Misunderstanding Digital Computer Technology in Court: A Commentary on a Case Involving the Post Office Horizon System

On 3rd May 2007, the long-time Manager of the England’s Lane Post Office in Hampstead, England , Mr. David Cameron, was found guilty in the Crown Court of ten counts of theft from six customer-complainants in the period July 2005 to February 20061. Mr. Cameron applied to the Court of Appeal for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal against his conviction, in light of the issues now known with the Horizon system, which processed the transactions involved in Mr. Cameron’s prosecution (the original deadline for filing for appeal had long passed). The judgement was published on 31st March, 2022. The Court of Appeal declined Mr. Cameron's application to appeal his conviction and provided their reasons

Freedom of Expression and its Legal Consequences in the Era of Social Media

Freedom of expression has become a household phrase, but its meaning is deeper than first appears, as found in some international instruments and national laws. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the first human rights instrument adopted by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly Resolution in Paris on 10 December 1948 to abate human rights violations and atrocities after the Second World War, addressed freedom of expression as one of the touchstones of democracy. Presently, all 192 member states of the United Nations have signed up to it, by virtue of the other UN treaties they have signed, even though it was intended to be a soft law. The Declaration was signed as a soft law to be respected but was without binding force. however, through the passage of time, it has become a customary international law with binding force. Freedom of expression, which is an inalienable right, permits human beings, among other things, to seek information, and if received, the recipient may impart the same through any media, regardless of frontiers, to inform and educate people about their rights. The importance of freedom of expression is that it is one of the pillars of human rights and is found in all the relevant international and regional human rights instruments. The international human rights instruments that have provisions on freedom of expression are: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which came into force on 23 March 1976, after it had been adopted for signature, ratification and accession by the UN General Assembly on 16 December 1966; the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 21 December 1965; and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly on 20 November 1989 and came into force in September 1990. All three regional human rights instruments have recognized freedom of expression as an indispensable part of human rights and have provisions for it. The three regional human rights instruments are: the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which was signed in Rome in 1950 and came into force on 3 September 1953; the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights 1981 (ACHPR), which came into force on 21 October 1986; and the American Covenant on Human Rights (ACHR), which was adopted in 1969 and came into force on 18 July 1978. Freedom of expression is also recognized by the Declaration of Human Rights Defenders, which came into force in 1998 to protect human rights defenders within the context of their work. The rights specifically mentioned in the declaration include freedom of expression. There are also national laws on freedom of expression. The position of Ghana is contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of Ghana 1992, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression, which include freedom of the press and other forms of media such as social, print and electronic media. The article shall address the limitations placed on freedom of expression, even though it appears to be absolute when one reads Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 19 of the ICCPR seems to suggest that freedom of expression is not absolute, and a person who seeks information may impart it through any media, including social media, upon receipt of the same, provided the information put out on media, including social media, is within the limitations placed on freedom of expression. Article 9 of the ACHPR also suggests that the right to receive information is absolute, but the right to express and disseminate opinion shall be within the law prescribed by the member states. Freedom of expression is a term of art and such freedom may be expressed in the form of writing, orally, print, or any other form of art or pictorial representation, and the limitations are placed on any of the modes and forms of expression stated above. Article 13 of the ACHPR prescribes criminal punishment for a person who goes beyond the limitations placed on freedom of expression with the aim of protecting public order, social order, national security, public health, public morality, and respecting the rights or reputations of others. The article aims to discuss all the limitations imposed on freedom of expression, including those punishable either civilly or criminally, or both, for the purposes of respecting the rights of others and not defaming or slandering another person, protecting national security, public order, public health, or morality. The recent trend of events is that people go on social media to defame others, violate their rights, cause fear and panic, and publish information about security threats, public order, and morality with impunity under the guise of freedom of expression. Social media, as a set of interactive internet applications, facilitates the creation, curation and sharing of the contents of information created either by individuals or in collaboration with others, and at the moment it seems to be the fastest form of media. The article shall discuss freedom of expression and its limitations from different human rights instruments and domestic statutes in respect of sanctions that can be imposed on a person who goes beyond their rights to violate the rights of others or defame others, or on a person who has published material that would affect the security of the state, public order, public health, or morals. It shall further discuss the forum where an action may be brought against the person who violates the rights of others in the name of freedom of expression and the appropriate forum where a person charged with an offence under it may be prosecuted. Keywords: admissibility of evidence; communication; African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; criminalization of freedom of expression; documentary information; freedom of expression; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; limitations on freedom of expression; social media; Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Criss-crossings of Psychological Practice in Adoption Processes: Preliminary Results of a Field Study in Argentina

