Unlawful Violence Research Articles

<i>Bacillus anthracis</i> - As Biological Weapons

Terrorism is defined as use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to indulge fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, social or religious. Bioterrorism is terrorism by intentional release or dissemination of biological agents, mainly bacteria or viruses. Use of biological weapons is attractive from the terrorists’ point of view because of low production costs, major range and easiness of transmission. The first mention of the use of primitive biological weapons date back to the 6th century. Use of plague-infested corpses as offensive means in the 14th century caused a spread of bubonic plague through the whole Europe. The biggest development of biological weapons took place in the interwar period and in the cold war era. Biological weapon trails and research were conducted by super powers such as USSR, UK, USA and Japan. At the beginning of the 20th century a new form of bioterrorism occurred, which put humanity in the face of a terrifying threat.

<i>Vibrio cholerae</i> - As Biological Weapons

Terrorism is defined as use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to indulge fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, social or religious. Bioterrorism is terrorism by intentional release or dissemination of biological agents, mainly bacteria or viruses. Use of biological weapons is attractive from the terrorists’ point of view because of low production costs, major range and easiness of transmission. The first mention of the use of primitive biological weapons date back to the 6th century. Use of plague-infested corpses as offensive means in the 14th century caused a spread of bubonic plague through the whole Europe. The biggest development of biological weapons took place in the interwar period and in the cold war era. Biological weapon trails and research were conducted by super powers such as USSR, UK, USA and Japan. At the beginning of the 20th century a new form of bioterrorism occurred, which put humanity in the face of a terrifying threat. Cholera is a deadly disease that has caused a worldwide phenomenon throughout history. Its imperative weapon, the Vibrio cholerae bacterium, has allowed cholera to seize control and wipe out a huge percentage of the human population. V. cholerae’s toxins are the primary causes of cholera’s lethal symptoms. The bacterium contains toxins that help it accomplish its job of invading the human system and defeating the body’s powerful immune system. With its sibling bacterium Escherichia coli, V. cholerae has become one of the most dominant pathogens in the known world. V. cholerae’s strategies in causing the infamous deadly diarrhea have been widely studied, from the irritation of the intestinal epithelium to the stimulation of capillary leakage, as well as the internal effects of the disease such as the Peyer’s patches on the intestinal walls. Overall, the Vibrio cholera bacterium has made cholera a tough disease to overcome, and because of its deadly virulence factors, cholera has become one of the most frightening diseases a human body could ever encounter. Vibrio cholerae is a Gram-negative, comma-shaped bacterium. Some strains of V. cholerae cause the disease cholera. V. cholerae is facultatively anaerobic and has a flagellum at one cell pole. V. cholerae was first isolated as the cause of cholera by Italian anatomist Filippo Pacini in 1854, but his discovery was not widely known until Robert Koch, working independently 30 years later, publicized the knowledge and the means of fighting the disease. V. cholerae pathogenicity genes code for proteins directly or indirectly involved in the virulence of the bacteria. During infection, V. cholerae secretes cholera toxin, a protein that causes profuse, watery diarrhea. Colonization of the small intestine also requires the toxin coregulated pilus (TCP), a thin, flexible, filamentous appendage on the surface of bacterial cells.

Calibrating risk for violent political extremists and terrorists: the VERA 2 structured assessment

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to outline the process of risk assessment for terrorists and violent political extremists and to present an example of such an approach. The approach proposed is referred to as the VERA 2 or violent extremism risk assessment protocol (Consultative Version 2).Design/methodology/approachA review of the knowledge base relating to risk assessment and risk assessment methodology was undertaken with a focus on relevance to individual terrorists and violent extremists. The need for a specific approach for the risk assessment of terrorists that differs from approaches used for ordinary violent criminals was identified. A model that could be used for the risk assessment of terrorists was identified with pertinent risk indicators. This was structured into a protocol referred to as the VERA (Consultative Version 2). The approach is intended to be applied to different types of violent extremists, terrorists and unlawful violent offenders motivated by religious, political or social ideologies.FindingsFirst, risk assessments of adjudicated terrorists and violent extremists should be undertaken with risk indicators that are relevant to ideological motivated violence. Indicators used for ordinary common violence differ in substantive ways from those relevant to terrorists and therefore may have questionable relevance for the assessment of risk in terrorists. Second, it is possible to construct an evidence‐based risk assessment approach for the range of violent extremists and terrorists using a structured professional judgment approach with pertinent risk indicators. The VERA 2 is an example of this type of risk assessment protocol for terrorists and unlawful violent extremists.Research limitations/implicationsRisk assessment tools that have been developed for ordinary violent criminals and members of organised criminal gangs should be used with caution with terrorists, violent extremists and other perpetrators of ideologically motivated unlawful violence. Specific risk assessment approaches for terrorists with relevant indicators should be used. At this time, terrorist oriented approaches such as the VERA 2 are to be considered consultative and used as an add‐on to other established approaches.Originality/valueThere are few transparent, structured risk assessment approaches that use indicators specifically relevant to violent political extremists and terrorists. One new approach, the VERA 2 is outlined in the paper using risk indicators that differ in substantive ways from those used for other ordinary violent criminals.

