Home, meaning and identity: learning from the English model of shared ownership

This article explores the problematic nature of the label “home ownership” through a case study of the English model of shared ownership, one of the methods used by the UK government to make home ownership affordable. Adopting a legal and socio-legal analysis, the article considers whether shared ownership is capable of fulfilling the aspirations households have for home ownership. To do so, the article considers the financial and nonfinancial meanings attached to home ownership and suggests that the core expectation lies in ownership of the value. The article demonstrates that the rights and responsibilities of shared owners are different in many respects from those of traditional home owners, including their rights as regards ownership of the value. By examining home ownership through the lens of shared ownership the article draws out lessons of broader significance to housing studies. In particular, it is argued that shared ownership shows the limitations of two dichotomies commonly used in housing discourse: that between private and social housing; and the classification of tenure between owner-occupiers and renters. The article concludes that a much more nuanced way of referring to home ownership is required, and that there is a need for a change of expectations amongst consumers as to what sharing ownership means.

The responsibility to record civilian casualties

The responsibility to record civilian casualties in both armed conflict and civil disturbances must be an integral element of the responsibility to protect, particularly in the application of the just cause principles. The first part of this article examines the threshold issue of the possibility of large-scale civilian casualties which triggers the international community’s responsibility to react. The reports recommending the responsibility to protect emphasise the need to establish the actuality or risk of ‘large scale’ loss of life which is not possible in the current context without a civilian casualty recording structure. The second part of the article outlines the international legal obligation to record civilian casualties based on international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Thirdly, the responsibility to protect and the legal obligation to record casualties are brought together within the framework of Ban Ki-moon’s reports on implementation of the Responsibility to Protect. The fourth and final part of the article reviews the situations in Sri Lanka and Syria. Both states represent egregious examples of governments hiding the existence of casualties, resulting in paralysis within the international community. These situations establish, beyond doubt, that the national obligation to record civilian casualties must be part and parcel of the responsibility to protect.

The international law implications of the Turkish/Kurdish conflict

This article considers the threaties and customs governing armed conflict in the context of the long standing insurgency in southeast Turkey. The first part of the article analyzes the existing treaty and customary law concerning the threshold of an armed conflict and concludes that the insurgency in Southeast Turkey existing since 1984 rises to the level of an armed conflict based on criteria identified both in treaty and customary international law. The next consideration is the classification of this conflict and this part concludes that this situation is a non-international armed conflict due to lack of involvement of forces of another country. Finally, this article considers international humanitarian law applicable to this non-international armed conflict and reveals that as a result of the monumental International Committee of the Red Cross customary humanitarian law study, particularly with respect to the law of targeting, that the rules applicable to international and non-international armed conflict have never been closer.

The Kurdish conflict: international humanitarian law and post-conflict mechanisms

This book is highly topical considering the recent resurgence of violence by the PKK, the incursions into Northern Iraq by the Turkish army and security forces and Turkey’s EU accession negotiations. Turkey has become an increasingly important player in Middle Eastern geopolitics. More than two decades of serious conflict in Turkey are proving to be a barrier to improved relations between Turkey and the EU. This book is the first study to address fully the legal and political dimensions of the conflict, and their impact on mechanisms for conflict resolution in the region, offering a scholarly exploration of a debate that is often politically and emotionally highly charged. Kerim Yildiz and Susan Breau look at the practical application of the law of armed conflicts to the ongoing situation in Turkey and Northern Iraq. The application of the law in this region also means addressing larger questions in international law, global politics and conflict resolution. Examples include belligerency in international law, whether the ‘war on terror’ has resulted in changes to the law of armed conflict and terrorism and conflict resolution. The Kurdish Conflict explores the practical possibilities of conflict resolution in the region, examining the political dynamics of the region, and suggesting where lessons can be drawn from other peace processes, such as in Northern Ireland. This book will be of great value to policy-makers, regional experts, and others interested in international humanitarian law and conflict resolution.

Identifying and recording every casualty of armed conflict

This article discusses the international legal obligation to identify and record every casualty of armed conflict that finds its basis in the treaties and customs of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. The article applies the various facets of the legal obligation to the armed conflicts in Iraq and Sri Lanka and argues that the parties in these conflicts failed in their international legal responsibility to civilians.

A sequential procedure for comparing two experimental treatments with a control

A procedure is described in which patients are randomized between two experimental treatments and a control. At a series of interim analyses, each experimental treatment is compared with control. One of the experimental treatments might then be found sufficiently superior to the control for it to be declared the best treatment, and the trial stopped. Alternatively, experimental treatments might be eliminated from further consideration at any stage. It is shown how the procedure can be conducted while controlling overall error probabilities. Data concerning evaluation of different doses of riluzole in the treatment of motor neurone disease are used for illustration.