Introducing the discussion paper by Sz\'{e}kely and Rizzo

Introducing the discussion paper by Sz\'{e}kely and RizzoComment: Published in at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/09-AOAS34INTRO the Annals of Applied Statistics (http://www.imstat.org/aoas/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org

Gamma-based clustering via ordered means with application to gene-expression analysis

Discrete mixture models provide a well-known basis for effective clustering algorithms, although technical challenges have limited their scope. In the context of gene-expression data analysis, a model is presented that mixes over a finite catalog of structures, each one representing equality and inequality constraints among latent expected values. Computations depend on the probability that independent gamma-distributed variables attain each of their possible orderings. Each ordering event is equivalent to an event in independent negative-binomial random variables, and this finding guides a dynamic-programming calculation. The structuring of mixture-model components according to constraints among latent means leads to strict concavity of the mixture log likelihood. In addition to its beneficial numerical properties, the clustering method shows promising results in an empirical study.Comment: Published in at http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/10-AOS805 the Annals of Statistics (http://www.imstat.org/aos/) by the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (http://www.imstat.org

Illustrating Illegitimate Lawfare

Lawfare that erodes the good faith application of the laws and customs of warfare is illegitimate and untenable. This essay outlines the contours of such illegitimate lawfare and provides current examples to guide practitioners. Clearly addressing the terminological imprecision in current understandings of lawfare, this essay is intended to help prevent further erosion of the corpus of jus in bello. Words matter, particularly when they are charged with legal significance and purport to convey legal rights and obligations. When purported legal “developments” actually undermine respect for the application and enforcement of humanitarian law, they are illegitimate. Although the laws and customs of war create a careful balance between the smoke, adrenalin, and uncertainty of a modern battlefield, and the imperative for disciplined constraints on the unlawful application of force, inappropriate lawfare permits the public perceptions to be manipulated Illegitimate exploitation of the law in turn permits the legal structure to be portrayed as a mass of indeterminate subjectivity that is nothing more than another weapon in the moral domain of conflict at the behest of the side with the best cameras, biggest microphones, and most compliant media accomplices. In this manner, the media can be misused to mask genuine violations of the law with spurious allegations and misrepresentations of the actual state of the law. Illegitimate lawfare is that which, taken to its logical end, marginalizes the precepts of humanitarian law and therefore creates strong disincentives to its application and enforcement. It logically follows that any efforts to distort and politicize fundamental principles of international law should not be meekly accepted as inevitable and appropriate “evolution.

International Criminal Law Aspects of the War Against Terrorism

The debates about forums and processes for prosecuting those accused of terrorist acts have resonated across the globe since September 11, 2001. Discussion is likely to intensify in this regard in preparation for the International Criminal Court Review Conference in 2009. The proper disposition of criminal cases against terrorists is linked to the deeper disputes regarding the applicability of the established frameworks for regulating conflicts and the status of those who have no lawful right to wage war, yet choose to conduct hostilities against sovereign states. This article assesses the established frameworks for addressing transnational terrorist acts in which the international community has negotiated a web of occasionally overlapping multilateral conventions addressing specific categories of criminal conduct. This essay superimposes the existing model against those made in favor of a newly created supranational judicial forum. Because the problem of transnational terrorism does not raise any of the problems that have been previously addressed by the establishment of an internationalized process, such a supranational forum is unnecessary and could actually undermine the pursuit of justice. This essay concludes that the voluntary efforts of sovereign states to implement and enforce international norms would not be materially enhanced by the creation of a new superstructure of supranational justice designed to address terrorist acts

A View from the Trenches

As a former armor officer, my roots are literally in the trenches. In sharing my figurative view from the trenches regarding the pursuit of justice, you should know that the pursuit of justice is the very core of our professional ethic among military lawyers. I was also privileged to serve as one of the foot soldiers within the ranks of the Department of State whose diplomatic focus revolved around the pursuit of personal accountability. My view from the trenches is therefore centered on a candid discussion of the pragmatic aspects of developing justice systems within the conditions and confines of military operations