Nexus Magazine 'Winter Edition' 2015

no

10 2015 Winter

THE TENUOUS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRIVACY LAW AND TECHNOLOGY / 21

OPINION: 1

SYRIZA GOV’T / 6

EXCHANGE: TAIPEI & BEIJING / 10

ALUMNI:

NEW YORK & LONDON / 36

DEBATE:

CHARLIE HEBDO / 41

COLOPHON NEXUS MAGAZINE WINTER 2014 / 2015 Date of Publication 1 April 2015 Nexus Nexus Student Association nexus@rug.nl Nexus Magazine Committee 2014-2015 Bart van der Geest (Editor in Chief) Ana Arnaoutoglou-Amza (Secretary) Nathalie Bienfait Ivonna Beches Christian Skrivervik nexusmagazine.law@gmail.com Founder Nexus Magazine Gemma Torras Vives Graphic Design Bart van der Geest Christian Skrivervik Cover Photo Saba Tariq Logo RE_Oslo Authors Angelina Winter / Ebru Akgun / Christian Hoerter / Elena Alexandra Radu / Theo Verdi / Dorit Hornung / Johanna Talecker / Claudia Skibniewski / Josefien Vreeken / Jamie Beales Brown / Alexandra Lily Kather / Takudzwa Mutezo / Nathalie Bienfait / Ana Arnaoutoglou-Amza / Ivonna Beches / Jannis Tzouros / Bart van der Geest Special Thanks To Saba Tariq

TABLE OF CONTENTS: 3 4 6 10 18 20 24 26 28 30 33 36 41 46 49 52 54

Letter from the Magazine Committee Editor’s Note / Blog: Post-it Paranoia Is The Syriza Government Actually Winning Battles?

Exchange in Asia: Taipei & Beijing Hacktivism: A Force for Good or Cyber-Terrorism?

The Tenuous Relationship Between Privacy Law And Technology Idenitity Theft Crime: US v EU Short-story: The Uprising 3D Printing: Legal and IP Issues Innovative Justice: A Hipster Talent?

Pulling The Justice System Into The Modern Age Life After Groningen Debate: Charlie Hebdo Attacks King Abdullah - A Reformer?

US / Cuba Relations: The End of Isolation TED Talks: The Coming Crisis in Antibiotics Bibliography

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

2

LETTER from the Magazine Committee Dear readers, We hereby present you our second issue of the year and we are glad to share this publication with all Nexus members and others who are interested in our work.

We strive to make this magazine a place to acquire knowledge, and be a place for open discussion on subjects that YOU are interested in. Our mission is to produce articles that matter to you, and our goal is to improve and practice communication skills, creative thinking, career development, organizational skills and leadership. Take initiative and join our legal community!

What makes Nexus Student Association most interesting is the diversity of people and ideas. Therefore, we encourage your contribution, opinion and ideas to the development of this magazine. This project is from and for all students!

We hope that you will enjoy this second issue of the academic year 2014 - 2015, and we look forward to receiving your input!

- Nexus Magazine Committee 2014 - 2015

(

The Nexus Magazine Committee independently obtained and organized the content of this magazine and is responsible for the publication of the Nexus Magazine. The opinions and ideas expressed by authors of articles in this magazine are solely the opinions and ideas of those authors and ( do not necessarily represent the opinions and ideas of this magazine or its editors or publishers.

PHOTO: SABA TARIQ / LEFT TO RIGHT: CHRISTIAN SKRIVERVIK / NATHALIE BIENFAIT / BART VAN DER GEEST IVONNA BECHES / ANA ARNAOUTOGLOU-AMZA

3

)

TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION & THE LAW exams are becoming digitised and professors are finding new ways to interact with their students by using technology. When you think of it, new technologies have had a big impact on life at university, for both students and professors alike.

Also in the field of law, technology is finally starting to break through. In this edition, our writers and contributors have been looking at different ways in which new technologies are influencing, innovating, challenging and shaping the laws around us. Some of the topics include: Innovating the justice system in and outside of the courtrooms (Ivonna Beches & Claudia Skibniewski), the ethics of hacktivism, 3D printing and its effects on intellectual property laws, identity theft: comparing the EU and US approaches (Elena Alexandra Radu), the relationship between privacy law and technology (Ivonna Beches), webcam paranoia (Josefien Vreeken) and a short story on mind control (Ana Arnaoutoglou-Amza).

BART VAN DER GEEST / LLB 2

TE!!!

O N 'S R O EDIT It is with great pleasure that I present to you the theme of this edition - namely: Technology, Innovation and the Law. Technology has become an integral part of our lives: whether we use it to socialise, work, study for exams, pay the bills, shop or entertain ourselves, there are many ways in which we benefit from technology on a daily basis.

When it comes to education, studying used to be a process of simply sitting down in a library with as many books from your reading list as you could get your hands on. While some students still prefer this traditional method of studying, a simple search on the internet for your chosen study topic is less time consuming, can produce inspiration and provides you access to a vast number of resources. In the lecture hall, laptops, tablets and smartphones are, to a certain extent, replacing notepads and textbooks,

To keep up with the latest trends and news at our university, we have introduced the blog feature. In this edition, Josefien discusses why students stick post-its in front of their webcams and whether this method actually helps. In addition, as third years have come back from their exchange periods abroad, we have asked several students to write about their experiences in Asia and we hope this will provide a little bit of insight for students going on exchange in the future.

As a final note, I cannot stress enough how thankful the magazine committee is for all of the people who have contributed in this year’s second edition. Over the past two years, it has really been a great experience seeing the Nexus Magazine grow and hopefully we’ll be able to print the magazine in the near future.

This magazine has been conceived for you, yes YOU! Therefore we rely on your feedback and comments in order to keep producing the magazines that you want to read.

Bart van der Geest (Editor-In-Chief)

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

4

BLOG POST-IT PARANOIA: The Piece of Paper Over Your Webcam

JOSEFIEN VREEKEN / LLB 2 TEXT: JOSEFIEN VREEKEN

As a student, you always have to keep up with the lecture hall trends: the iPhones, Macbooks, tablets, old school pen and paper, recording devices, etc. The latest trend is now the post-it. Not because it helps you remember your groceries or functions as a tab in your law book to mark the important articles, but because it can protect you. It can protect your privacy. A small piece of paper placed over your webcam can protect you from the outer world.

Why have students begun covering their webcams with a small piece of paper? It might have something to do with the abundance of tales that confirm the right to be paranoid; from foreign governments, to the creepy teenager boy-next-door recording every move your webcam could possibly capture.

Who would want to see that? I have my laptop open at least five hours a day. To write lecture notes, watch series, roam around the internet, and watch ‘baby afraid of their own shadow’ clips with my roommates. There’s nothing really interesting to see. It seems useless and tiring to spy on a person who is staring, expressionless, at their screen day in, day out.

Yet disturbingly, there are people out there who have the patience to wait for a compromising pose.

It is shockingly easy is to hack into someone’s webcam. Even for a semi-technophobe, it is not that hard. For example, using a program called Remote Administration Tools, or RATs, which are fairly easy to acquire and use, any average bored hacker could take control of a computer including a webcam.

Compromising a computer is a fairly simple task.

5

Typically, you open a sketchy torrent file that, for example, promises the newest Suits episode. The torrent file sneaks in one of these RATs, which installs onto your computer, silently. Another common option is placing an invisible agreement button underneath a regular button. When you watch that cute video online, and hit play, the action not only lets you play the video but also makes you unknowingly consent to an intrusion. There are many more options to hack silently into a computer. Once a hacker has entered your technological property, it is extremely easy for them to turn off the light of your webcam and watch your every move.

The problem with the post-it however, is that it still allows hackers to steal your data without you noticing, then cover their tracks nice and neatly. The postit does not protect your data or your passwords. It does however go some way to guarding your physical appearance, thus ensuring that you are safe from the cybercrimes relating to being filmed. Even in an age of technology, it is still the old-school paper that is the most effective method of protecting yourself.

OPINION

TEXT: EBRU AKGUN / PHOTO: PETROS GIANNAKOURIS/AP

IS THE SYRIZA GOVERNMENT ACTUALLY WINNING BATTLES? The contents of this article may not cover relevant events that occurred following the date of its conception (27.02.2015).

The ancient Greeks invented the word ‘chaos’ to define the state of “complete disorder and confusion,” a word that can be used to describe the situation previous Greek governments have put the Eurozone in. On January 25 of this year, Greece started a new chapter: a left-wing party got elected with a 36% majority. The new party is considered to be anti-establishment and the first anti-austerity party in the Hellenic Republic; it was originally founded as a coalition of left-wing and radical left parties in 2004.

The Syriza government was promised less strict sanctions from the European Union (EU) and five weeks into his new position, the new Prime Minister Alexis

Tsipras appears to have kept his word by buying his government more “breathing space.” This, however, is a very optimistic way of reflecting on what has actually happened.

Since the end of 2009, Greece has been suffering financially. The “troika programme” that was introduced in order to help Greece recover from the crisis did not achieve the desired outcome. The Union’s biggest nightmare became the devaluation of the Euro, which made the Greeks even poorer. What Tsipras did was create a “new” agreement for their bailout with the EU. Greece had to come up with its own list of reforms by February 23 2015 in order to pay its debts to the Union. However, what Greece simply wanted was to erase its debt like Germany did in 1953, because part of the Federal Republic of NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

6

Germany’s debt was forgiven after the Second World War. Due to the fact that Germany has had immense growth since the debt was written off, Greece demanded Germany pay this debt as well. The Eurozone made it very clear that this was not an option. By the 23rd the Greek government was to suggest reforms to tackle tax evasion, but in reality it was forced to adhere to many of the austerity demands of the original bailout. As part of the deal, Greece agreed not to take any unilateral actions to threaten financial stability, which meant that ultimately, the creditors have the final say. How does that amount to “winning a battle”, especially if we keep in mind that Germany has the veto power?

As the Greek minister of finance Yanis Varoufakis said at a press conference on February 16, the deadline for a new Greek plan with ‘credible measures’ was very short to come up. The only way to move on is if both sides compromise, in this case Greece versus the member states that demand the debt to be paid. Obviously Greece needs to make compromises and the minister of finance agrees as long as there is flexibility from fiscal targets and some flexibility in choosing which reforms they can make; a new consensus can be achieved. This does not mean that Tsipras is meeting his campaign targets. The Eurozone, especially Germany, has rightfully made it clear that they will not settle for less. After all, if the debt is forgiven, it is the taxpayers of the rest of the Eurozone countries that must pay it off, and despite the clear separation between the rich northern countries and the financially “problematic” countries, Spain, Portugal, Cyprus and Ireland have made it very clear that Greece is to stay in the programme and that debt relief is not an option. Moreover, the result of this crisis is very important for Euro-sceptic parties within the Union according to Varoufakis, as it will prove the importance of negotiations.

“It is absurd to expect Greece to sell its national properties and treasures off at fire sale prices in the middle of a deflationary crisis.”

The Eurozone members ratified the extension for the series of Greek government reforms on 7

EBRU AKGUN / LLB 3

January 27. In this scenario, Germany’s approval was regarded as the dominant one; however, there was not much choice in passing the decision, as a Eurozone breakup would be more expensive than the bailouts. The German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble explained that the new agreement between the Eurozone and Greece is not about providing new billions to Greece, but to grant extra time to successfully complete their programme by April 2015. In the meantime Greece also has to repay €2 billion to the International Monetary Fund in March and €6.7 billion to the European Central Bank (ECB) in July.

Greece had to impose austerity measures in return for a bailout. In his campaign, Tsipras claimed that this would come to an end. Yet, at the end of the day, the outcome will not change; Greece will get a bit more flexibility on fiscal measures, but will still have to pay the entirety of the debt, only with measures approved by the creditors (ironically, even Varoufakis did not know what “some flexibility” entailed after the meeting on February 16). The Syriza government hopes to reduce burden by swapping part of its debts for bonds and make payments once the Greek economy actually grows, since the current debt is 175% of its Gross Domestic Product. Unfortunately, the Eurozone countries do not approve of this plan and claim that this new democratic mandate does not change anything. On the one hand, Greece should pay the entire debt and should stick to its obligations;

on the other, there are some facts that should not go unnoticed either. The debt is unsustainable and it is not shrinking; in fact, it has worsened over the troika programme. It is absurd to expect Greece to sell its national properties and treasures off at fire sale prices in the middle of a deflationary crisis. It is only fair to expect Greece to stick to its obligations, yet the Union needs to calm down about governmental change. Other countries change their policies due to new governments all the time. The Greek economy needs time and space to recover. Fortunately, this time and space have been awarded to the Greek government as a result of the new negotiations.

