EU Law, International Law and Economic Sanctions Against Terrorism: The Judiciary in Distress?

This article seeks to examine the relationship between European Union law, international law, and the protection of fundamental rights in the light of recent case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Court of First Instance (CFI) relating to economic sanctions against individuals. On 3 September 2008, the ECJ delivered its long-awaited judgment in Kadi and Al Barakaat on appeal from the CFI. In its judgment under appeal, the CFI had held that the European Community (EC) is competent to adopt regulations imposing economic sanctions against private organizations in pursuance of UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions seeking to combat terrorism; that although the EC is not bound directly by the UN Charter, it is bound pursuant to the EC Treaty to respect international law and give effect to UNSC; and that the CFI has jurisdiction to examine the compatibility of EC regulations implementing UNSC resolutions with fundamental rights not as protected by the EC but as protected by jus cogens. On appeal, following the Opinion of Maduro AG, the ECJ rejected the CFI\u27s approach. It held that UNSC resolutions are binding only in international law. It subjected the contested regulations to full review under EC human rights standards and found them in breach of the right to a hearing, the right to judicial protection and the right to property. Kadi and Al Barakaat is the most important judgment ever delivered by the ECJ on the relationship between EC and international law and one of its most important judgments on fundamental rights. It is imbued by constitutional confidence, commitment to the rule of law but also some skepticism towards international law. In the meantime, the CFI has delivered a number of other judgments on anti-terrorist sanctions assessing the limits of the emergency constitution at European level. The purpose of this paper is to examine the above case law and explore the dilemmas and tensions facing the EU judiciary in seeking to define and protect the EU\u27s distinct constitutional space. It is divided as follows. It first looks at the judgment in Kadi. After a short presentation of the factual and legal background, it explores the question whether the EU has competence to adopt smart sanctions. It then examines whether the EU is bound by resolutions of the Security Council, whether the ECJ has jurisdiction to review Community measures implementing such resolutions and the applicable standard of judicial scrutiny. It analyzes the contrasting views of the CFI, the Advocate General, and the ECJ taking account also of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Further, it explores the consequences of annulling the contested regulation. It then turns to discussing CFI case law in relation to sanctions lists drawn up not by the UN Security Council but by the EC. The paper concludes by welcoming the judgment of the ECJ. Whilst its reasoning on the issue of Community competence is questionable, once such competence is established, it is difficult to support the abrogation of Community standards for the protection of fundamental rights. Such standards should ensure procedural due process whilst recognizing the importance of public security

BER of MRC for M-QAM with imperfect channel estimation over correlated Nakagami-m fading

In this contribution, we provide an exact BER analysis for M-QAM transmission over arbitrarily correlated Nakagami-m fading channels with maximal-ratio combining (MRC) and imperfect channel estimation at the receiver. Assuming an arbitrary joint fading distribution and a generic pilot-based channel estimation method, we derive an exact BER expression that involves an expectation over (at most) 4 variables, irrespective of the number of receive antennas. The resulting BER expression includes well-known PDFs and the PDF of only the norm of the channel vector. In order to obtain the latter PDF for arbitrarily correlated Nakagami-m fading, several approaches from the literature are discussed. For identically distributed and arbitrarily correlated Nakagami-m channels with integer m, we present several BER performance results, which are obtained from numerical evaluation and confirmed by straightforward computer simulations. The numerical evaluation of the exact BER expression turns out to be much less time-consuming than the computer simulations

Why Is the Shape of the Web a Bowtie?

The first time in Graph Theory a graph was characterized as “Bowtie” was in the seminal paper by Broder et. al. Though no textbook had ever mentioned this type of graph before, no less an important network than the Web Graph itself is supposed to resemble this shape. In two large collections of crawled Web pages and in numerous smaller collections, researchers discovered Bowties and Bowtie-looking graphs by studying millions of web pages. But why do collections of Web pages resemble a Bowtie? The short answer is “because, given the way the Web is created, that’s the only shape it could have”. This paper shows why this is the case and presents an algorithm and software to visualize Bowtie graphs

A 2007 Model Curriculum for a Liberal Arts Degree in Computer Science

In 1986, guidelines for a computer science major degree program offered in the context of the liberal arts were developed by the Liberal Arts Computer Science Consortium (LACS) [4]. In 1996 the same group offered a revised curriculum reflecting advances in the discipline, the accompanying technology, and teaching pedagogy [6]. In each case, the LACS models represented, at least in part, a response to the recommendations of the ACM/IEEE-CS [1][2]. Continuing change in the discipline, technology, and pedagogy coupled with the appearance of Computing Curriculum 2001 [3] have led to the 2007 Model Curriculum described here. This report begins by considering just what computer science is and what goals are appropriate for the study of computer science in the landscape of the liberal arts. A curricular model for this setting follows, updating the 1996 revision. As in previous LACS curricula, [4] and [6], the model is practical; that is, students can schedule it, it can be taught with a relatively small size faculty, and it contributes to the foundation of an excellent liberal arts education. Finally, this 2007 Model Curriculum is compared with the recommendations of CC2001 [3]