The International Protection of Refugees and Asylum Seekers: the Role of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights

This book presents a comprehensive assessment of regional responses to the crisis in the asylum/refugee system and critically examines how different regions tackle the problem. The chapters consider the fundamental challenges which undermine an effective asylum process as well as regional difficulties with the various circumstances surrounding asylum seekers. With contributions on Africa, Europe, Latin America, South Asia and the Middle East, and the Pacific, the collection strives to appreciate what informs each region’s approach to the asylum process and asks if there are issues common to every region and if regions can learn from one another. The book seeks an understanding of the existing legal regime for the protection of asylum seekers and how regional institutions such as human rights commissions and regional courts enforce and adjudicate the law.

The Irish hospitals sweepstake in the United States of America, 1930-1939

The Irish hospitals sweepstake was established by statute in the Irish Free State in 1930 to fund the state’s hospital service. The vast majority of tickets were sold outside Ireland, particularly in countries where such gambling was illegal at the time. Initially the largest market was in the United Kingdom, but following the introduction of restrictive legislation there in 1934, the promoters of the sweepstake turned their attentions to North America and after 1936 the United States became the largest source of contributions to the Irish sweep. This article examines a number of factors concerning the relationship of the Irish sweep with the USA, including: an effort to estimate the amount of money contributed to the sweep by Americans; the role of the Irish diaspora and of prominent republicans, including Joseph McGarrity and Connie Neenan, in the illegal ticket distribution network; the efforts of American Federal agencies and government departments to disrupt the sweepstake organisation in America; how the sweep was used by those who sought to legalise gambling in the USA; the attitudes of both the Irish and American governments to the sweep’s activities in America; and how the legalisation of gambling in America brought about the demise of the Irish sweep.

Perceived and reported access to the general practitioner: an international comparison of universal access and mixed private/public systems.

Timely and convenient access to primary healthcare is essential for the health of the population as delays can incur additional health and financial costs. Access to health care is under increasing scrutiny as part of the drive to contain escalating costs, while attempting to maintain equity in service provision. The objective was to compare primary care services in Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, and to report on perceived and reported access to GP services in universal access and mixed private/public systems. A questionnaire study was performed in Northern Ireland (NI) and the Republic of Ireland (ROI). Patients of 20 practices in the ROI and NI were contacted (n = 22,796). Main outcome measures were overall satisfaction and the access to GP services. Individual responses and scale scores were derived using the General Practice Assessment Questionnaire (G-PAQ). The response rate was 52% (n = 11,870). Overall satisfaction with GP practices was higher in ROI than in NI (84.2% and 80.9% respectively). Access scores were higher in ROI than in NI (69.2% and 57.0% respectively) Less than 1 in 10 patients in ROI waited two or more working days to see a doctor of choice (8.1%) compared to almost half (45.0%) in NI. In NI overall satisfaction decreased as practice size increased; 82.8%, 80.4%, and 75.8%. In both systems, in large practices, accessibility is reduced when compared to smaller practices. The faster access to GP services in ROI may be due to the deterrent effect of the consultation charge freeing up services although, as it is the poorest and sickest who are deterred by the charge this improved accessibility may come at a significant cost in terms of equity. The underlying concern for policy makers centres around provision of equitable services.

Genocide and the International Court of Justice: Finally, a Duty to Prevent the Crime of Crimes

The International Court of Justice has issued its long-awaited decision in the suit filed by Bosnia and Herzegovina against Serbia and Montenegro with respect to the 1992–1995 war. The decision confirms the factual and legal determinations of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, ruling that genocide was committed during the Srebrenica massacre in July 1995 but that the conflict as a whole was not genocidal in nature. The Court held that Serbia had failed in its duty to prevent genocide in Srebrenica, although—because, the Court said, there was no certainty that it could have succeeded in preventing the genocide—no damages were awarded. The judgment provides a strong and authoritative statement of the general duty upon states to prevent genocide that dovetails well with the doctrine of the responsibility to protect.