There have also been rumours of Greece intending to exit the Eurozone if their demands are not granted – a potential ‘Grexit’. However, both the Union and Greece know how much they need each other and have emphasized that this is not their intention.

Let’s take a look at what could happen if this Grexit did occur. Firstly, Greece would have to introduce a non-euro currency, as its supply from the ECB would be cut off. Meanwhile the economy would have to continue turning without influencing its momentum.

All banks would have to be closed and a new currency would have to be printed (a potential return of Drachma), which would take a lot of time. Secondly, wages and prices would have to be changed and adjusted to the new currency. Thirdly, capital control would need to be introduced, banning people from moving their money out while switching currency.

“At this point, the Union needs to decide how integrated it actually wants to be.”

The non-euro currency would probably start off at the same value as the Euro, but would, due to free trade, most likely devaluate compared to the Euro.

However, in reality, if this Grexit would occur, there would be a rush of money out of the country, leading to a long recession, severe inflation and further falls in standards of living. On the one hand, Greek exports and holidays in Greece would be relatively cheaper. On the other, imports would be relatively expensive in return. In the long-run, the economy itself could benefit from the comparative exchange rate and stabilize; however, this devaluation cannot solve underlying problems of Greece such as poor tax collection, leading to a struggle in controlling government spending.

The ECB claims to have minimized the potential damages and that even if this Grexit occurred, it is prepared for the consequences; yet some outcomes are inevitable. Other struggling Eurozone countries would most likely transfer their money to economically stronger countries, such as Germany, sparking a new crisis within the zone, which could ultimately turn into a global crisis like in 2008.

The change in currency would also lead to legal implications. Some contracts would be converted to a new currency, yet other foreign law would remain in Euros. Many contracts could end up in legal disputes over whether they should be converted or not.

Due to the devaluation, companies who still owe big debts in Euros to foreign lenders would be unable to repay them. The greater fear is that it could cause bankruptcy for numerous businesses, causing great loss for foreign lenders. In a broader perspective, the Eurozone will offer more instability than it already does. The fear caused by the instability would result in a reduction of investment and consumption by the people, leading to a greater recession. Finally, the Euro would devaluate, just like the non-euro currency in Greece, meaning the EU would be more competitive in its exports, but imports from the rest of the world would be relatively expensive. If Greece were to exit the zone, other countries where anti-euro groups are popular could follow this pattern. In Spain for example, left-wing, anti-austerity party ‘Podemos’ has already gained ground and Portugal is somewhat following this pattern. The Eurozone cannot possibly survive the crisis if all unstable countries were to leave the zone. On a further note, the increase of anti-euro perspectives will create tension within the Union with regards to decision-making, especially matters that require unanimity.

Regardless of what Greece or the other member states want, neither an exit nor expulsion from the Economic and Monetary Union without a parallel withdrawal from the Union itself is legally possible, as the ECB already announced in 2009. Additionally, there is no legal basis for Greece to be forced out of the zone either. If Greece wants to leave the Eurozone, it has to withdraw from the Union in accordance with Art. 50 of the Treaty of the European Union. Leaving the EMU and staying in the Union is not an option.

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

8

The Eurozone needs to become stronger in a political sense, in order to keep the Union together as much as possible. The success of the zone cannot simply depend on the economic situation. Whenever there are no economic problems, everything appears to be fine, but as soon as there is an economic instability, the Union turns to chaos. One must not forget that the accession to the EU is a political matter, meaning new political dialogue is necessary in order to solve an economic crisis as such. The Union is clearly going through an existential crisis and the word “solidarity” is being thrown around, but not for its actual meaning. This so-called “solidarity” does not extend too far between member states. At this point, the Union needs to decide how integrated it actually wants to be. Varoufakis is right in claiming that this is a “European problem” and not merely a “Greek problem.” After all, Greece is not the only country that is struggling with austerity measures.

In conclusion, Tsipras’ promises in scrapping away harsh austerity measures are rather irrational and so are the rumours of Greece exiting the Eurozone.

However, it appears that the Syriza government will be the “rebellious” member state for the time being and will cause numerous frictions within the Union. The EU sanctions on Russia with regards to Crimea and the reverse sanctions on the EU have hit Greek exports hard, which is why Greece has already announced that it will vote against any extension of the embargo, in contrast to most of the member states. Further disagreements exist on matters concerning Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo and the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. This means that Greece might act as a barrier in matters that require unanimity yet might be isolated in matters that require qualified majority. The compromise made on the flexibility of the Greek list of reforms is definitely necessary, but it’s not enough to prevent the tension that awaits the European Union. One way or another, Greece will have to pay its debts, most likely by agreeing on the exact terms by April 2015.

1

2

3

PHOTO 1: REUTERS/ KOSTAS TSIRONIS PHOTO 2: REUTERS PHOTO 3: GIANNIS PAPANIKOS PHOTO 4: REUTERS/ YANNIS BEHRAKIS

9

4

EXCHANGE IN ASIA TAIPEI & BEIJING

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

10

“WHAT THE HELL DO YOU WANT IN CHINA?”

TEXT & PHOTO: DORIT HORNUNG

During my exchange, I studied at the China University of Political Science and Law (CUPL) in Beijing, which is said to be one of the best law schools in China. After this experience, I can truly say that China is crazy. I spent 6 months in this gigantic country – first travelling, then studying – and still, I only saw a very small fraction of what China is really about. Nevertheless, it was probably the most exciting and enriching time of my life as well as the biggest challenge I could ever have imagined. When I first arrived at the Beijing airport in the beginning of September, my first impression was astonishing: It was still very warm, I was surrounded by hundreds of Chinese people and a lot of smog, and nobody spoke any English. Taxi drivers did not really understand where I wanted to go and the prices seemed to be so low that I did not understand that I was actually completely ripped off. In addition to this, Beijing has over 20 million inhabitants, which was a little bit more than what I was accustomed to in Groningen. This experience and the fact that I have never been outside of Europe before are the reasons why I eventually came to understand what the term “culture shock” really means.

ments were lost in the mail so we needed to enter the country with a tourist visa, which was unexpectedly troublesome. After we managed to cross the Chinese border, we then had to extend the visa and eventually transform it into a residence permit, which cost us a lot of time, money and nerves . The second challenge awaited us at the Beijing airport – finding our university. Taxi drivers in Beijing can neither speak nor read English. Due to the fact that our Chinese study advisor was very new, she forgot to give us the address in Chinese and, even though I am good at pantomime, this task was definitely beyond my capabilities. However, when we eventually arrived at the university, our study advisor and us were equally surprised and happy to finally meet each other in person, and she totally made up for the troubles caused. Looking back, I can say that I am very glad for this experience because I learned the first important lesson in China: “Don’t panic, everything will be okay!” So no matter what happened or what went wrong, I never panicked again because in the end I knew it would be alright – and that held true to end. So after a very troublesome start, it only became better and better.

My First Impression The exchange between CUPL and the University of Groningen was conducted for the first time, which was the reason why the overall organisation was still very chaotic. Therefore, I obviously felt like the luckiest person on earth when I found out that another student, in fact, a very good friend from our program would accompany me on my journey. Our first challenge was to enter the country. As a prospective student you need to apply for a student visa in your home country, which is only possible with the necessary documents that are produced by the foreign university. Unfortunately, these highly official docu-

Living in China China is a different world. It is nothing like Europe and it will definitely blow your mind. Every city seems to have its own kind of people, landscape, traditions and food. Beijing is, in my view, one of the most cultural and non-Western cities of China, despite being the political capital; I immediately fell in love with it as every district is different and has its very own charm. While Haidian is full of universities, Wudaokou is the student district with many foreigners, nice restaurants and bars, Sanlitun the shopping mile and destination of the high society and party animals, and Chaoyang the central busi

11

ness district. And going by subway is only 0,25 Euro per ride! However, the best part is the Great Wall.

There are many different parts and even though I went there five times already, I would always go back.

(But don’t tell the Chinese that it is not only a Great Wall, but also a great hostel!)

ment and costs only 0,50 Euro per visit. In addition to this, there are also billiard tables, ping-pong tables and badminton fields, which provided a great source of entertainment, especially after a couple of beers.

Due to the fact that the dormitory is not equipped with a kitchen, lunch and dinner always provides lots of opportunities to meet people and socialize.

The campus itself has two big canteens, of which one is Muslim and one Chinese. The food is incredibly cheap and it was hard to pay more than 1,50 Euro per meal; nevertheless, the bigger challenge was to get used to Chinese food. My recommendation: Just don’t go for the chicken feet and the hundred-year eggs and you will probably be fine! In case you do not like any of the food served in the canteen (nobody will judge you), there are also many restaurants around the corner for the same price.

Housing and Facilities During my studies, I lived in a dormitory on the graduate campus in Haidian District. Exchange students enjoy certain privileges, for instance, they only have to share a room with one other person and pay 8 Euro a month, while Chinese students have to live together with up to 7 other graduates for the same price. Even though I was lucky, as my roommate moved out after two weeks, everyone else who shared a room was quite happy and no one had any complaints. Nevertheless, it would be easy to switch rooms if you were really unsatisfied with your roommate. Furthermore, the extra costs for electricity, internet and using the showers did not account to more than 2 Euro a month. Another nice feature of the dormitory is the gym, which is located in the base-

Language and People Studying at CUPL or “Zhong Guo Zheng Fa Da Xue” At this point I would like to tell you something about the Chinese people and their culture. Even though Chinese people are rather reluctant to speak to foreigners at first, you will see that they are the friendliest and most caring people as soon as you get to know them. In addition to this, it is crucial to learn at least the most basic Chinese skills. Therefore, the second lesson is: Be able to say the name of your university in Chinese, no matter how drunk you are!

Also, it is very useful to have some Chinese bargaining skills as there are no fixed prices anywhere in Beijing. From my own experience I can tell that as soon as you speak some Chinese, the locals will open up to you and be incredibly interested in where you are

DORIT HORNUNG / LLB 3

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

12

from and what you are doing. You should also keep in mind that going to China is not a typical Erasmus exchange, but it is a cultural and personal challenge.

Foreign exchange students are rare and there are no organized events for them. However, we were offered to give some German lessons, which enabled us to meet many nice and inspiring Chinese graduate students and due to the fact that everyone lives in one building, we eventually got to know everyone very fast.

Studying at CUPL or “Zhong Guo Zheng Fa Da Xue” Studying in China was not as fruitful and inspiring as I had expected. Each lecture is between three and four hours long and 100% attendance is expected (otherwise it will be reflected in your final grade).

Additionally, the course requirements are slightly questionable as you are supposed to write a paper for every course about a topic, which has NOT been discussed in class. Therefore, many people wisely used the lectures to finish their master applications, watch the latest movie or simply take a little nap. However, some courses were also very interesting like “Human Rights Law”, “Foreign Investment Law” and “Chinese Law and Society”. You can choose from a great variety of courses and you have to take at least 5 courses to obtain the necessary credits.

“What the hell do you want in China?”

This was the most frequently asked question throughout my preparations for China, during my stay and even now, and my answer will probably always be the same: “I really don’t know”. Looking back, I am still unable to tell exactly what it is about

13

China that eventually made me love it. It is a country you cannot grasp by reading about it or simply looking at nice pictures. You have to go there and experience it first-hand. Even though China challenged me a lot, I can proudly say that it was the most interesting, inspiring and life-changing experience of my life.

Originally, I planned to go to Australia, so when I got the news of being accepted in China instead, I was not really sure whether to be crazily happy or really, really sad. In the end, it turned out to be the best thing that could have happened to me as I opened up a lot, learned Chinese, got some of the best Chinese friends you can imagine and fell in love with a culture I hardly knew existed.

