Human parietal and primary motor cortical interactions are selectively modulated during the transport and grip formation of goal-directed hand actions

Posterior parietal cortex (PPC) constitutes a critical cortical node in the sensorimotor system in which goal-directed actions are computed. This information then must be transferred into commands suitable for hand movements to the primary motor cortex (M1). Complexity arises because reach-to-grasp actions not only require directing the hand towards the object (transport component), but also preshaping the hand according to the features of the object (grip component). Yet, the functional influence that specific PPC regions exert over ipsilateral M1 during the planning of different hand movements remains unclear in humans. Here we manipulated transport and grip components of goal-directed hand movements and exploited paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (ppTMS) to probe the functional interactions between M1 and two different PPC regions, namely superior parieto-occipital cortex (SPOC) and the anterior region of the intraparietal sulcus (aIPS), in the left hemisphere. We show that when the extension of the arm is required to contact a target object, SPOC selectively facilitates motor evoked potentials, suggesting that SPOC-M1 interactions are functionally specific to arm transport. In contrast, a different pathway, linking the aIPS and ipsilateral M1, shows enhanced functional connections during the sensorimotor planning of grip. These results support recent human neuroimaging findings arguing for specialized human parietal regions for the planning of arm transport and hand grip during goal-directed actions. Importantly, they provide new insight into the causal influences these different parietal regions exert over ipsilateral motor cortex for specific types of planned hand movements

The Human Rights Act 1998 – Future Prospects

It is now over fifteen years since the Human Rights Act was enacted in November 1998. Although in legal terms it is difficult to argue with the proposition that the Act is working in an effective manner, in political terms the Act remains one of the most highly debated pieces of legislation on the UK statute books. In recent years there have been numerous calls for the repeal of the Act, and for its replacement with a ‘UK Bill of Rights’. Such calls led to the establishment of a Commission on a Bill of Rights, which issued its final report in December 2012. Little progress has since been made on the issue. One notable occurrence however was the introduction of the Human Rights Act 1998 (Repeal and Substitution) Bill, a Private Member’s Bill which was eventually withdrawn in March 2013. This article seeks to assess the current situation regarding the bill of rights debate, and ultimately the question of the future prospects of the Human Rights Act, an issue of immense legal significance. Overall, it will be questioned whether the enactment of a UK Bill of Rights would constitute an improvement on the current position under the Human Rights Act.

The European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 – Ten Years On

The European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 has now been in force in Ireland for ten years. This article analyses the Act itself and the impact which it has had on the Irish courts during the first decade of its operation. The use of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Irish courts prior to the enactment of the legislation is discussed, as are the reasons for the passing of the Act. The relationship between the Act and the Irish Constitution is examined, as is the jurisprudence of the Irish courts towards the interpretative obligation found in section 2(1), and the duty placed upon organs of the State by section 3(1). The article ends with a number of observations regarding the impact which the Act has had on the Irish courts at a more general level. Comparisons will be drawn with the UK’s Human Rights Act 1998 throughout the discussion.

Second Equal Treatment Act for the commercial sector

This book analyses one of the first pieces of legislation promoted by Angela Merkel, who started her political career as a minister for women's equality under Helmut Kohl. The name of the Act, Second Equal Treatment Act, allured to the Equal Treatment Act of the 1950s which implemented the barest minimum requirements to make the German constitution's demand to guarantee equal rights for women more than a hollow formula. However, this Act, while abolishing blatant discrimination of women through statute in fields such as family law, did nothing to further substantive equality. In 1990, when Germany was reunited, women from Eastern Germany had a first hand experience what the absence of such furtherance meant under capitalism. Used to being at nor risk to fall into poverty just because they divorced, or decided to become a mother without male protection, to being in full employment and not at the mercy of payments by their husbands, women from Eastern Germany were dismissed in large numbers, and found themselves sent back to the kitchen. The first minister for women affairs from their ranks made the "2nd Equality Act", but this act did little more than the minimum required by the EEC legislation. Again, substantive equality was not addressed through German Federal legislation. This was left to some of the German states - whose competences were limited to the public services. Most of those states which did create positive action measures for women employed in the public services were governed not by Christian Democrats - but this was the theme of another book.