Recent Developments

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has made an increasing number of key decisions concerning domestic violence, of which Kalucza v Hungary is the most recent. It is the first case that addresses the nature of the human rights obligations in circumstances where it is alleged that both parties to a domestic dispute are engaged in acts of unlawful physical violence. It also considers the requirement for swift decision-making where restraining orders are sought against violent partners. The requirement to give sufficient reasons when decisions pertaining to restraining orders is also evaluated. In addition, the judgment considers the duty to determine cases pertaining to the division of the home within a ‘reasonable when both parties are residing within it. This article considers the implications of this case, comparing it to other domestic violence cases that have been brought under both Articles 3 and 8.

Render unto Caesar

The violence of the British state in the global ‘war on terror’ is a form of state crime, but as these crimes are largely committed as a ‘junior partner’ in the unlawful violence of a US-led empire...

Public Order: Immediacy of Unlawful Violence under S. 4

Public Order: Immediacy of Unlawful Violence under S. 4

The Continuing Role for Belligerent Reprisals

‘The rumours of my demise are greatly exaggerated.’ - Mark TwainThe enforcement of the law of war has always been a difficult proposition. It has become even more difficult in recent conflicts given the propensity of combatants to employ unlawful violence to further their cause. Such horrific conduct begs the question, how does the law of war restrain violators? There are many potential methods, among them war crimes tribunals and international mediation, but the subject of this article is the final enforcement mechanism: belligerent reprisals. It is a doctrine that responds to unlawful conduct by inflicting the same violation upon the violators in order to force them to cease. The doctrine of reprisals has fallen into disuse as numerous commentators suggest that it is no longer effective and soon to slip into complete illegality. However, reprisals utilizing a prohibited weapon remain lawful. And, for a number of states, reprisals against captured enemy combatants remain lawful. Violating the law of war, even in a manner it allows, is a repugnant act, yet an even more repugnant act is to allow an adversary to violate that same law with impunity.

The Ethics of Peace and Justice in International Order

The question is: How is a global peace order possible in the shape of an international legal system? The article focuses on the problems of international law within the present system of the UN and tries to actualise the Kantian concept of perpetual peace (1795), with regard to positions of international lawyers. A peaceful international order must have the means to protect against unlawful violence, even by armed forces, e.g. to intervene against gross violations of fundamental human rights. It is necessary that even the great powers are obliged to act only within this legal framework. Unilateralism must be abolished in a continuing process. ‘Good leadership under law, not above the law’ (J. Delbrück).

Rewriting the honour plot: ‘Infierno grande’ by Guillermo Martínez

The short stories in the collection Infierno grande (1989) by Argentine author Guillermo Martínez are bound by a common theme: a deep-seated preoccupation with masculine identity. Born in 1962, Martínez is representative of a generation of men who came of age during the military dictatorship in power from 1976 to 1983, a period ofviolent political repression accompanied by heightened gender anxiety, surveillance, and social control. The title story, set in a small provincial town in 1978, depicts traditional masculinity in crisis, threatened by progressive gender ideology associated with the political left. Martínez stages this crisis of masculinity in the gendered space of the barbershop, traditionally a site of homosocial male bonding, and employs the Calderonian pundonor theme to foreground questions of male honour, female virtue, and violence. The honour plot is not resolved by a vengeance killing, however, but further complicated by the discovery of evidence of atrocities committed by the military state. The author uses the honour/vengeance plot to critique the dominant cultural and political discourses of Argentine masculinity, including the hypermasculine discourse of the military junta. In ‘Infierno grande’, the title story of the collection, Martínez subverts the problematic literary model of vengeance killing in order to challenge the patriarchal logic of the honour code, and to question the invocation of masculine, military and national honour to justify various forms of unlawful male violence against the feminine and feminised Other( s) in the context of the Argentine Proceso.

RESEARCH NOTECOUNTING VIOLENCE COMMITTED BY THE POLICE: RAW FACTS AND NARRATIVES

In this article, the author describes the effort made by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Punishment or Treatment (CPT) to measure acts that are usually either presented as isolated occurrences (“case X or Y”) or as undifferentiated denunciations (“Police everywhere, justice nowhere”) – that is to say, unlawful violence by the police.