JOHANNA TALECKER / LLB 3

TAIWAN

Come and join me for an exchange semester in Taipei … where scooters are countless and foreigners are scarce.

When my spot in Taipei was confirmed last year, I was thrilled. However, since it was the first year that law students were being sent to the National Taiwan University, I also had no idea what I had signed up for. Hence, this report should ideally serve as a guide for everybody considering choosing Taiwan as an exchange destination in the future or everybody who is interested in visiting Taipei anytime soon.

body else should obtain an easy card: It is cheaper and makes your life significantly less troublesome if you do not like to carry around coins. In addition, cabs are widely available. The climate is subtropical, which means that summers are hot and humid. There are two beaches close to Taipei, Baishawan and Fulong, and you should definitely visit them to escape the heat in the city. From October to early December the climate will be mild with temperatures around 20°C. The winter feels quite cold because there are no heaters in the dorms. Hence, it can be a smart investment to buy a small heater for those months.

What do you sign up for?

You sign up for roughly five months in Taipei, due to a 17 weeks long semester with midterms and finals.

Exchange students are assured on-campus accommodation, which is cheap, convenient and decent. You will live in a big condominium with both local and foreign students and have a private room with your own bathroom. I arrived one week before classes started and already met many people in the dorms at that time, so it is really easy to socialize. Before you arrive, you should look for the facebook group of exchange students at NTU, as I met many students by just attending some exchange meetings.

In addition, Taipei offers a great nightlife with many different clubs, so it will probably take a while until going out in Taipei will bore you. Notably, Taiwanese people, especially women, really like to dress up when they go out. Therefore, bring your fancy clothes that you never use in Groningen – in Taipei you will need them in order to blend in!

Furthermore, the central location of Taiwan enables you to travel to many Asian countries. I visited Hong Kong, Thailand and Japan during the semester. Especially Japan is something you really should not miss if you are already in the area. There are direct flights from Taipei to Osaka, from which you reach Kyoto by train in approximately 40 minutes.

What is Taipei like?

Taipei is relatively calm for being a capital city with more than two million inhabitants and a nice city to live in. The metro system is modern and bilingual (as opposed to the bus system) and enables one to get around the city quickly. Exchange students will be able to use their student ID as a metro card, every-

Taipei itself is not a touristy place at all, which I enjoyed very much. Most tourists come from China or Japan and I had the feeling that the Western people in Taipei were mainly exchange students. Moreover, there is a lot of sightseeing to do – Taipei is definitely worth the visit!

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

14

THE ISLAND OF BUBBLE TEA, PINEAPPLE CAKE AND WOODEN POSTCARDS. TEXT & PHOTO: JOHANNA TALECKER

Life at the National Taiwan University The available courses taught in English will mainly depend on the visiting professors, which in my case were all Americans. Therefore, I predominantly studied US related topics. However, this could be totally different for your exchange. Notably, I took a course on International Disability Rights Law taught by a visiting professor from Harvard, which was excellent.

Hence, depending on which year you go, you can be very lucky with the available courses… or not.

What to eat?

Cheap and delicious food is available in almost every street, especially on the great night markets and the next beef noodles are always just a hop away. Pork dumplings, fish balls, fried squid: The Taiwanese love to snack and that is what you should do, too. Taiwanese tea is also exquisite and famous. Be sure to try Alishan Oolong Tea. Mandarin? Really?

I recommend choosing Taipei as an exchange destination to everyone who is interested in a mix of Chinese, Japanese and Western culture and willing to learn at least a few words of Mandarin before going or while abroad. Notably, the language skills are not a necessity in the sense that you will not survive without them. Rather, being able to communicate with locals will just allow you to actually grasp Taiwanese culture and make your whole experience more rewarding. Furthermore, a lot of useful information is only available in Mandarin and you will miss out on many things if you can only rely on information available in English. NTU offers Chinese courses free 15

of charge, which I would advise you to take. If you think Mandarin will be too hard for you to learn: That’s okay, but while abroad you should preferably have friends that know more Mandarin than you do…

In a nutshell: My semester abroad has been a great experience.

Taiwanese people are very kind and helpful. Besides, Taipei is a really cool city that is quite unaffected from the negative side effects of global tourism (or do you know anybody who has been there?). Sometimes the language barrier was very frustrating for me, but with a little effort and patience I usually found my way around. Furthermore, I have learned a lot about Asian cultures in the last months, which is something I would not want to miss. Luckily, I can take this knowledge with me. Like Albert Einstein put it: ‘The mind that opens to a new idea never returns to its original size.’

VISIT:

1. Taipei 101 2. Chiang Kai-shek Memorial 3. Maokong Gondola 4. Guandu Temple (this is not one of the classics, but it is my favorite temple in Taipei) 5. Elephant Mountain (metro station Xiangshan) 6. Shilin Nightmarket (just go once for the experience, but eat at smaller ones, e.g. around Taipower Building) 7. Wistaria Tea House 8. Din Tai Fung 9. Jiufen (a small town up in the mountains)

TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION & THE LAW

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

16

HACKTIVISM:

A FORCE FOR GOOD OR CYBER-TERRORISM? / 18

PRIVACY:

THE TENUOUS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRIVACY LAW AND TECHNOLOGY / 20

IDENTITY THEFT CRIME:

UNITED STATES v EUROPEAN UNION / 24

SHORT STORY:

THE UPRISING / 26

3D PRINTING:

LEGAL AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ISSUES / 28

INNOVATING JUSTICE: A HIPSTER TALENT? / 30

COURT INNOVATION:

PULLING THE JUSTICE SYSTEM INTO THE MODERN AGE: COURTS AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT / 33

17

OPINION

TEXT: BART VAN DER GEEST / PHOTO: ESTHER VARGAS

HACKTIVISM: A FORCE FOR GOOD OR CYBER-TERRORISM? “We are Anonymous. We are legion. We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us.”

Hacktivism, a combination of ‘hacker’ and ‘activism’ that was first coined in 1995 by a hacker collective named The Cult of the Dead Cow, is a word used to describe people who use technologic hacking to effect social change. Their activities span many political ideals and issues but usually their motives brew down to defending free speech, human rights and freedom of information on the internet. Although they can be seen as a force for good by supporting popular movements in opposing powerful corporations and oppressive governments, groups such as Anonymous can be dangerous for society and even for themselves, as there are no forces capable of setting limits to their actions. Should hacktivism be considered as a force for good or cyber-terrorism?

Praised or condemned, hacktivist group ‘Anonymous’ took the world by surprise when in 2008 it launched a YouTube video declaring war on the Church of Scientology, an organization notorious for its censorship of free speech and freedom of infor-

mation. What started out as a sustained campaign of ‘denial of service’ (DDoS) attacks (the process by which you bombard computers that run the target’s website with more traffic than they can handle) and telephone pranks eventually culminated to a massive physical protest, simultaneously at various locations around the world, with many demonstrators wearing Guy Fawkes masks that would later become iconic symbols of the movement. Anonymous had given a whole new definition to the word ‘hacktivism’ and saw here, with the defeat of the Church, the opportunity to provide large-scale social change and to act, as such, like a guardian of the web. It has since involved itself in a variety of conflicts, including: WikiLeaks, the Westboro Baptist Church, the Arab Spring and Charlie Hebdo. On March 30, it threatened Israel with an ‘electronic holocaust’ in response ‘to crimes in the Palestinian territories’.

Although Anonymous is generally capable of noble (if illegal) gestures, I do not always agree with some NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

18

of its actions. For example, on December 2010, Anonymous knocked down the websites of the credit card giants Mastercard, Paypal and Visa and briefly slowed web traffic to Paypal by directing massive amounts of traffic to the website because these companies turned down their support for whistle-blowing site WikiLeaks. Although this did not cause any direct physical harm, the attacks were disruptive, allegedly causing these companies losses in the region of $5.3 million. There is nothing wrong with people expressing their disapproval of companies that have dumped WikiLeaks by stopping doing business with them, but to use the internet to disrupt commercial services is a cause that raises concerns.

Some argue that DDoS attacks are a legitimate expression of dissent, equivalent to a mass sit-in or a mob milling around the building, making entry and exit impossible. This form of civil disobedience is allowed in many democratic societies, who even deploy the forces of law and order to protect them. One of the major differences, however, is that the “Low Orbit Ion Canon” software used for the attacks allows an infinite number of anonymous users to pummel the sites with traffic for an unlimited amount of time and there are no rules governing this form of online protest. The act itself might be harmless, but it becomes harmful when multiplied.

Arguably, the hacktivists’ successful #OpTurkey and #OpEgypt campaigns to fight internet censorship during the Arab Spring merit some reflection.

Groups of Anons were able to assist popular movements in disabling tools of suppression and in opening up channels of communication closed by ruling governments, without imposing its own agenda or ideals upon popular struggle. In Egypt for example, it worked hard to ensure that the footage of protestors clashing with aggressive government forces reached audiences outside the country. It collaborated with Google and Twitter to produce a “Speak2Tweet” service allowing anyone, inside or outside Egypt to leave a message on certain telephone lines, which would then be immediately placed on Twitter. The stated motive behind this service was: “We hope this will go some way to helping people in Egypt stay connected at this very difficult time.” Although their role was not pivotal in in the overthrow of the governments, it was certainly significant.

These operations are a good example of the fact that, because of its diverse and diffuse nature, no 19

BART VAN DER GEEST / LLB 2

single group or culture seems to control Anonymous, allowing it to adapt, evolve, and discard failed strategies. It is a leaderless collective of hackers and activists who come together in response of perceived injustices, who then work simultaneously until the operation is over. In the words of @YourAnonCentral, speaking to journalist Max Freeman, Anonymous is “an ideology in its own way that manifests itself as a group”. This is at the same time the organization’s strength and weakness, because it means hackers can do things under the banner of Anonymous that might not be as noble and ethical as the Arab Spring and WikiLeaks campaigns. For example, a spin-off group named LulzSec decided that Anonymous had become too serious and went on what they termed ’50 days of Lulz’, where they hacked a wide range of internet sites just for laughs.

Anonymous’ multifaceted nature suggests that there are two ends to the spectrum, which is why it is too simple and easy to condemn or praise Anonymous outright. Assessing whether hacktivism is good or bad ultimately depends on your own perspective.

Like most weapons, hacking can be used for good or bad, to defend freedom or attack it. Though computer hackers aren’t an especially earnest bunch, their dedication to the idea that information on the Internet should be free is at least undisputable and admirable. I do however think that a powerful group such as Anonymous - where for every Anon that is detained by the police there could be a hundred others to take their place – should not seek to take control of society and impose its own agenda. As long as Anonymous stays anonymous and solely acts to protect our fundamental freedoms, it can achieve great things.

OPINION

THE TENUOUS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TECHNOLOGY & PRIVACY LAW. “IF YOU WANT TO KEEP A SECRET YOU MUST ALSO HIDE IT FROM YOURSELF”

TEXT: IVONNA BECHES / PHOTO: IRENEOGRIZEK.COM

It is perhaps fitting, yet also simple, and incredibly predictable to title this article with a quote from Orwell’s 1984. It serves little purpose beyond attempting to make light of the apparently rampant paranoia that surrounds any discussions regarding privacy on the internet or in relation to technology more generally. Perhaps the fear is misguided, and we are all exaggerating; but when was the last time you actually read the terms of service of any of the websites you frequent?

Failing that, are you aware of how your right to privacy is enshrined in European law?

Do you know how much information applications that sync up with your social media profiles actually extract from you, in comparison with how much they are theoretically allowed to?

Most importantly however, if you did know, would you stop using the technology which may or may not infringe on your private life without your consent, on a daily basis?

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

20

2

Privacy Policies: What are you consenting to?

Most recently, Samsung has come under fire regarding the respect of privacy after the company warned owners of net-connected Samsung Smart TVs that the voice activation feature may allow their television sets to ‘listen’ to what they said and may share the information with third parties.

The warning was encompassed in one concise and, given recent developments, poorly worded sentence buried in the SmartTV’s privacy policy which read: “Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party through your use of Voice Recognition.” When placed in the wider context of the entire paragraph regarding the voice recognition software, it is clear that the voice commands a user gives their television are simply being transferred to the third party which is in charge of the software (Nuance Communications, Inc.) and thus responsible for transforming the voice commands into text.

