Gabriel Vockel – författare

Master's Thesis from the year 2005 in the subject Law - European and International Law, Intellectual Properties, grade: Merit, 68%, University of Warwick (Coventry Business School), course: Module Human Rights in Europe, language: English, abstract: The analysis undertaken in this dissertation gives attention to three core foci of examination. The first two are international legal documents used in the protection of human rights: The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) from 1989 and the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) from 1950. The third focal point consists of an investigation into a specific area of jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) regarding the protection of human rights of children: the phenomenon of the corporal punishment and abuse of children in the UK. This selection of verdicts of the European Court aims at portraying how the ECHR impacts on the child's human rights in practice and how well the work of the European Court reflects the values enshrined in the CRC and also gain an understanding of how the two conventional systems might impact on the other. The third chapter investigates verdicts of the Court that have dealt with cases that derive from institutional settings (judicial corporal punishment and punishment in public schools). The fourth chapter will observe private settings, where cases of corporally punished children relate to the private sphere (e.g. punishment through parents). Beside, it is intended to give a short outlook on two selected cases where a matter of more general abuse of children was under judicial scrutiny. The dissertation concludes that both the CRC and the ECHR are characterised by a number of more or less serious flaws and drawbacks in relation to the protection of children's human rights. The narrow textual scope of the ECHR and the significant weaknesses of the CRC regarding its implementation mechanism are two prominent examples. The paper suggests that in Europe, the trend of maximising the potential of the European Convention by combining the widely accepted, detailed standards on children's rights set out in the UN Convention with the highly successful and influential system of individual petition and implementation should find its continuation and be strengthened even further.

Seminar paper from the year 2005 in the subject Law - Comparative Legal Systems, Comparative Law, grade: Distinction, Coventry University (Coventry Business School), course: International Law in the Contemporary World Arena, language: English, abstract: The dilemma of what to do about citizens of another sovereign country who see themselves confronted with horrifying abuses by their own government has remained with us throughout the era post World War II. The recent events in the Sudanese region of Darfur, labelled not only civil war, but "e;ethnic cleansing"e; have, again, triggered discussions about the question of "e;humanitarian intervention"e;. We can quote various instances in recent history after 1945, where appalling violations of basic human rights, including the mass killing of civilians on a high scale happened within the sovereign territory of a country, for example in Cambodia in the period 1975-1979, in Ex-Yugoslavia in the early 1990s, in Rwanda in 1994, to name but these.3Time and again, alongside those tragic events, different voices have called for military actions driven by humanitarian considerations, seemingly subscribing to the catchphrase "e;humanitarian intervention [as opposed to] inhumanitarian non-intervention"e;. The military actions of NATO in Kosovo especially, having been branded the first "e;humanitarian war"e;, have attained a remarkable degree of attention in the academia, raising new and old questions about the legitimacy and viability of the model of humanitarian intervention. While there seems to be an unanimous agreement that there are in existence both moral and ethical raisons d'etre as well as some agreement of how the modus operandi of a humanitarian intervention should look like10, there exists some substantial disagreement as to if at all and under which conditions such a venture is to be deemed legally permissible. In the face of an absence of a comprehensive legalistic framework under international law that would govern humanitarian interventions (the human rights framework is severely limited by the weaknesses of its enforcement mechanisms), the essence of the contemporary debate predominantly stems from a clash of imperatives between the principles of the protection of state sovereignty as laid down in Art. 2 (4) and (7) of the UN-Charter and the obligation of the protection of human rights (that might be achieved through a humanitarian intervention), in other words, a conflict between justice and [legal] order .

