Juror stereotypes and blame attribution in rape cases involving intoxicants - The findings of a pilot study

Prior to recent legislative changes, sexual offences were contained in a combination of statutory provisions and common law that was criticized as being ill-equipped to tackle the intricacies of modern sexual (mis)behaviour. This pilot study explored the capacity of these provisions to address the complexities of drug-assisted rape using focus groups and a trial simulation to identify factors which influenced jurors in rape trials involving intoxicants. The findings revealed that jurors considered numerous extra-legal factors when reaching a decision: rape myths, misconceptions about the impact of intoxicants and factors such as the motivation of the defendant in administering an intoxicant. This paper draws upon these findings, focusing in particular on the interaction between juror attributions of blame and stereotypical conceptions about intoxication, sexual consent and drug-assisted rape. The findings of this pilot study form the basis for a larger-scale project (ESRC -funded, commenced January 2004) that examines this interaction in the context of new provisions under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

The United Nations and the African Union: Assessing a partnership for peace in Darfur

In Resolution 1556, the Security Council, with the conflict in Darfur clearly in mind, determined that the ‘situation in Sudan constitutes a threat to international peace and security and to stability in the region’. This article focuses on the response by the United Nations, in particular the Security Council, and the African Union to the Darfur conflict. It begins by exploring the role of peacekeeping operations and regional arrangements or agencies in the overarching architecture of international peace and security. Having laid this frame of reference, it then looks at the modalities of peacekeeping in Darfur. These operations began with the African Union acting in isolation but have transitioned to an increasingly important role being played by the United Nations and a hybrid peacekeeping presence. Finally, this article asks whether, assuming that a legally dispositive conclusion can be drawn that genocide has taken place in Darfur since the outbreak of hostilities there in 2003, there exists a legal justification, or even obligation, for non-compliance by states with the sanctions regime established by Security Council Resolutions 1556 and 1591. This regime of sanctions has played an important part in the Security Council's approach to Darfur but has been, unfortunately, left largely unexamined from the standpoint of international legality.