In addition, Samsung has since elaborated on the matter and explained that: “Samsung may collect, and your device may capture, voice commands and associated texts so that we can provide you with Voice Recognition features and evaluate and improve the features. Samsung will collect your interactive voice commands only when you make a specific search request to the Smart TV by clicking the activation button either on the remote control or on your screen and speaking into the microphone on the remote control.”’’

Thus, Samsung makes it clear that the consent of SmartTV users remains one of the main factors in how and to what extent they use the SmartTV’s capabilities. The problem is however that the entire debacle only came to light as a result of the Daily Beast, a news reporting and opinions website, posting an article that flagged up the issue with the privacy policy.

A privacy policy many customers may have skimmed over or not given a second glance prior to or after purchasing their SmartTV. Nevertheless, the general intention behind how this information is being used ties back to striving to provide customers with the best customized experience possible.

A similar problem is consistently faced by users of social media websites and platforms and the applica21

IVONNA BECHES / EXCHANGE

tions attached to these platforms. In August of 2014, Facebook faced backlash over the information collected by Facebook Messenger, an application Facebook users were obliged to download if they wanted to use the messaging service on their smartphones or tablets. It is common knowledge that the majority of social media applications which are free to download access some of the users’ personal information, and may pass this information on to third parties in order to create targeted advertisements that, in turn, make more money for the companies providing the application. Yet this is always done with the user’s consent, and, at face value, Facebook Messenger was no different.

The point of contention where this particular application was concerned however, was the sheer amount of access that users surrender, to the application when they accept the terms of service (often without reading them at all). Once installed, the application has access to, amongst other things: web bookmarks and history, contacts, calendar events (which it may be able to modify without consent), the phone’s text messaging service (allowing users to send messages they would then be charged for), call logs, media files/photos, the phone’s camera and microphone and the phone’s ID and call information. Regardless, many people have already installed, continue to install, and use the application, whether or not they are completely aware of the information they are readily giving away in exchange for full access to a social media platform on their mobile or tablet device. The question that arises is, does this mean that no protections should be set up for users and consumers of ad-

vanced technology and internet services, simply because they are willing to risk their privacy or are unaware of how much they are risking?

The E-Privacy Directive: how European law protects users and consumers The main technology which enables data to be stored and utilized in the ways explained above is normally referred to as a cookie, or collectively, cookies. They are small files stored on a user’s computer, or tablet, or mobile device, which contain data specific to a particular website and a particular user. They are normally generated when a specific web page is accessed and are used to tailor the services offered by that website for the person accessing the website, as well as to streamline the browsing experience by remembering a particular user. One simple example of this technology is the autofill function some websites provide. This technology becomes an issue: what kind of information is being saved, how long it is being retained and who has access to it?

The European Union’s response to this arguably ever growing problem, is contained within the E-Privacy Directive, also known as the EU cookie law, or by its official name: Directive 2002/58/ EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications). The directive tackles the idea that Member States are obligated to ensure the protection of the privacy of their citizens as well as their other rights and freedoms with regards to the processing of personal data, as well as the very important issue of user consent. There is some freedom as to how consent can be given but it must be through an “appropriate method enabling a freely given specific and informed indication of the user’s wishes, including by ticking a box when visiting an Internet website”. In addition “the methods for giving information, offering a right to refuse or requesting consent should be made as user-friendly as possible.”

An example of an attempt to implement this directive in practice can be seen in the 2012

Guidance Paper drawn up by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), the UK’s independent authority on information rights and data privacy. Before providing any advice on how the directive works, the 2012 guidance hits the nail on the head with regards to the unique nature of the problem by quoting findings of a 2011 study on consumers’ knowledge of the internet and cookies. The results point to a worrying lack of understanding even amongst the most experienced internet users: • “41% of those surveyed were unaware of any of the different types of cookies (first party, third party, Flash / Local Storage). Only 50% were aware of first party cookies.

• Only 13 of respondents indicated that they fully understood how cookies work, 37% had heard of internet cookies but did not understand how they work and 2% of people had not heard of internet cookies before participating in the survey.

• 37% said they did not know how to manage cookies on their computer.

• The survey tested respondents’ knowledge of cookies, asking them to confirm if a number of statements about cookies were correct or not.

Out of the sixteen statements only one was answered correctly by the majority of respondents.”

The guidance then goes on to explain that the threshold required for consent to be valid is for each individual to “fully understand that by the action in question [whether it be ticking a box or clicking a button] they will be giving consent” for their information to be retained and used by the website they are browsing or a third party, as the case may be. This complete understanding must also, evidently, be communicated in a coherent manner.

At this point, the guidance clarifies that simply because the regulation does not explicitly ask for prior consent (i.e. before a user visits a website, which is technically impossible to obtain), this does not mean that consent can simply be obtained after the event requiring the consent, the

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

22

PHOTO: SAMSUNG SMART TV/CAMPAIGNBRIEF.COM

planting of the cookies, has happened. Recently this issue has been somewhat rectified, as most websites will alert users that cookies are in use and will ask for explicit acceptance. Of course, rejecting all forms of cookies from a website normally leads to an inability to browse the website at all. Moreover, while websites will sometimes provide links which lead to pages containing detailed information about the nature of their tracking services in order to ensure the consent they gain is in fact ‘specific and informed’, if the statistics listed above are to be relied on at all, it is easy to infer that a large number of users pay little or no attention to the information they are provided with. That said, the burden still falls quite heavily on the companies that provide the website services, as part of their compliance with the regulation relies on them personalizing the way in which they gain consent to reflect the habits and general level of understanding of the majority of their users.

23

Conclusion The bottom line is that, while advancements in privacy law might not move as quickly as advancements in social media and the technology related to it, the protection provided strives to be as expansive as possible. There may certainly be companies that may try to exploit loopholes in legislation, but the biggest threat to individual privacy at the moment seems to be individuals themselves. Once the ‘yes’ button has been pressed or the box has been ticked, whether or not the terms and conditions have been read in full, a representation has been made by the user that they have understood and accepted the implications of their use. If a certain company providing an application or access to a website has done everything foreseeably in its power to warn a user about potential privacy infringements, they cannot be blamed for the willful ignorance of the user.

OPINION

TEXT: ELENA ALEXANDRA RADU / PHOTO: THOMPSON HALL

ELENA ALEXANDRA RADU / LLB 2

IDentity Theft Crime: United States vs. European Union

What is identity theft?

The blunt truth is that no dictionary contains a clearcut definition, neither in Europe nor in the United States. There is a colossal dichotomy between the definition across the ocean, which characterizes identity theft and identity fraud as terms that refer to all types of crime in which someone wrongfully obtains and uses another person’s personal data in

some way that involves fraud or deception, typically for economic gain. Simultaneously, on our continent, every state considers it from another perspective.

For example, in the United Kingdom, identity fraud is distinct from identity theft, the latter being only the precursor of the crime per se. One of the issues of paramount importance is that the aforementioned NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

24

definition construed by the Home Office in the UK is different form the one given by CIFAS (The UK’s Fraud Prevention Service) which describes the crime as an impersonation fraud. It goes without saying that there is an enormous lack of harmonization in this almost invisible field within the European Union but small steps are being taken in order to regulate it.

What is the current situation in the European Union?

At the moment, there is no common European terminology with regard to this crime. However, Member States enacted laws on this matter but they all regard it differently. For instance, in Czech Republic, Belgium, Bulgaria, Germany or the UK, ID theft is regulated through legislation on fraud as a secondary crime. Basically, it is the crime of using the data stolen from a private or public party that constitutes a punishable crime. In this respect, a skeptical lawyer might wonder: in light of the recent case law (the famous ruling C-131/12 Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v Agencia Española de Protección de Datos, Mario Costeja González in which the European Court of Justice dealt with the right to be forgotten), should it be still legal to have in possession personal details of a person which may or may not be used in order to commit a fraud? It may be that the analogy between the right to be forgotten and the norms in some countries for the ID theft crime is too far-fetched but it is important to understand the huge discrepancies at EU and national levels.

Nevertheless, we have to bear in mind the fact that for the past three years, hard work has been done and numerous fruitful discussions have been undertaken in order to achieve the objective set for 2020: a European digital single market by creating a General Data Protection Regulation which will replace the actual Data Protection Directive. Moreover, considering the situation in the UK, where the government loses approximately £3.3 billion a year and the number of cases reaches around the 100.000, the call for a common legislation can also be perceived from a financial point of view. As a result of not working on a strategy together, every Member State puts itself in a disadvantageous position which only determines more and more losses.

25

Another perspective: United States The matter under discussion is considered ‘an old problem’ in the US, where the fraudulent use of identities creates losses of approximately $50 billion per year. In contrast with the method used by the European Union to deal with it (i.e. new regulation in the near future), the American Congress passed the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act back in 1998, thus defining it as a federal crime. Also, in 2004, the legislator adopted the Identity Theft Penalty Enhancement Act in which it established penalties for ‘aggravated’ identity theft. In addition, every state further enacted laws on the matter, following the federal requirements which entailed at least two years of imprisonment. Unfortunately, thieves simultaneously developed plenty of new methods to steal identities such as phishing or ‘smash and grab’ burglaries. In the end, judging by the high numbers of victims and perpetrators, the question remains: has the regulation of the crime of ID theft resolved the problem in any respect?

Comparing the two systems This brings us to the point of comparing the situations in the EU and US. In the EU there is a lack of policy harmonization and the problem is carried out internally and differently in every Member State. In the US, on the other hand, even though the definition encompasses various types of ID theft crimes and is thus broader and stricter, this equally leads to a high number of violations. From my point of view, there is no doubt that essential measures have already been taken by leaders and specialists on both sides. However, I believe that legislation is still under heavy development and perhaps, sadly, technology will always be one step ahead of the old discipline of law.

STORY

THE UPRISING This story is purely a figment of imagination and is inspired by no real-life events.

He fought, with all the strength left in his body, the strong hands holding him down. He desperately tried to look left and right at the others as one of the soldier’s boots came down on his head, mushing his face even deeper into the gravel. He screamed all of their names hoping that by some miracle someone would hear him; but in the chaos of battle his cries drowned in the powerful booms of the explosives and never ending stream of gunshots. Once again, he tried to gather his vigour and urge his muscles to push him off the ground but to no avail. He was pinned down by a strength that could not be human.

He strained his hearing, hoping that he would maybe catch a sound that would let him know how the fight was going. The radio of one of the men holding him down crackled as a rough low voice said: “The rebels are regrouping, behind the church!” His heart lifted at the news. They were still alive and better yet, they were still fighting! In his joy he must have made a sound which drew the soldiers’ attention back to him. They hit him hard at first and perhaps

they never stopped doing so and he had just grown numb with pain. He chuckled and grinned at them, a bloody smile, confident now that he could feel the sweet arms of death wrapping themselves around his body. They couldn’t hurt him anymore; he was free!

“At least my death will not have been in vain”, he thought for a split of a second, as he pictured in his mind what had brought him here in the first place.

“At least news of my death will fuel the fire. It will renew their resolve to fight for our freedom.”

He hadn’t realized that he had spoken aloud until one of the soldiers squatted down in front of him and pulled him up by the hair saying: “Death? Hah! Nobody said anything about killing you, rebel. Oh no, we have different orders. The Power, in its mercy, has held that all captured rebels are to be chipped, like the rest of the population.”

He froze, his eyes widening as the realization hit. He shivered but not because he was cold and not because of the chilling laughs of the soulless soldiers that seemed to be surrounding him. Panic gripped his NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

26

ANA ARNAOUTOGLOU-AMZA / LLB 2

TEXT: ANA ARNAOUTOGLOU-AMZA / PAINTING: ACHIM PRILL

heart as he roared and writhed, driven with fear of what was to come. The soldiers were thrown aback, not expecting any fight to be left in that shattered, beaten body that had been on the brink of death just moments ago. He managed to stand up for just a moment before he was slammed into the ground again. A moment was all it had taken though and he had seen enough. All around him there were rebels who, just like him, had been caught and were held in a similar manner. Before he had the chance to think of anything else, he felt the needle puncture the back of his neck.