Psychologists have acquired an increasingly significant role in the field of child protection in Argentina. Particularly in regard to their participation in the adoption system, psychological reports and interventions have taken great prominence when an exceptional protection measure of family separation is decided or when the adoptability status of a child is under consideration, among other instances. The increasing incidence of intervention by psychologists makes it necessary to analyse the factors that infuse the practices conditioning professional criteria. From a mental health perspective, it is necessary for professionals in the area to be able to provide a reading of the subjective aspects at stake. Based on this, we reflect on the importance of articulating both the children’s rights field and the field of the individual subject involved in each case. This article presents some results of PhD field research conducted in Buenos Aires, Argentina, by analysing qualitative interviews and the retrieval of information from legal files collected from a Civil Court and from several institutions related to the adoption system. It examines various institutional and discursive criss-crossings that affect the work and the viewpoint of psychologists in this area of their activity. Keywords: adoption; ethics; institutions; psychology; subjectivity

Zhang Wanhong (张万红), 1976-2024

Amicus Curiae is pleased to republish below a memorial note commemorating the life and work of the very distinguished Chinese legal scholar Professor Zhang Wanhong, of Wuhan University. Professor Zhang passed away earlier this year. The note came to our attention in The China Collection (formerly Chinese Law Prof Blog) an important forum for posting news and other materials on China’ s legal development. We thank the authors for kindly giving Amicus Curiae permission to republish the commemorative note

What’s in a Name? Children’s Rights and Legal Voice within Administrative and Juridical Procedures of Recognition of Same-Sex Filiation

This performative text, consisting of writing and visualizations, explores children’s voices within court proceedings connected to the legal recognition of intended mothers within lesbian-parented families. The research used long-term ethnographic observations and biographical interviews focused on French and Italian families from the “activist generation” who devoted their efforts to obtaining reproductive and family rights. The article provides a critical account of the implementation of Article 12.2 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child 1989 (UNCRC)—that is the right to be listened to in judicial and administrative proceedings affecting children. Our main argument is that, in contrast to the intention of Article 12.2 of the UNCRC, children are given a more symbolic than substantial voice in court proceedings and administrative procedures. The text situates children’s voices both in the wider context and in everyday life. Drawing on ethnographic research data, we show where and to what extent children’s voices emerge or, on the contrary, are silenced. Keywords: same-sex parenting; filiation; children’s rights; ethnography; creative writing; visual methods; performative text; Euro-American kinship; Italy; France

Which Children Have Rights? The Child’s Right to Bodily Integrity and Protection Gaps for Children with Intersex Traits under International and National Laws

This article examines protection gaps for children with intersex traits under international and national laws governing non-voluntary medicalized interventions into sexual anatomy. Various United Nations (UN) bodies, including the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, human rights treaty-monitoring bodies and the Human Rights Council, have called for full acknowledgment and substantive protection of the rights of children with intersex variations—as with all children—to bodily integrity and (future) bodily autonomy in relation to their own sexed embodiment. However, these global norms generally have not been codified under international law, and most countries have not passed adequate, or any, legislation to secure these rights. We review relevant global norms, international human rights treaties and legislative developments in a range of countries to illustrate potential pathways for closing legal gaps in the protection of all children’s rights to bodily integrity and (future) bodily and sexual autonomy. Keywords: bodily integrity; children’s rights; gender binary; non-voluntary medical interventions; human rights; intersex

The UNCRC and the Holy See: How Issues of Statehood, Attribution and Immunity Constrain Children’s Rights

This contribution analyses the complex problems arising from the application of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) to the Holy See. Taking the continuous scandal of sexual abuses on children within the Catholic Church as a case study, it highlights the still persistent tension within international law between the protection of sovereignty and the full enjoyment of human rights, including children’s rights. To this end, after a preliminary analysis of the Holy See’s sui generis international legal personality, this contribution investigates two issues that prevent the Holy See from being held responsible for violation of children’s rights under international law. First, it examines the attribution of the conduct of local bishops/priests accused of sexual abuses worldwide to the Holy See, also in light of Pope Francis’ latest institutional reforms. Second, it addresses the immunity granted to the Holy See in these circumstances, thus questioning the rationale of such immunity when children are involved. Indeed, this article argues that, despite the Holy See having ratified the UNCRC (Article 34 of which calls on parties to protect the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse), children’s rights and their best interests are generally ignored when the sexual abuse plague within the Church is encountered in international fora. Keywords: UNCRC; Holy See; Vatican City State; international law of responsibility; immunity; sexual abuses