EU multilingualism: the looming challenges

The European Union’s motto “Unity in Diversity” is the demonstration of the enduring vision of Europe’s different languages and different cultures as a priceless asset. Ensuring that this diversity is not a barrier to understanding is the task of 10% of the European Commission staff, comprising roughly three quarters translators, one quarter interpreters. I shall of course be concentrating on the latter. Danica Seleskovitch very pertinently pointed out that the chain of communication does not stop in the booth. We in the European Commission’s Directorate-general for Interpretation have long taken this to heart, both literally and figuratively. Literally, in the sense that the ultimate destination of the message is of course the customer: I will present some key findings of our latest Customer Satisfaction Survey which has just been finalised. Figuratively, because the looming shortage of good young conference interpreters coming into the profession threatens that the message may only reach an empty booth for some languages. Within those two over-arching themes, there are of course other important interwoven issues which I would like to tease out for your consideration

‘All sorts of wonderful impossibilities’: Tracing the Genesis of John McGahern’s ‘Doorways’

It is well known by now that John McGahern was a scrupulous reviser of his own work, even if this insight into his compositional methods has not been accompanied by a substantial body of research on the archive and the revisions themselves. This essay aims to address this anomaly by focusing on the genetic evolution of McGahern's short story ‘Doorways’. Specifically, it will concentrate on the earliest handwritten drafts when the work is at its most provisional. The consensus view of McGahern's writing practices is of an artist committed to ideals of Flaubertian perfectionism, but implicit in this view is a bias towards the more granular work of late-stage refinement. The approach this essay takes shows McGahern at his most distant from the Flaubertian perfectionist that he is best known as, thus opening up new ways to reconsider how those works achieve their distinctive appearance of refined delicacy and simplicity

An Argument Against Open-File Discovery in Criminal Cases

This Note argues that, for the most part, open-file discovery proponents fail to recognize the added burden that defense counsel would face under a regime in which all items of the prosecution’s evidence are available for investigation by the defense. This is particularly true in the eighty to ninety percent of criminal cases where the defendant is indigent, and the court appointed defense counsel is operating under strict resource constraints. This Note also argues that advocates of open-file discovery fail to recognize that in the majority of cases involving prosecutorial misconduct, the prosecutor’s intentional wrongdoing will be sufficient to overshadow any reasonable amount of diligence performed by defense counsel. This Note will contend that instituting an open-file discovery policy would only compound the problem of providing adequate representation to defendants. In light of the fact that the overwhelming majority of defendants are represented by publicly funded counsel, this Note will focus on the effects of open-file discovery to indigent defendants. Specifically, it will argue that any attendant benefits received by a single defendant under an open-file discovery regime would be largely outweighed by the costs to defendants as a whole and to the judicial system. This Note will demonstrate that the economic consequences of open-file discovery would be disastrous in the current judicial environment and would serve as nothing more than a shifting of burdens from the prosecution to the defense. The effect of this burden shifting would lead to more overworked public defenders and lower quality representation for indigent defendants. This Note will also demonstrate that in the cases often cited as the hallmark evidence showing a need for open-file discovery— those in which innocent defendants are convicted because the prosecution affirmatively fails to disclose exculpatory evidence—open-file discovery would serve no actual purpose in eliminating the prosecutorial misconduct. This Note will show that open-file discovery would cause more harm than good by creating a situation in which prosecutors could overwhelm defense counsel with evidence, either intentionally or unintentionally, and frustrate defense counsel’s ability to locate and synthesize critical evidence

An Argument Against Open-File Discovery in Criminal Cases

This Note argues that, for the most part, open-file discovery proponents fail to recognize the added burden that defense counsel would face under a regime in which all items of the prosecution’s evidence are available for investigation by the defense. This is particularly true in the eighty to ninety percent of criminal cases where the defendant is indigent, and the court appointed defense counsel is operating under strict resource constraints. This Note also argues that advocates of open-file discovery fail to recognize that in the majority of cases involving prosecutorial misconduct, the prosecutor’s intentional wrongdoing will be sufficient to overshadow any reasonable amount of diligence performed by defense counsel. This Note will contend that instituting an open-file discovery policy would only compound the problem of providing adequate representation to defendants. In light of the fact that the overwhelming majority of defendants are represented by publicly funded counsel, this Note will focus on the effects of open-file discovery to indigent defendants. Specifically, it will argue that any attendant benefits received by a single defendant under an open-file discovery regime would be largely outweighed by the costs to defendants as a whole and to the judicial system. This Note will demonstrate that the economic consequences of open-file discovery would be disastrous in the current judicial environment and would serve as nothing more than a shifting of burdens from the prosecution to the defense. The effect of this burden shifting would lead to more overworked public defenders and lower quality representation for indigent defendants. This Note will also demonstrate that in the cases often cited as the hallmark evidence showing a need for open-file discovery— those in which innocent defendants are convicted because the prosecution affirmatively fails to disclose exculpatory evidence—open-file discovery would serve no actual purpose in eliminating the prosecutorial misconduct. This Note will show that open-file discovery would cause more harm than good by creating a situation in which prosecutors could overwhelm defense counsel with evidence, either intentionally or unintentionally, and frustrate defense counsel’s ability to locate and synthesize critical evidence

Carl Schmitt And Political Catholicism: Friend Or Foe?

The scholarship on controversial German constitutional lawyer and political theorist Carl Schmitt (1888-1985) has long accepted what can be called a standard narrative as regards his intellectual development. This narrative treats Schmitt as, on the whole, a Catholic intellectual and political theologian until the mid-1920s when he turns decidedly towards a secular decisionism. Commentators frequently point to Schmitt\u27s non-canonical second marriage in 1926 as the biographically salient factor in dating a turn from an early association with political Catholicism to his later nationalist authoritarianism. This later approach to politics led Schmitt to promote plebiscitary dictatorship in the last years of the Weimar Republic and to then readily accept the National Socialist regime once it came to power. This dissertation attempts to completely revise the standard narrative, which has functioned as a procrustean force within Schmitt scholarship. Indeed, the assumption of the jurist\u27s Catholicity prior to becoming alienated from the Church amounts to a red herring, in large measure existing due to the efforts expended in shaping Schmitt\u27s image after the Second World War both by the long-lived jurist himself as well as on his behalf by his students and friends. By reading Schmitt\u27s texts within the context of his diaries and letters (most only recently made available) on the one side, and of the general trends in German political Catholicism and intellectual life on the other, a better grounded intellectual biography of Schmitt should emerge