He knew that it was not exactly death that was beginning to spread through his body, but some evil way worse and crueler than old, timeless Thanatos.

The soldiers let go of him and for a second he lost all touch with his senses. The chip beeped as it activated itself and started spreading through his body, stealing away his human warmth, his reason and perhaps worst of all, his free will.

He rose, looking at the world through new eyes. He could no longer hear the screams of those in pain, he no longer recognized the look of fear in the eyes of 27

what had not so long ago been his brothers in arms nor recognize the pain in his own body. He desperately tried to retain at least a tiny piece of himself, as his body was set in motion by a will not his own.

He raised the gun, with an automatized movement, just then realizing for the first time that someone had handed him one at one point, and aimed it at the woman’s head. She was being held down like he had been just minutes ago. She was crying and talking to him.

“Wait! Please stop. You can’t do this. You are my friend, my brother. Do you not remember me? I beg you, please stop,” she kept saying over and over again.

He did remember her. He felt tears welling up in his eyes as he frantically tried to fight himself. The chip twisted at the back of his neck and his face went blank, all memories of his former self gone. He pulled the trigger, and as her body went limp he felt no remorse.

3D PRINTING: BART VAN DER GEEST / LLB 2

Legal and Intellectual Property Issues

“

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, fans of the television series “Star Trek: The Next Generation”, saw Patrick Stewart procure hot tea from a ‘food replicator’, a machine capable of generating his tea – cup and all – instantly on demand. At the time, the idea of printing 3D objects out of thin air was alien, but not fantastical, as a method for three-dimensional (3-D) “printing” had already been patented. Following other inventions inspired by Star Trek, such as tablet computers, phasers and intelligent sliding doors, additive manufacturing is the latest in cutting-edge technology, capable of redefining the way in which we look at the world around us. In terms of intellectual property law, 3D printers may prove to have various legal implications in the future with regard to ownership, patent eligibility, trade secrets and other IP issues.

A game changer

3D-printing, a manufacturing technique - dating back to the seventies - that produces three-dimensional, tangible objects from digital files, is evolving at a rapid pace. 3D printers have become affordable for private users due to growing industrial use only recently, selling for as little as $250. Today, they can be applied for many purposes, including making model figurines of video game and movie characters, art designs, manufacturing prototypes, machine parts, quasi-legal guns and even human organs using a person’s own cells. At the moment, the technology mainly attracts hobbyists and enthusiasts, but as the technology advances and becomes cheaper, it will eventually appeal to a larger group of consumers. It is already possible to buy 3D designs from websites such as Shapeways, or download them for free using open-source venues such as Thingiverse and Cubify.

”

customizing products at home. Last week Amazon filed several patent applications for a system that uses trucks outfitted with 3D printers that could produce and deliver items on their travels. Although the technology is still very much in its infancy stage, Natural Machines is hoping to release its first automated meal-assembly machine in 2015. As you can see, 3D printing can already be applied in various contexts.

How are IP/ legal rights affected?

3D printers are likely to have a big impact on copyright, trademark and patent holders. Comparisons can be drawn with the music industry and how the latter has had to re-invent itself with the coming of digitalized media. Essentially, in the near future anyone with a 3D printer could, similarly to downloading music files, produce, copy, distribute and change products that are indistinguishable from copyrighted designs by well-known brands as they see fit. At the moment, however, most 3D printers are limited in As the market for home-based 3D printers is growthat they can only produce small objects from one or ing, companies are looking at how new technologies two materials, but as they get better and printed macan give them a competitive market edge. Last year, toy maker Lego reported it was considering 3D print- terials improve, it will become harder to distinguish ing in the future with a vision of people printing and them from products made in traditional factories.

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

28

TEXT: BART VAN DER GEEST / PHOTO: SIGNE BREWSTER

“What “copy and paste” did to jeopardize digitally stored intellectual property, 3-D printing may do to intellectual property captured in a tangible form: Sculptors may soon lose control over the replication of statues, vases and architectural models in the same way that modern musicians contend with viral replication of digitized songs. The unauthorized duplication of 3D-printed designs not only raises copyright issues but also threatens to undermine trademark, trade dress and design patent rights”.

Visit a 3D printing market place such as Shapeways, and it won’t be hard to find figurines of South Park, Mario and Star Wars characters. However, since these websites are not actively encouraging copyright infringements, and they comply with all the ‘safe harbor’ requirements set out in the US Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA), it will be difficult to pursue copyright action against such providers. As long as they have posted a policy saying that they will take down infringing material if the copyright holder requests it, these marketplaces are protected.

Problems arise in the event that a designer wants to invoke counterfeit infringement law to defend his/ her rights. Who would be prosecuted in court? The person who designed and digitized the counterfeit product, the person who put the file online, or the person who printed and replicated the object? Would the action have the same effect if the printed object was for personal use only?

29

Furthermore, the question of quality and consumer protection will undoubtedly pose problems. Traditionally, industrially manufactured objects are subject to a number of quality standards, enforced on the industrialists. Now, with the arrival of 3D printed objects, how will we be able to guarantee that these manufactured objects abide by safety regulations? If an accident were to happen, who could be held responsible and to what extent? In the U.S, for example, “Senator Charles E. Schumer has called for legislation banning 3D printed guns since manufacturing such plastic weapons easily circumvents background checks, registration requirements and metal detectors.”*

Looking to the future

Time will tell whether old intellectual property law is sufficiently flexible to adapt to the problems raised by 3D printing. More importantly, as F. Ghilassene points out, companies that have their products exposed to the risks of 3D counterfeit will have to react intelligently and look to the music industry for possible solutions. This would imply, on the one hand, integrating 3D printing in their marketing strategy, and on the other, revising their business models. Recognizing the potential issues arising from 3D printing at home could ensure that it becomes the company’s next great technology rather than its next great liability.

OPINION

“

Ping pong balls, videogames, cotton flowers. These terms linked to the concept of justice will sound capricious and arbitrary to many, but in the world of innovative justice, these and other unusual ideas come together with the purpose of a more inclusive, fair justice system.

”

OPINION

INNOVATING JUSTICE: A HIPSTER TALENT? TEXT: CLAUDIA SKIBNIEWSKI

For a few days every November, The Hague, dubbed the ‘City of Justice’, and its Peace Palace turn into a hub of creativity, where entrepreneurs, jurists, diplomats and other justice-savvy professionals come together to network and find the best justice innova-

tion of the year. At this event, called HiiL Innovation Justice Forum, diversity is the key. Therefore, a few places are reserved for students, so that the incoming generation of jurists are able to get involved in the development of this emerging legal field. All the NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

30

major universities in the world as well as in the Netherlands are represented at the event, either via students, study advisors or academics.

This diversity creates a curious mix of creative individuals with the same passion of achieving a change in the justice system for a better world.

In 2014 I was honoured to join them, representing the University of Groningen, thanks to an idea that I had at my interview to become a Nexus active member.

1

But what exactly does the rather vague term ‘innovative justice’ entail? In short, it is about developing new ways to bring fairness between people and the idea of establishing the rule of law as something tangible and measurable on which communities can rely. Moreover, it sees justice as an inclusive sector where lawyers are no longer the major actors. Everyone can be a justice innovator, no matter if their background is law, engineering, bakery or art; HiiL places this idea into 5 yes or no questions: Do you think: • Laws and procedures should be stable?

• It is impossible to achieve justice in this world?

• That lawyers always resist change?

• That justice for one is injustice for another?

• That courts of law and governments should provide justice?

If you have answered some or all of the questions above with a “yes”, you are also, in heart and mind, a potential justice innovator. Dan Jackson, Executive Director at ‘NuLawLab’, Northeastern University School of Law, USA, was one of these potential innovators when he came up with the idea of an online advocacy simulation for self-represented parties. Using a video game interface, he and his team work to solve a pressing issue in the US court system, namely, access to legal representation in matters so intimate for a person’s life such as eviction, divorces and child custodies. Nearly 80% of all 31

CLAUDIA SKIBNIEWSKI / LLB 1

litigants involved in American family and tax law procedures appear in court without a lawyer due to the lack of economic resources. Through this online game, litigants can practice model questions and get acquainted with the court procedure, making the experience less daunting.

Another justice innovation comes from bustling New Delhi. ‘LawForMe’ aims at filling the gap of legal knowledge in society, and uses technological elements to make laws more understandable and accessible. To demystify and make the law easier to understand, this project has created an online library of simple flowcharts where Indian citizens can check model legal problems and follow the procedural phases in manageable and approachable language. In an environment where the opinion of friends and family is of utmost importance, the need of impartial and accessible legal advice is evident. Some of the questions that users of this library can already access include how to file for divorce; what to do if you are a victim of cyber-fraud; claim your insurance; even how to respond to sexual harassment situations at the workplace.

Access to justice, as portrayed by these innovations, is one of the pillars of innovative justice, showing how it tackles every dimension of society, usually supported by non-traditional channels like new technologies and social media.

Other featured areas include the ‘living wage challenge’. In cooperation with the clothing company C&A’s foundation, this initiative

targets the garment industry in a desire to make an impact on the communities in which our clothes are made and make them more financially sustainable.

This idea is what Natalie Grillon from the ‘Just’ project promotes: technological leverage to create transparency in fashion supply-chains. The idea behind the project is to connect designers with high quality ethical suppliers, and measure suppliers through crowd-sourced information. In an industry where the ethical standards of suppliers have been controlled by out-dated, inauthentic auditors paid by the big brands, Just aims at improving the living wage of the people working in the early stages of the fashion supply chain by creating a positive feedback loop of consumers, producers and suppliers with strong ethical commitment and a smartphone app complete with QR code reader.

Another daunting venture is the one of Justin Dillon, founder of ‘Made in a Free World’. After finding out that the cost of a slave in 1809, adjusted to today’s monetary value, was USD 40,000, compared with USD 40 in 2009, and that, according to the International Labor Organization, there are 20.9 millions of forced labour victims in the world, Justin set up a revolutionary software to eradicate forced labour in global supply chains. Currently, big companies rely

on physical auditors that monitor scheduled rotations of workers, however fail to assess the labour situation of the whole supply chain. Dillon’s “Software as Service” enables firms to analyze their entire spending data, the origin of their raw materials and thus locate specific areas of risk.

There are millions of other ideas in progress and waiting to be realized. The world of innovative justice is certainly in its infancy and not yet well known, but it has huge potential, since its scope covers much more than court-related issues. It uses the latest technological advances and targets society’s necessities in a cost-efficient way to improve people’s lives. It has an ambitious goal: to democratize the rule of law, and it is a field for those who are passionate about law, change and generosity. For “hipster” lawyers and guerilla economists, design masters and you, no matter your talent; if you are passionate about it you can succeed in the innovative justice world.

FOR MORE INFO VISIT: - www.hiil.org - http://madeinafreeworld.com/business - http://projectjust.com/ - http://www.rfgindia.org/ - http://www.nulawlab.org/

PHOTO 1& 2: HIIL INNOVATING JUSTICE

Community Justice Teams Mediating Disputes Around Ebola in Liberia 2

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

32

OPINION

TEXT: IVONNA BECHES / PHOTO: WOLFVISION

PULLING THE JUSTICE SYSTEM INTO THE MODERN AGE: COURTS AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT

M

ost lay-people and law students consider courtrooms, as well as the judiciary, to be completely out of touch with modern technology. From technophobic judges to the old, imposing buildings where law is actively practiced, the general atmosphere does not seem to be welcoming for computers, touchscreens, advanced projectors or videoconferencing equipment. On the other hand, it has been common knowledge for a long time that some of the main purposes of technology, particularly the Information Technology branch (IT), are to increase efficiency and to make communication faster, cheaper and more accessible to everyone. To that end, IT has become a more prominent feature of court proceedings at various stages recently, but the process has been slow for various reasons. This article will seek to set out where technological advancements fit into a court of law as well as the issues that are holding back the advancement of European courts in particular.

33

IVONNA BECHES / EXCHANGE

Why is technology needed?

