James Fitzpiers Fitzgerald, Captain Thomas Lee, and the problem of ‘secret traitors’: conflicted loyalties during the Nine Years’ War, 1594-1603

Existing evidence pertaining to Ireland’s Nine Years’ War (1594–1603) strongly lends itself to the impression that the majority of Old English Palesmen, at least those of higher social status, chose to support the English crown during this conflict rather than their co-religionist Gaelic Irish countrymen. Loyalties, however, were anything but straightforward and could depend on any number of cultural values, social concerns, and economic incentives. Nevertheless, James Fitzpiers Fitzgerald, a ‘Bastard Geraldine’ who served as sheriff of Kildare, seemed to have been driven by a genuine sense of duty to the English crown and establishment. With the outbreak of hostilities in the 1590s, Fitzpiers proved to be a devout crown servitor, risking life and limb to confront the English queen’s Irish enemies. But, in late 1598 he suddenly, and somewhat inexplicably, threw his lot in with the Irish confederacy, defying the government he had once championed. During the ensuing investigation, the Dublin administration accumulated much damning evidence against Fitzpiers, including a patriotic plea from rebel leader Hugh O’Neill which urged Fitzpiers to defend his Irish homeland from the oppressions of English Protestant rule. Yet, at the very same time, a counter case was made by Fitzpiers’s controversial English friend, Captain Thomas Lee, which argued that Fitzpiers’s actions were more loyal than anyone could have imagined. Through an examination of Fitzpiers’s perplexing case, this paper will explore the complicated nature of allegiances in 1590s Ireland and how loyalties were not always what they seemed.

The right to humanitarian assistance in natural and human-made disasters: progress and challenges for an emerging international legal framework

Natural and human-made disasters cause on average 120,000 deaths and over US$140 billion in damage to property and infrastructure every year, with national, regional and international actors consistently responding to the humanitarian imperative to alleviate suffering wherever it may be found. Despite various attempts to codify international disaster laws since the 1920s, a right to humanitarian assistance remains contested, reflecting concerns regarding the relative importance of state sovereignty vis-à-vis individual rights under international law. However, the evolving acquis humanitaire of binding and non-binding normative standards for responses to humanitarian crises highlights the increasing focus on rights and responsibilities applicable in disasters; although the International Law Commission has also noted the difficulty of identifying lex lata and lex ferenda regarding the protection of persons in the event of disasters due to the “amorphous state of the law relating to international disaster response.” Therefore, using the conceptual framework of transnational legal process, this thesis analyses the evolving normative frameworks and standards for rights-holders and duty-bearers in disasters. Determining the process whereby rights are created and evolve, and their potential internalisation into domestic law and policy, provides a powerful analytical framework for examining the progress and challenges of developing accountable responses to major disasters.