaining power. The massive inequalities of power and condition; the continued occurrence of war and intervention and the continued willingness of major states to use military power as an instrument of state policy; the role of power in skewing the terms of the global capitalist economy and the close links that exist between globalization and inequality; and the deformity of many of the core institutions of international society-all these point towards the pressing need to consider the minimal political preconditions that might underpin a global moral community in which reasoned deliberation and uncoerced consensus could have begin to have been possible. Although political theorists are perhaps naturally tempted to argue from the ceiling down, the wholly different scale of inequalities that exist in the world politics should push us to think hard about the minimum preconditions for an acceptable international political process. At a minimum this might include: some acceptance of equality of status, respect, and consideration; some capacity for autonomous decision making on the basis of a reasonable information; a degree of uncoerced willingness to participate; a situation in which the most disadvantaged perceive themselves having some stake in the system; and some institutional processes by which the weak and disadvantaged are able to make their voice heard and to express claims about unjust treatment. Apart from concern with the suffering of the most disadvantaged, Rawls gives two very good reasons why we should be concerned with inequality: first, that a large gap between rich and poor ‘often leads to some citizens being stigmatized and treated as inferiors, and that is unjust’; and second, because of the ‘important role of fairness in the political processes of the basic structure of the society of peoples’. Yet, despite ample evidence that some peoples stigmatized and treated the inferiors and still more evidence of the massive unfairness of international political processes, Rawls draws only the feeblest of conclusions as to what needs to be changed globally in the interests of justice. We need to give far greater attention to the links between the political and moral cosmopolitan and to the possible principles of global political justice that might inform those links. A revalidation of process legitimacy and procedural justice is crucial for the development of a stable, effective, and legitimate international society and for the nurturing of meaningfully shared foundations for the discussion of global justice. In a very important sense, the ethical claims of international society rest on the contention that such a society continues to be the most stable set of globally institutionalized political processes by which norms and rules can be negotiated on the basis of dialogue and consent, rather than simply being imposed by the most powerful. There is very little reason for supposing that progress in the direction of moral accessibility, institutional stability, or more balanced and equitable forms of political agency is likely to be easy. It may not be possible at all. There are nevertheless good reasons for believing that it is a direction which continues to be of crucial importance. Understanding how the rope bridge may be spun across the canyon is central both to the chances of world order in the 21st century and to the promotion of greater global justice.

05. PROSECUTING THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMES:-

The threat of terrorism to international peace, security and development remains a pressing issue for the international community. The expansion of UN efforts on counter-terrorism has produced a unique tool, the UN global counter terrorism strategy adopted by the general assembly. The unanimous endorsement of this document marks an historic step, bringing together 192 member states to demonstrate their resolve and ability to defeat the scourge of terrorism. The strategy outlines a coordinated and comprehensive response to terrorism at national, regional and global levels, while ensuring the respect for human rights and the rule of law. It put forward a concrete plan of action to prevent and combat terrorism and to address grievances and underlying social, economic and political conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism. The strategy will have the greatest success if it is fully achieved. This goal can be achieved by strengthening the capacity of the member states and the UN system, and by seeking the involvement of the civil society and the private sector. The main responsibility for implementing the strategy falls on member states. Nevertheless, various secretariat departments, specialized agencies, and UN programmes and funds contribute to this important endeavor by assisting member states with their implementation efforts.

01. OF THE INTERNATIONAL LAWS IN GENERAL

02. TAKING THE STATE TO THE COURT

[A]. State Sovereignty

[B.] Changes And Continuity In The International System

[C.] The International Court of Justice (ICJ)

03. DEMOCRACY AND INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY

[A.] The global order

[B.] On Peace-keeping attempts of the UN

[C.] THE RULE OF LAW

04. PURSUIT OF JUSTICE

[A.] Institutional Authority

[B.] Political Agency

05. PROSECUTING THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMES:-

06. CONCLUSION

01. OF THE INTERNATIONAL LAWS IN GENERAL:-