There are a variety of advantages to technology being introduced into European courtrooms, most of which have been recognized recently in Opinion No.(2011) 14 adopted by the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) on the topic. The CCJE is a consultative body within the Council of Europe, concerned exclusively with the independence, impartiality and competence of judges. This makes their opinion important in that it places the advantages in the context of changes needed to improve access to justice.

The entirety of the CCJE’s opinion on the role of IT defeats one of the most prominent arguments about including technology in a court of law, namely the idea that court proceedings would lose their solemnity and that the authoritative power of the decisions would be diminished. While the report does recognize that the risks exist, and encourages that the effects of technology should not be taken that far, it also recognizes that “The use of IT improves access to justice, as well as increases its effectiveness and transparency�.

Another improvement that would be brought to the table, as mentioned before, is the efficiency to the court procedure. As the number of cases brought to courts every day increases considerably, technology can help organize the workload in a manner that expedites the work of both judges and lawyers. At present, the filing of cases and the exchange of information between parties have already been made more efficient by technology, but the role it could play in other levels of the adjudication process, such as the performance during a trial should not be overlooked.

On a related point, speed is also increased exponentially by the use of technology. The exchange of information between the parties involved as well as between lawyers and judges is much quicker, and can have a substantial and direct effect on cutting hearing times of cases.

In addition, technology can make the roles of jurors and witnesses considerably easier and decrease security risks where defendants who have been incarcerated have to take the stand. Recorded evidence that can be played as many times as jurors require is far more efficient than expecting jurors to

rely on notes they make during the trial procedure, for example. Witnesses and defendants giving testimonies through videoconference can protect witnesses and make them feel safer and can ensure that incarcerated defendants are not given an opportunity to escape. Removing the need for a physical presence also considerably decreases the costs involved in arranging each testimony.

More generally, costs are additionally reduced across the board as the need for paper copies and personal delivery diminishes. However, costs double as an issue specifically in the implementation stage. A steady source of funding is needed for the judicial system of any state to buy and install all of the required technology, and this is one main factor holding back advancement in this field. Private funding could, in theory, resolve this problem to an extent, but on the whole European states have preferred to initially rely on public funding, then allow for investment offers from private sources later on.

Practical considerations - how would the technology actually be used?

Advantages, while great, cannot of course be considered abstractly. It is important to set out what role technology would actually play in the different stages of the court procedure in order to drive home any arguments made about its necessity. It is thus important to set out at this point that technology can and should be used at all three main stages of a trial procedure: during pre-trial, during the trial itself and at the end, after the judgement is handed down.

Ordinary office IT plays a big role for pre-trial, as courts increasingly communicate with parties and lawyers electronically, although, according to a report by Dr. Dory Reiling, electronic files and signatures remain experimental. While electronic filing is not the exclusive means of filing cases and documentation by any means, it is one of the main methods currently employed, and the increase in mechanization also allows for the use of electronic calendars to quickly set dates for hearings and find available courtrooms. Furthermore, systems that allow parties to arrange the majority if not the entirety of the pre-trial procedure electronically are encouraged, and are being developed, but they remain sparse.

During the trial itself, as previously noted, technolo-

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

34

gy allows for the easy retrieval of stored information, particularly of evidence, at any point at which it is required. In addition, it can play a big role in how information is presented. For example, an article on Law Technology Today, an online blog affiliated with the American Bar Association (ABA) Legal Technology Resource Center, explained both the advantages and the capabilities of an AV System. The system has a variety of different input options and can display information on three different output screens, giving lawyers the capability to “use virtually any device with video or audio signal output”. Moreover, “the technology includes a touch-screen-telestrator which allows the users to annotate and highlight information displayed on any screen”. This is a considerably more advanced, and in the long run cheaper, method of presenting evidence than using whiteboards or easels or printing out information to hand out to the judge and jurors.

Testimonies are of course also part of the trial stage and setting up a video/teleconference is as easy as setting up a skype call between the witness or the defendant and the court. Videoconferences can save time and money and reduce risks but are also important for the safety of witnesses, as particularly vulnerable individuals can be examined and cross examined from a safe location. Critics of this method suggest that judges would have a more difficult time judging a witness’s ‘demeanour’, if they are not physically present in court. However, this calls into question whether the entire decision in a case should rest solely on the ‘demeanour’ of the individuals testifying, that is, their voice or body language, which are at any rate still visible in a videoconference.

Finally, technology can be used after a trial has ended in part to improve accessibility to the justice system.

Many, but not all courts in various European states have websites that publish information about the court, and in some cases summaries or entire transcripts of court cases. The free availability of judgements is an important aspect of accessibility and, as such, reinforces one of the tenets of Article 6 of the ECHR. As far as the CCJE is concerned, it states in its opinion that it: “considers that the judiciary should make case law, or at least landmark decisions, available on the internet i) free of charge, ii) in an easily accessible form, and iii) taking account of personal data protection. The CCJE welcomes initiatives to introduce international case-law identifiers (like the European Union case35

1

law identifier ECLI3) which will improve access to foreign case-law”.

Conclusion Technology has many practical uses within a courtroom and there is evidence to suggest that a move towards modernization is being made, albeit very slowly. The one barrier which is consistently being torn down is the distrust with which technology is viewed. The criticisms about ‘Hollywood trials’ can however be debunked easily with examples of just how efficient and cost effective pulling the court system into the present age can be. Hence, the only persistent setback that remains are costs, although it is hoped that, as knowledge of the advantages gained from the use of technology spreads, and the push for modernization from international organizations within the European community increases, more states will become more willing to divert funds towards creating courtrooms that reflect modern advancements.

PHOTO 1: SHUTTERSTOCK

LIFE AFTER

GRONINGEN ALUMNI:

TEXT & PHOTOS: JAMIE BEALE BROWN

It has not actually been that long since I graduated from the good old LLB programme, but it has been a whirlwind of activity since then. Within a few short weeks of finishing in Groningen, I packed my bags and flew to the New World to continue my studies with the Columbia/Amsterdam Joint Program in International Criminal Law. It’s a pretty special little program which only accepts eight students and is arrange to include a semester each in New York and Amsterdam. I’ve not even finished the program, but maybe you’re curious about what sort of things one can get up to after the LLB anyway.

Columbia Law School sits in the affluent Upper West Side of Manhattan: it’s a top-tier law school in a top-tier university in probably the most prominent and busy city on Earth. Quite a change-up from Groningen, which is an adorable university village in comparison. All the courses were world-class, my fellow students were a damn smart bunch, and the benefits of being in an Ivy League university are pretty extraordinary. But expectations are high and you’re going to have to work hard to succeed. I had to write three big papers over the semester to a grand total of some 21,000 words, which was more than double my LLB thesis on top of all my other work.

Literally hundreds of pages to read each week, and class participation is practically mandatory, so if you’re aiming for something like this, expect to work harder than you’ve ever had to before.

Since my program was focused on international crimes, we had a menu of courses in criminal law, human rights, international law, criminal investigations, civil liberties, and security issues. If you’re a curious person, you just want to take as many as you can! I took civil liberties courses with professionals from the ACLU who had argued those very cases before the US Supreme Court, national secu-

JAMIE BEALE BROWN / ALUMNI

rity law with former Bush administration lawyers, and a course on Congress in US defence policy with former Presidential Candidate Senator Joe Lieberman. We had guest lectures from US Army Generals, Congressmen, Admirals, famous jurists, journalists and political leaders. Elite law schools like Columbia attract elites and the access you get to the decision-makers is unparalleled outside of Washington itself.

At the same time, I managed to wrangle an internship with an NGO with privileged UN access and spent a lot of time taking notes and monitoring UN Security Council meetings. I got to sit in on ICC oversight committees, take part in discussions on the forefront of international law, and intern at the Assembly of State Parties to the Rome Statute. The UN HQ is a hive of activity on any given day, and it’s incredibly educating just being there, let alone chatting to Those Who Know Things.

Now in Amsterdam, I’m taking courses in international criminal justice, working as an intern on the Appeals Defence for former Serbian President Radovan Karadzic, and writing my LLM thesis about ISIS’ practice of beheading hostages. Exciting stuff.

We also spend a lot of time in The Hague meeting people from the ICC, ICTY, ICTR and the diplomatic community. Our course material is heavily focused on international cooperation in criminal matters, international criminal procedure, and a lot of jurisprudence. To maintain momentum, I’m taking electives in UN law, climate law and refugee law. Amsterdam law school isn’t so different from Groningen in some ways, so it can feel quite comfortable and familiar for LLB graduates.

So this all sounds great, you might think..

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

36

1

2

3

Maybe. Don’t be naïve and think that all this didn’t come at great cost. People keep telling me on Facebook that it looks like I’m having a wonderful time.

Let’s be honest to each other here: I compromised a lot to get into this program and then even more when I got there. Seriously. I’ve worked my ass off to get where I am now and that required giving up on some things that you might enjoy. I turned down many a social invite, I gave up alcohol, I avoided getting romantically involved, and I spend my limited income on keeping healthy rather than entertained.

I averaged six hours sleep a night, frequently crashed over the weekends, and drank far too much coffee.

All the work and stress exacerbated some of the health problems I’ve had for years and I gave myself some pretty serious headaches and shoulder pain from too much reading and computers.

Subjects such as competition law or corporate law are pretty dull and technical to someone like me.

When you study international criminal law, you read cases about the darkest, nastiest, most extreme events involving mass murder, torture, rape, mutilation and genocide. This is fascinating to some degree and it can give a great insight into the human condition at its worst. But, honestly, sometimes it’s not pleasant working with that sort of material all day and sometimes I wonder what the psychological toll will be. If you study something like this, you better to be able to find a way to keep yourself happy lest the grim nature of the material depresses you.

So why do it then? I can’t give you a simple reason for why I chose to study international criminal law, especially as it is such an intensely competitive,

37

4

5 1. NEW YORK CITY - COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2. NEW YORK CITY - 11TH AVENUE 3. NEW YORK CITY - STATUE OF LIBERTY 4. NEW YORK CITY - ICC MEETING 5. NEW YORK CITY - UNSC IN ACTION

job-squeezed field. I do a lot of existential questioning, which is perhaps wise at this point in my life and career. A part of me wants to be a champion of justice, another part is eager to find and fight demons wherever they are, and the self-serving side probably just wants to be ambitious and successful while doing all of the above.

International law is competitive, merciless, challenging and frequently uncomfortable. It’s a cognitively demanding field, requiring huge amounts of reading, reasoning and writing, like most law I guess. It’s also fuzzier than most law as it overlaps and merges with world events, diplomatic relations, political realities and resource constraints. But being at the heart of the UN’s international law bodies, I’ve seen just what a phenomenal field it is to be in: you get involved with the biggest issues of the day, facilitate action for peace and justice, and, optimistically, contribute to the progressive development of humanity. At least, that’s the dream; I’m not there yet and honestly don’t know if I ever will be.

I guess there’s no real conclusion to this piece. I love my LLM program and it’s been pretty cool to be at the UN in New York and the international courts and tribunals in The Hague, especially at this early stage of my career. When it’ll start paying off, who knows?

It ain’t easy and the money won’t be great, but at the same time I get the feeling that it’s going to be pretty rewarding and thrilling to work as an international lawyer.

Jamie graduated from the LLB and Honours College in 2014. If you want to bug him with questions, he’s actually totally cool with that because at least it’ll be a break from work. Email at: jamiebealebrown@gmail.com - Jamie Beale Brown

LIFE AFTER

GRONINGEN ALUMNI:

ALEXANDRA LILY KATHER / ALUMNI

Alexandra Lily Kather graduated with the LLB (Honours) International and European Law in 2013 and with LLM (Cum Laude) Criminal Law and Criminology in 2014. She was a Member of the Editorial Board and Promotional Director of the Groningen Journal of International Law. In 2014, she co-founded ‘Alignment for Dignity’, an international information platform on refugees and asylum, with a fellow student of the University of Groningen.

I decided to study law thanks to my grandmother who once handed me a stack of hand-written letters on her experiences during the Second World War, as well as handful of inspiring individuals like Gareth Peirce, a London-based solicitor selflessly defending the human rights of terrorist suspects. On-going conflicts and injustice worldwide remain the main source of my motivation behind everything I do and believe in.