Seminar paper from the year 2005 in the subject Law - Comparative Legal Systems, Comparative Law, grade: Merit, 68 %, Coventry University (Coventry Business School), course: Diplomacy and the International System, language: English, abstract: While there are less than 200 governments in the global political system, there are approximately 60.000 major transnational companies (TNCs), about 10.000 singlecountry Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), 250 Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs) and approximately 5.800 International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs). 1 Crucially, the advent of globalization that brought about democratisation of international relations, transnational links and diffusion of power has greatly effected the large proliferation of so-called non-governmental (transnational) actors. This paper will attempt to give insight into the specific role of (both national as well as international) NGOs as they touch the international diplomatic realm. The paper also seeks to analyse whether this makes a significant difference for both processes and machinery of diplomacy as the particular adopted patterns, techniques and institutions of interaction and communication in the infrastructure of the international arena. While doing so, we will necessarily touch some controversial views that might claim different truths regarding the same facts that we are about to discuss. Although this is not (yet) the place to engage any deeper conceptual theoretical analysis, it is worthwhile to note shortly, that the state-centric approach of the realist school of thought will inevitably assign other - less important - impacts to the activities of NGOs than the pluralistic understanding of our modern political system, and will prescribe other modi to deal with activities of civil society groups. The foundation for these different biases regarding the importance of NGOs undoubtedly lies within the different theoretical premises into which both poles of thinkers venture. While wishing to allow the reader to explore some evidence that we have gathered, we will leave any further conclusions for a later moment. [...]

Seminar paper from the year 2005 in the subject Law - Comparative Legal Systems, Comparative Law, grade: Merit 68 %, Coventry University (Coventry Business School), course: University Course: War, Law and Morality, language: English, abstract: Much water has swirled around the rocks of the "e;war on terrorism"e; in recent academic literature. Both political and strategic as well as legal analysts have delineated their views on how best the world community should tackle the phenomenon of terrorism. The clash of competing demands of civil liberties, international law and domestic security and whether or not violent responses to violence render both sides morally indistinguishable are only some of the difficult questions that the current debate is facing. It is often said, that the first casualty in "e;war"e; is the truth, and the second is law. While, in the present conflict, it might be an exaggeration to declare thatsilent leges inter arma,the law has certainly been used as an instrument by many in the debate, and its clarity has become increasingly obfuscated in the process.1The discussions about the anti-terrorism-laws in the British House of Commons in the first months of 2005 are, again, highlighting the fact that very different views can be held as to how the laws, the government and the society should retort to terrorist threats. Such discussions, quite clearly, do not only occur in the domestic sphere but also on the international echelon. The numerous recent Security Council Resolutions issued during the debate revolving around terrorism are a case in point. In this short paper we wish to firstly outline a few issues of a more general nature, drawing attention to some terminological particularities of the war on terrorism as well as some engaging moral aspects of the debate. Secondly, and being the main part of this paper, we will attempt to depict and analyse some of the aspects of both the jus ad bellum and the jus in bello in order to shed some light on the sometimes unclear legal situation regarding anti-terror measures. Methodologically, we will approach the core answer to the essay-question from two angles. One will consist of an investigation into selected prominent regulations and concepts of international law. The second will comprise the analysis of contemporary world experiences that might reflect a shift in the perception of international law on an international level. Certainly, we should keep in mind that we ought to avoid the temptation of muddying the water of clear analysis by deducing general insights from single cases.3However, in order to fully appreciate the impact of international law, the application to specific practical cases is indispensable.

Document from the year 2002 in the subject Law - Comparative Legal Systems, Comparative Law, grade: keine, , course: Internship with the International UN Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, language: English, abstract: I was on my way to a small village in the outskirts of down-town Kigali, where a traditional "e;Gacaca trial"e;, which has been introduced in every small conglomeration of the country, was taking place that day, in an attempt to deal with the almost 120.000 people who are still being held in prison in the aftermath of the genocide (at 2002). About a hundred meters down the road there was an open meadow on which a big, burned remains of a house was standing. In the courtyard of this house there were chairs, benches, tables as well as a big plan of the UN Refugee Organisation (UNHCR) that was providing a shade. At this time only a group of elderly men who made up part of the 19 traditional judges had arrived at the scene. I followed the three hour process itself with the help of a translator and friend, Emmanuel, a young Rwandan journalist. As the approximately 250 village inhabitants were taking leave at the end of the session, I was also thinking of parting, but at this moment one of the traditional judges, a rather friendly, tall and lean gentleman of about 45, came over to me. We took seats alone, as he spoke very good English and we did not need a translator, on a nearby bench a bit removed from the villagers who were still standing all around the place. In the meantime Emmanuel had caught company of an old friend, with whom he stood around the dilapidating door frames, just a stone throw away from us.