Transitional justice in the judiciary: lessons from the portuguese democratisation

The nature of the Portuguese transition to democracy and the following state crises (1974-1975) created a ‘window of opportunity’ in which the ‘reaction to the past’ was much stronger than in the other Southern or even of Central and Eastern European transitions. In Portugal, initiatives of symbolic rupture with the past began soon after the April 25, 1974, coup d’état and transitional justice policies assumed mainly three formulas. First, the institutional reforms directed primarily to abusive state institutions such as the political police (PIDE-DGS) and political courts (Plenary courts) in order to dismantle the repressive apparatus and prevent further human rights abuses and impunity. Secondly, the criminal prosecutions addressed to perpetrators considered as being the most responsible for repression and abuses. Finally, lustration or political purges (saneamentos, the term used in Portugal to designate political purges) which were, in fact, the most common form of political justice in Portuguese transition to democracy. This paper deals with the peculiarities of transitional justice in Portugal devoting a particular attention to the judicial, a key sector to understand the way the Portuguese dealt with their authoritarian past.

Transplants: bioethics and justice

Bioethics, as a branch of philosophy that focuses on questions relative to health and human life, is closely tied to the idea of justice and equality. As such, in understanding the concept of equality in its original sense, that is, in associating it to the idea to treat "unequals" (those who are unequal or different, in terms of conditions or circumstances) unequally (differentially), in proportion to their inequalities (differences), we see that the so-called "one-and-only waiting list" for transplants established in law no. 9.434/97, ends up not addressing the concept of equality and justice, bearing upon bioethics, even when considering the objective criteria of precedence established in regulation no. 9.4347/98, Thus, the organizing of transplants on a one-and-only waiting list, with a few exceptions that are weakly applicable, without a case by case technical and grounded analysis, according to each particular necessity, ends up institutionalizing inequalities, condemning patients to happenstance and, consequently, departs from the ratio legis, which aims at seeking the greatest application of justice in regards to organ transplants. We conclude, therefore, that from an analysis of the legislation and of the principles of bioethics and justice, there is a need for the creation of a collegiate of medical experts, that, based on medical criteria and done in a well established manner, can analyze each case to be included on the waiting list, deferentially and according to the necessity; thus, precluding that people in special circumstances be treated equal to people in normal circumstances.

Environmental conflicts, environmental justice and valuation

In this article some historical and contemporary environmental conflicts are described. The international environmental liability of mining corporations is discussed. Comparisons are made with conflicts in the United States and in South Africa which fall under the rubric of the Environmental Justice movement. Such conflicts are fought out in many languages, and the economic valuation of damages is only one of such languages. Who has the power to impose particular languages of valuation? Who rules over the ways and means of simplifying complexity, deciding that some points of view are out of order? Who has power to determine which is the bottom-line in an environmental discussion?

Assessment of current anglo-saxon proposals about criminal justice and the justification of legal punishment: Moore, Duff and Finnis on retribution, and the challenging compatibility with the up-and-coming Restorative Justice

Pendent

IPH Response to Dept of Justice and Equality Review of the Code of Practice on the Sale and Display of Alcohol in Mixed Trading Premises

IPH responded to the Department of Justice, Equality and Defence review of the voluntary Code of Practice for the display and sale of alcohol in supermarkets, convenience stores and similar mixed trading outlets. The voluntary Code was introduced in 2008 as an alternative to the statutory rules for structural separation of alcohol products in mixed trading outlets which are set out in section 9 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008. Interested bodies and individuals were invited to submit comments on the Compliance Report for 2011 and on the effectiveness of the voluntary approach to structural separation by 20th December 2011. The Minister said he intended to also seek the views of the Minister for Health and the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality before reaching any decision on whether to bring the statutory rules in the 2008 Act into operation.