Thus, starting the LLB I had a very clear vision that I would like to specialise in the field of human rights and international justice. I wrote my bachelor thesis on the prosecution of crimes of sexual violence in international criminal law and my master thesis on the obligation to prevent genocide under international law.

Some of you may know me due to my involvement in the Groningen Journal of International Law as a Member of the Editorial Board and Promotional

TEXT & PHOTOS: ALEXANDRA LILY KATHER

Director. This invaluable experience taught me the importance of teamwork, organisation and exchange with fellow students. Working closely in a team of five on two publications and one event is now a time I gratefully look back to.

In addition to this, I co-founded an online-based information network raising awareness for the situation of refugees and asylum seekers in the European Union and beyond with a former fellow student of International Relations and now dear friend of mine.

“Alignment for Dignity – I am here for a reason”, which was featured in a previous Nexus Magazine edition (Spring 2014), is an initiative founded by students of the University of Groningen in February 2014 and has since then expanded to an international network with contributors located all over the world.

Given the fact that the subject, notwithstanding its importance, had found little attention among students at the time made the founding of the group important to us.

We believe that human rights violations need to find public attention in order to be taken seriously. Therefore, we see the work of collecting information from international media, NGOs as well as civil society actors in the particular field of refugee and asylum as crucial in order contribute to the improvement of the situation.

In the course of writing my bachelor thesis I rather

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

38

1

2

3

4

5 1. LONDON - WALK ON CAPTITAL PUNISHMENT 2. LONDON - THE BRITISH LIBRARY 3. LONDON - VIEW FROM QUEEN’S WALK 4. LONDON - CONFERANCE ON SEXUAL VIOLENCE 5. LONDON - PANEL ON EROSION OF HR (LSE)

quickly realised that I profoundly enjoy researching, finding legal gaps, exploring them, contextualising them, understanding them. I went through a similar experience during the time I wrote my master thesis.

Both were by far the educational highlights of my university time. I was given a taste of what people mean when referring to the term academic freedom.

It felt a privilege to be given a platform to think and write about topics that were and still are so important to me. Yet, I lacked the confidence to admit that a doctoral degree would be the next step for me.

I will forever be grateful to Professor Caroline Fournet, who was the supervisor for both my bachelor and master thesis and whose trust in my capabilities allowed me to start believing in myself and become the young, striving, far more confident researcher I am today.

Consequently, I started to apply for doctoral degrees at various academic institutions in Europe. I received more than one decline for either the admission to the degree itself or the respective scholarship. Naturally, I went through a second phase of self-doubt and certainly a third or fourth. I learned that failure is part of the journey and that the journey itself is often equally important than its destination.

A month after my LLM graduation in late August 2014, I started my PhD under the supervision of Professor William Schabas at Middlesex University

39

London on the dead in international human rights law. Upon arrival for the first monthly international law seminar held by my supervisor for all of his 10 doctoral students, I felt nothing but terrified. However, I was met by an overwhelming amount of kindness and interest in my work. My current research environment is the most fruitful ground I could have ever wished for.

Concurrently, I am interning at a Geneva-based organisation called Universal Rights Group researching government’s responsiveness to complaints filed against them to the treaty bodies of the nine core human rights treaties and their optional protocols to which the respective states have previously committed themselves to adhere to. I decided to take on this internship to continue to acquire knowledge of working outside academia, despite the fact that once I have completed my PhD I hope to pursue an academic career.

Ending university is very similar to ending a relationship. You begin to ask open-ended questions like, ‘Is this actually over?’ or ‘Are we really done?’ My answer to this question is: No, you are never really done because attending university is just one aspect of nurturing a relationship with yourself and the world around you.

University is where you begin to understand that home is not a place and that change is the only con-

LIFE AFTER

GRONINGEN ALUMNI:

stant. It is where you are first able to introduce yourself independently to the world, allowing yourself to be whoever you want to be. It is where you initiate the beginning of lifelong friendships with some of the greatest people you will ever meet, one of them being yourself.

Appreciate every second of it, never miss a class, read all the materials, be aware of the people around you, not only fellow students of all disciplines but also professors, and invest in meaningful relationships with those whom it feels right to do so, and never stop asking questions.

After graduation, you might feel that reality hits you like a ton of bricks, or if as someone has just stolen your identity and took off with your life, leaving you homeless, empty and confused to the point where you wouldn’t know which way is up or down. Nevertheless, there is a life after university.

Embrace it. Always look out for growth. Work hard, prioritise what is important to you and follow through with your plan. There will be rejections, moments of despair and the feeling of unfairness.

You will get to where you want to go if you manage to develop the strength and belief in yourself that you will get there.

For those of you who are thinking about doing a PhD after their LLM, my advice is to pursue it if you find fulfilment in research, if you have the urge to make an original contribution to the landscape of legal research. It requires years of exclusive dedication, an endless amount of self-discipline and motivation. It is a lonely affair spent in libraries and in front of a computer for most of it but again it is up to you to connect with like-minded thinkers around you, let them be fellow doctoral students or practitioners.

London is a great place in the sense that every week there is at least one or two events I’m attending at either one of the universities or one of the fantastic institutes, among them Chatham House, The Law Society or the British Institute of International and Comparative Law. In quest of deciding upon a topic, which took me several months, I found direction in the following quote by Tony Morrison:

“If there’s a book that you want to read, but hasn’t been written yet, then you must write it.”

If you have any more questions, feel free to email A.Kather@ mdx.ac.uk. I will be more than happy to answer them.

- Alexandra Lily Kather

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

40

D E B A T E! 41

Charlie Hebdo: Where Is The Limit To Our Freedom Of Expression?

NATHALIE BIENFAIT / LLB 1

INTRODUCTION TO DEBATE TEXT: NATHALIE BIENFAIT

As you certainly will have observed, the recent attacks on the Charlie Hebdo magazine headquarters in Paris shocked the world. World leaders, public figures of all descriptions and citizens the world over all joined in an attack on such a seemingly clear intrusion on the right to freedom of expression. Pens and banners with the, now infamous, slogan “je suis Charlie” were defiantly waved in a proud protection of our right to freely express our views. However, it only took a matter of days before our news was also filled with writers arguing “je ne suis pas Charlie” that we should not be so quick to jump on the righteous bandwagon in support of freedom of expression. In addition, as was pointed out by many, the Charlie Hebdo magazine was not the best example of the promotion of freedom of expression, as many of the ideas being promulgated were controversial and sometimes simply offensive.

In light of these thoughts, therefore, we must ask: what can we define as the limit to our freedom of expression? Should there be a limit? How can the international community decide to enforce such delicately balanced ideas?

To answer the first question, we must first look at internationally agreed legislation defining this right: article 19 ICCPR - “The right to hold opinions without interference”; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, also sets out that “[e]veryone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression...”. Both of these documents, as well as other international legislation

such as the ECHR, are very clear that the right to freedom of expression should be taken very seriously, and that it is a fundamental right which should be enjoyed by every human.

The same pieces of legislation, however, also set out a clear structure for the limitation of this right: in the ICCPR, the exercise of one’s right to freedom of expression is limited to what is “prescribed by law and [is] necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals or the fundamental freedoms of others”, ideas which are echoed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and elsewhere. We therefore have a clear answer to the second question in this legislation: yes, there should be a limit to the extent to which we are allowed to express our opinions, views and values. If we did not have limits, then we would be infringing upon the human rights and freedoms of others, an illogical result, considering the fundamental aims of human rights to provide these freedoms and rights to everybody.

Returning to the Charlie Hebdo attacks, we should answer the final question simply with ‘balance’; only by weighing each interest against another and ensuring equity through compromise can the international community seek to maintain a healthy relationship between allowing the freedom of expression shown in the Charlie Hebdo magazine, and protecting those directly affected by the controversial views frequently published in the magazine.

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

42

THEO VERDI / EXCHANGE

DEBATE

A FRENCH PERSPECTIVE TEXT: THEO VERDI

On its decision rendered on November the 14th 2006 the Cour de Cassation confirmed an enduring principle derived from the Lumières: Religious motivations are not sufficient grounds to restrain freedom of expression in a modern democracy.

Indeed, there is in France a long­-lasting culture of satire and criticism towards the political and religious institutions along with their tokens. It is in that spirit that Charlie Hebdo, with others, have published, front­pages of a largely controversial nature.

Charlie Hebdo has occasionally been depicted from abroad as an “improper” champion of freedom of expression. Indeed, some started to claimed that they “were not Charlie” in order to demonstrate their condemnation of the magazine’s controversial methods, suggesting that there is a limit to what is socially or morally acceptable to declare in the public sphere.

The existence of legal limitations is not questioned 43

here; individuals must be protected from slander or defamation. However institutions and symbols do not need protection. Boiling controversies and scathing critics of institutionalized bodies have been the fuel of the democratic debate since early antiquity.

It seems rather incoherent to declare an incompatibility between freedom of expression and controversies or to systematically ban any offensive contents.

Indeed, human expression freed from censorship leads, in essence, to plurality of opinions and therefore to controversies. In addition, a multitude of those freed declarations intrinsically unleash the production of moot contents, because, by definition, ‘offensiveness’ is to be assessed subjectively.

For these reasons, we believe that freedom of expression should be protected from any type of interferences which are not aimed at protecting individuals.

The derision of institutions and of their symbols remains, for us, the bedrock of democracy.

JANNIS TZOUROS / LLB 3

A DUTCH PERSPECTIVE

I would like to depart slightly from the subject of debate and argue in favor of the right to blasphemy (blas·phe·my(blăs’fa-mē) n. pl. blas·phe·mies 1. a.

Contemptuous or profane speech or action concerning God or a sacred entity. b. An instance of this. 2.

Irreverent or impious action or expression in regard to something considered inviolable or sacrosanct).

Numerous debates have been conducted concerning the freedom of expression and its limitations, therefore one more attempt to argue about the self-evident obligations not to incite hatred or violence or not to disseminate defamatory remarks would not add substantially to the debate. I was surprised personally that the condemnation to the murderous attacks in Charlie Hebdo was not unequivocal. Moreover, what annoyed me equally, were statements of ‘yes, but…’ style arguing that the extremely sharp humor of the magazine infuriated certain groups, which acted in defense of their faith. The reactions of certain religious societies and leaders in the aftermath of those horrific acts clearly indicate that the line between radicalization and tolerance might be dangerously blurred sometimes. Is therefore the agenda of what is acceptable or not set by a bunch of fanatic lunatics?

Are western societies, in the name of a vague political correctness or of a distorted idea of multiculturalism supposed to accept institutionalized intolerance and further limitations to freedom of expression?

What lies at the core of liberal secular states since the Enlightenment is reason. The right to question, mock, satirize or even ridicule one’s beliefs, according to the laws of the state of residence, is a fundamental aspect of our democracy. No belief should be

TEXT: JANNIS TZOUROS

above or beyond criticism, especially if it claims to have an important role in the public domain. What promotes social progress is the continuous questioning and debate over all ideas, regardless of how fundamental or taboo they are considered. Western democracies have achieved this stage through a long and not always pacific process, marked by integration and osmosis of various beliefs, reasoning and questioning of others. It would be highly absurd to throw all that away in order not to offend every self-proclaimed, bearded (or not) vigilante, who believes that all answers are to be found in one holy book. If one has reasons to feel offended by this, he/she may proceed according to the laws of their state. Therefore, I see no valid reason justifying why irrational, by revelation beliefs of 7th century nomads, are somehow placed beyond criticism or debate - simply due to the fact that they are part of a religion. What confirms the privileged position that religion enjoys, is that the laws against blasphemy are still valid in many countries, justifying from terms of three years imprisonment to a student mocking the gullibility of religious believers (true story), to even more extreme penalties including death. However, one cannot defend a right, namely to argue and question every subject, without defending its practice, even if this irritates certain groups. Consequently, upholding that freedom of expression should be limited in a manner not to touch upon religious beliefs, ascribes identical outcomes, thus the de facto ban on blasphemy with the religious fundamentalist groups demanding to violently impose their world view upon the rest of society.

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

44

DEBATE

A ZIMBABWEAN PERSPECTIVE TEXT: TAKUDZA MUTEZO

The unexpected attacks that occurred in Paris were very shocking and brought to question the right to freedom of expression. It spurred on the discussion of the extent to which the freedom of expression could be made use of without constituting abuse of this fundamental freedom. The question lay in where the line must be drawn and at what point, if any, we need to set a limit on this fundamental right.

