Considering Just-World Thinking in Counter-Terrorism Cases: Miscarriages of Justice in Northern Ireland

Recent literature has drawn a parallel between the discriminatory application of counterterrorism legislation to the Irish population in the United Kingdom during the Northern Ireland conflict and the targeting of Muslims after September 2001. Less attention has been paid to lessons that can be drawn from judicial decision making in terrorism-related cases stemming from the Northern Ireland conflict. This Article examines Northern Ireland Court of Appeal (“NICA”) jurisprudence on miscarriages of justice in cases regarding counterterrorism offenses. In particular, the Article focuses on cases referred after the 1998 peace agreements in Northern Ireland from the Criminal Cases Review Commission (“CCRC”), a relatively new entity that investigates potential wrongful convictions in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Although the NICA’s human rights jurisprudence has developed significantly in recent years, the study of CCRC-referred cases finds that judges have retained confidence in the integrity of the conflict-era counterterrorism system even while acknowledging abuses and procedural irregularities that occurred. This study partially contradicts contentions that judicial deference to the executive recedes in a post-conflict or post-emergency period. Despite a high rate of quashed convictions, the NICA’s decisions suggest that it seeks to limit a large number of referrals and demonstrate a judicial predisposition to defend the justness of the past system’s laws and procedure. This perspective is consistent with what social psychologists have studied as “just-world thinking,” in which objective observers, although motivated by a concern with justice, believe—as a result of cognitive bias—that individuals “got what they deserved.” The Article considers other potential interpretations of the jurisprudence and contends that conservative decision making is particularly dangerous in the politicized realm of counterterrorism and in light of the criminalization of members of suspect communities.

“Do You Want to See My Hornpipe?”: The Traditional Irish Dancing Body at Play in the Work of Jean Butler and Colin Dunne.

This chapter considers the radical re-imaginings of traditional Irish step dance in the recent works of Jean Butler and Colin Dunne. In Butler's Does She Take Sugar (2007) and Dunne's Out of Time (2008), the Irish step dancing body is separated from its historical roots in nationalism, from the exhibitionism required by the competitive form, and from the spectacularization of the commercialized theatrical format. In these works, which are both solo pieces performed by the choreographers themselves, the traditional form undergoes a critical interrogation in which the dancers attempt to depart from the determinacy of the traditional technique, while acknowledging its formation of their corporealities; the Irish step dance technique becomes a springboard for creative experimentation. In order to consider the importance of the creative potential revealed by these works, this chapter will contextualize them within the dance background from which they emerged, outlining the history of competitive step dancing in Ireland, the "modernization" of traditional Irish dance with the emergence of Riverdance (1994), and the experiments of Ireland's national folk theatre, Siamsa Tíre.

Private rule-making and European governance - issues of legitimacy

Private rule-making is widely discussed as supporting institutional policy making and legislation at EU level. The following argues for a different perspective on private actor rule-making, focusing on the autonomy of social realms within which self-governance may be possible. From this perspective, private actor rule-making is considered as a potential gain in self-determination. Substantive autonomy and enhanced self-determination of all those affected are considered as prerequisites for accepting rules made by private actors. Opening the field for discussion, some manifestations of (envisaged) private rule-making at EU level are explored and discussed as to whether they should be accepted as legitimate forms of self-governance.

Cases, Materials and Text on National, Supranational and International Non-Discrimination Law

This casebook, the result of the collaborative efforts of a panel of experts from various EU Member States, is the latest in the Ius Commune Casebook series developed at the Universities of Maastricht and Leuven. The book provides a comprehensive and skilfully designed resource for students, practitioners, researchers, public officials, NGOs, consumer organisations and the judiciary. In common with earlier books in the series, this casebook presents cases and other materials (legislative materials, international and European materials, excerpts from books or articles). As non-discrimination law is a comparatively new subject, the chapters search for and develop the concepts of discrimination law on the basis of a wide variety of young and often still emerging case law and legislation. The result is a comprehensive textbook with materials from a wide variety of EU Member States. The book is entirely in English (i.e. materials are translated where not available in English). At the end of each chapter a comparative overview ties the material together, with emphasis, where appropriate, on existing or emerging general principles in the legal systems within Europe.
The book illustrates the distinct relationship between international, European and national legislation in the field of non-discrimination law. It covers the grounds of discrimination addressed in the Racial Equality and Employment Equality Directives, as well as non-discrimination law relating to gender. In so doing, it covers the law of a large number of EU Member States, alongside some international comparisons.
The Ius Commune Casebook on Non-Discrimination Law
- provides practitioners with ready access to primary and secondary legal material needed to assist them in crafting test case strategies.
- provides the judiciary with the tools needed to respond sensitively to such cases.
- provides material for teaching non-discrimination law to law and other students.
- provides a basis for ongoing research on non-discrimination law.
- provides an up-to-date overview of the implementation of the Directives and of the state of the law.
This Casebook is the result of a project which has been supported by a grant from the European Commission's Anti-Discrimination Programme.

EU Social and Labour Rights and EU Internal Market Law: Study for the EMPL Committee

EU Social and Labour Rights have developed incrementally, originally through a set of legislative initiatives creating selective employment rights, followed by a non-binding Charter of Social Rights. Only in 2009, social and labour rights became legally binding through the Charter of Fundamental Rights for the European Union (CFREU). By contrast, the EU Internal Market - an area without frontiers where goods, persons, services and capital can circulate freely – has been enshrined in legally enforceable Treaty provisions from 1958. These comprise the economic freedoms guaranteeing said free circulation and a system ensuring that competition is not distorted within the Internal Market (Protocol 27 to the Treaty of Lisbon). Tensions between Internal Market law and social and labour rights have been observed in analyses of EU case law and legislation. This study explores responses by socio-economic and political actors at national and EU levels to such tensions, focusing on collective labour rights, rights to fair working conditions and rights to social security and social assistance (Articles 12, 28, 31, 34 Charter of Fundamental Rights for the European Union). On the basis of the current Treaties and the CFREU, the constitutionally conditioned Internal Market emerges as a way to overcome the perception that social and labour rights limit Internal Market law, or vice versa. On this basis, alternative responses to perceived tensions are proposed, focused on posting of workers, furthering fair employment conditions through public procurement and enabling effective collective bargaining and industrial action in the Internal Market.

IQ Imbalance in Multiuser Systems: Channel Estimation and Compensation

In this paper, we consider the uplink of a single-cell multi-user single-input multiple-output (MU-SIMO) system with in-phase and quadrature-phase imbalance (IQI). Particularly, we investigate the effect of receive (RX) IQI on the performance of MU-SIMO systems with large antenna arrays employing maximum-ratio combining (MRC) receivers. In order to study how IQI affects channel estimation, we derive a new channel estimator for the IQI-impaired model and show that the higher the value of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) the higher the impact of IQI on the spectral efficiency (SE). Moreover, a novel pilot-based joint estimator of the augmented MIMO channel matrix and IQI coefficients is described and then, a low-complexity IQI compensation scheme is proposed which is based on the
IQI coefficients’ estimation and it is independent of the channel gain. The performance of the proposed compensation scheme is analytically evaluated by deriving a tractable approximation of the ergodic SE assuming transmission over Rayleigh fading channels with large-scale fading. Furthermore, we investigate how many MSs should be scheduled in massive multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) systems with IQI and show that the highest SE loss occurs at the optimal operating point. Finally,
by deriving asymptotic power scaling laws, and proving that the SE loss due to IQI is asymptotically independent of the number of BS antennas, we show that massive MIMO is resilient to the effect of RX IQI.