Even those, like myself, who in principle support the culling of wild animals in support of improving the welfare of livestock will be, as I have been, reduced to despair by the DEFRA Independent Expert Panel’s evaluation of the pilot badger culls in parts of Gloucestershire and Somerset which was published last month. DEFRA implemented the culls on the basis that they would be humane and effective, but, though it expresses itself in the most restrained fashion, the Panel shows that everything that was predicted to go wrong with the culls has gone wrong.
On 31st March 2014, the International Court of Justice delivered its long-awaited judgment in the Whaling in the Antarctic case between Australia and Japan concerning the legality of the whaling activities of the latter in the Southern Ocean. The Court’s finding that Japan was indeed in breach of its obligations arising from the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) is certainly welcomed, though the ICJ could have elaborated more on aspects concerning the interpretation of this Convention. In this post, I will present an overview of the reasoning of the ICJ, and offer some comments concerning the significance and the potential impact of the judgment for whaling in general.
This blogs considers the case of Anne, recently reported to have received an assisted death at the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland because she was tired of life and the digital age. I reflect on the implications of this case and the question of whether it can be legitimate to permit assisted dying on the basis of such existential suffering.
Political debate in the UK about EU migration always seems to focus on EU Citizens, particularly from Central and Eastern Europe, coming to the UK. In reality the position is much more fluid. Nearly 2 million UK nationals live elsewhere in the EU (see the FT) and movement never goes only one way. There is a constant flow of EU citizens moving back and forth between EU Member States exercising their free movement rights. The difficulty in predicting trends in the patterns of movement was highlighted recently; the “tidal flood” of immigrants from Bulgaria and Romania prophesised by many strident UK commentators proved to be illusory. A pair of recent judgments from the Court of Justice of the EU, the highest court within the EU legal system, highlights the problems faced by other EU Member States when they have a significant number of migrants coming into their territory from the UK and Ireland; because they arrive in vehicles with the steering apparatus on the wrong side …
Over the last month I’ve done work in Turkey and London with the Kosovo judiciary, and spoken by invitation at a conference on ‘transitional cosmopolitanism’ in Oslo. In this post I’ll try to set out what connects these activities, and offer a comment upon a recent European Court of Human Rights case.