The value and essence of the freedom of expression is irrefutable. However, Charlie Hebdo had for years been subject to a lot of controversy, with one of the newspaper editors stating in reference to the publication of a cartoon with the Prophet Muhammed: “When we do it with the Prophet, it’s called provocation”. Although this does not justify the use of

45

TAKUDZWA MUTEZO / LLB 2

violence in any way, this goes to evoke the intention of the editors, authors and the magazine itself. There was clearly a deliberate effort being made to provoke readers, particularly those with Islamic beliefs.

Personally, I consider freedom of expression to be an important element of democracy. However, when this right is used to deliberately harm or offend and castigate one’s beliefs, religion and culture, then it becomes a form of abuse and should be reviewed.

Thus ultimately, despite the fact that freedom of expression is an important fundamental that is necessary in a democratic society, there should be some review done to ensure that this right is not abused, in cases where it is used with the intention to harm or infringe on someone’s beliefs.

OPINION

TEXT: ANGELINA WINTER / PHOTO: FAYEZ NURALDINE/AFP

King Abdullah - A Reformer?

“S

AUDI ARABIA - the country that ‘often sparks worldwide outrage for its repression of basic freedoms and persecution of political opponents and human rights activists.’

How do these preconceptions relate to reality? This article will consider the rights of women in Saudi Arabia, the judicial system and the right to freedom of expression.

ANGELINA WINTER / LLB 2

”

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

46

The death of King Abdullah on the 23rd of January 2015 drew with it an international response complimenting him as a reformer and as a supporter of peaceful dialogue and humanitarian causes. President Obama called him a leader who was “always candid and had the courage of his convictions,” while Secretary of State John Kerry narrated him as “a man of wisdom and vision.” British Prime Minister David Cameron applauded King Abdullah for his “commitment to peace and for strengthening understanding between faiths.” Notwithstanding Saudi Arabia’s dark human rights record, flags were put at half-mast at official buildings around the world as a way to show respect. Christine Lagarde, the head of the International Monetary Fund, said of the King, “In a very discreet way, he was a strong advocate of women.”

Indeed, King Abdullah has given women the right to vote for municipal councils and the right to compete in the Olympics. Furthermore, as a significant step in 2013, he appointed 30 women to Saudi Arabia’s Shura Council, an advisory body that makes recommendations to the cabinet.

‘These reforms, however, did not address the key underlying issues entrenching discrimination against women, such as the male guardianship system, under which ministerial policies and practices forbid women from obtaining a passport, marrying, travelling, or accessing higher education without the approval of a male guardian, usually a husband, father, brother, or son.’ Indeed, despite Abdullah’s verbal support in 2005 for the idea of women driving, an issue that Saudi feminists had been pushing for since 1990, ‘at his death they remain forbidden from getting behind the wheel’ , underlying the fact that the main issue of discrimination of women has not been resolved.

In the field of law King Abdullah completely restructured the country's courts in order to introduce, among other things, review of judicial decisions and more professional training for Shari'a judges , and was as such active in implementing numerous reform measures. However, Gerald Staberock, Secretary General of the World Organisation Against Torture points out other sides of this regime: "In Saudi Arabia there is the so-called 'religious police', whose role is to find human rights advocates and freedom fighters and punish them. And then there are high courts, which do not function like in Western countries: “They are not in charge of guaranteeing protection of 47

rights, but making sure that punishments are carried out," he says, highlighting the problems of the justice system which is far from just and fair.

When considering Freedom of Speech, which is a fundamental human right, suppression is more than noticeable. As Hala Aldosari points out, ‘Legislation — all of which came in the form of royal decrees — was passed to target activists who aimed to promote Human Rights. Questioning religious authorities, communicating with international human rights organizations or the media, or even attending conferences critical of the country’s policies are considered acts of terror.’ Furthermore, critics of this new legislation signify the use of a broad definition of terrorism, which implies the inclusion of any act intended to insult the reputation of the state, harm public order or destabilise the security of society and is as such regarded as a threat to freedom of speech and thought in the kingdom.

In terms of human rights violations in the penal system, Human Rights Watch states that Saudi Arabia has pressed on with arrests, trials, and convictions of peaceful dissidents, and forcibly dispersed peaceful demonstrations by citizens demonstrating for human rights. While further stating that “King Abdullah’s reign brought about marginal advances for women but failed to secure the fundamental rights of Saudi citizens to free expression, association, and assembly,” it has been pointed out that since 2011, the regime has grown even harsher as it has attempted to stifle online criticism “through intimidation, arrests, prosecutions, and lengthy prison sentences”.

1

For example, Raif Badawi, the most well- known yet

2

unexceptional example, was a blogger who was sentenced to 1,000 lashes, for running a liberal website dedicated to freedom of speech. From the Western perspective, such a scenario is viewed as rather unrealistic and absurd. Furthermore, the horrible execution video, which was leaked by activists, serves as an example of a widespread practice, as over 80 people were executed in 2014, mostly by beheading. "The law allows people in power to crackdown on anyone," Sara Hashash, the Middle East and North Africa press officer at Amnesty International states, emphasizing that “the recent crackdown in the kingdom is targeting civil and political associations and human rights organizations. Lots of people are prisoners of conscience and they are detained forcefully for simply stating their opinions."

Despite various violations occurring, Western authorities are still reticent in complaining about Saudi Arabia’s poor human rights records, making human rights advocates wonder whether this is the outcome of the important economical and political relationships the West has with Saudi Arabia.

“There is always a consensual rather than a confrontational approach on human rights,” says Julien Barnes-Dacey, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. “The Saudis are too important economically and politically. Financial

3

concerns are key. They are a pivotal regional player.

If you push too hard you will find yourself out of the loop at a time when the British and European role in the region has question marks over it.”

“King Abdullah came to power promising reforms, but his agenda fell far short of achieving lasting institutional gains on basic rights for Saudi citizens,” Joe Stork, deputy Middle East director said, “King Salman, the new ruler, should move the country forward by ending intolerance for free expression, rooting out gender and sectarian discrimination, and fostering a fair and impartial judicial system.”

One can always claim that there are many sides to each story; the story of Saudi Arabia and King Abdullah is just one of many examples. Depending from which side you want to look at the human rights issues in Saudi Arabia, and the actions of King Abdullah in particular, he was either a reformer and a politically, as well as economically, important figure, or he has in fact changed little for his country in the grand scheme of things.

See bibliography for references* PHOTO 1: AFP PHOTO 2: vocfm.co.za PHOTO 3: AP PHOTO/ HASSAN AMMAR

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

48

OPINION

US / CUBA RELATIONS:

The End of Isolation and the Stony Path Towards a New Modus Vivendi

CHRISTIAN HOERTER / ALUMNI

TEXT: CHRISTIAN HOERTER

“Isolation has not worked. It’s time for a new approach.”

These were the words from Washington that echoed through television on 17 December 2014. “We have decided to re-establish diplomatic relations [with the U.S.], ” followed from Havana. In a simultaneous address to their people, U.S. President Obama and his Cuban counterpart, President Raul Castro, marked the end of an era characterized by isolation and economic sanctions – or at least they provided hope for a new start, after half a century of diplomatic silence between the two countries.

In 1959, a group of revolutionaries led by Fidel Castro seized power in Havana, overthrowing the regime of Fulgencio Batista. Despite Castro’s communist ideology, the U.S. initially accepted the government, a political stance that however turned around when Castro’s government regime increasingly turned to the Soviet Union for trade, introduced taxes on U.S. imports and started nationalizing the vast amounts of U.S. property. This in turn led to a stark response by the Eisenhower administration in 1960, cutting the amount of sugar imports from Cuba, which culminated into a full economic embargo imposed by the Kennedy administration. In 1961 diplomatic ties with Cuba broke off and several covert operations were launched to overthrow the Castro regime, including the disastrous 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion.

The latter further severed the relations, leading to a secret agreement allowing the Soviet Union to station 49

missiles on the island. When the U.S. discovered the plans in 1962, Kennedy imposed a naval quarantine around the island. Eventually, this fourteen-days standoff ended with an agreement, demanding the dismantling of the missile base in return for a promise by the U.S. not to invade Cuba and to withdraw nuclear missiles from Turkey. The decades that followed these events did not see any move of the U.S. or Cuba towards each other and the administrations that followed pursued a political stance of economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation.

Yet, on 17 December 2014, after half a century of isolation the two countries made a ‘sudden’ move towards each other, announcing that they would restore diplomatic relations. This move, the result of several months of secret back-channel talks between U.S. and Cuban officials and the brokering of Pope Francis, was epitomized in the initial exchange of prisoners, namely the release of three jailed Cuban prisoners in exchange for a U.S. contractor, Rolando S. Trujillo, who had been imprisoned in Havana for about twenty years. Besides this immediate exchange, the U.S. further agreed to release fifty-three prisoners imprisoned as political dissidents, to reconsider Cuba’s designation as “state sponsor of terrorism” and ease restrictions on remittances, travel and banking.

While a recently enacted legislation among others allows U.S. travels to visit Cuba without the previously required government license, airlines to provide services to the country and banks to authorize transactions more easily, several challenges are yet ahead for the two countries.

One major obstacle in the process of restoring diplomatic ties and regarding the initial step of reopening embassies has proven to be Cuba’s designation as “state sponsor of terrorism”, as became ever-more apparent in the second round of diplomatic talks that was held on 27 February 2015. Although it was reported that “meaningful progress” was reached and that more rounds of talks addressing important issues such as human rights, human trafficking, civil aviation and internet connections were scheduled for the weeks to come, the issue of Cuba being placed on the list of “state sponsor of terrorism” remains a major obstacle to the talks. Particularly, the opening of embassies appears to be conditioned upon the removal of Cuba from this list, as evident in the statement by an official from the State Department that “it would be very easy to restore diplomatic relations if they would not link those two things.” Even if an agreement would be made on establishing embassies prior to solving the issue with the designation as “state sponsor of terrorism”, it remains a crucial issue in the progress for restoring diplomatic relations.

The importance of Cuba’s removal from the list, whereon it was placed in 1982 as of allegedly supporting the Basque separatist group Eta and Colombia’s Farc rebels, lies in the therewith connected economic sanctions and restrictions inter alia on banking and business transactions in the U.S. While Obama stated that “[a]t a time when we are focused on threats from Al Qaeda to ISIL, a nation that meets our conditions and renounces the use of terrorism should not face this sanction,” the removal of Cuba therefrom takes longer than expected.

“The lifting of the embargo is not to be expected in the near future, although it must be regarded as the right thing to do.”

Another major obstacle in the normalization of relations is the economic embargo that is in place since the 1962, whereof the removal is conditioned on the introduction of multiparty elections and the restitution of the nationalized property as provided for in the 1996 Helms-Burton Act. Given the political status quo in the U.S. – with Congress dominated by Republicans and the criticism that is voiced regarding the restoring of diplomatic relations, particularly in the face of the human rights situation in Cuba – the lifting of the embargo is not to be expected in the

near future, although it must be regarded as the right thing to do. The economic embargo, which according to Cuba’s Foreign Minister Rodriguez had cost 1,126 trillion, constitutes a heavy burden on Cuba. It now – given the current economic instability in Venezuela – has to turn to other countries to preserve its economy.

Above all, the economic embargo has failed and maybe worse, has helped sustain the economic and political situation, as the embargo constituted a good excuse for the economic and political situation within the country. Thus, it is about time for the U.S. to lift the embargo, which moreover also tainted its relations with other Latin American countries. Even the partial improvement of economic relations in form of easing restrictions on travel and banking that Obama is initiating using his executive authority, could provide Cuba with benefits. Maybe, Obama’s move of using his executive authority to continuously lift the economic burden placed on Cuba could even lead to “a political dynamic that would ultimately shift opinion inside Congress to eventually repeal, or no longer enforce, Helms-Burton,” as argued by Julia Sweig, Council on Foreign Relations Fellow.

Although many obstacles remain on the path towards establishing a new modus vivendi and reestablishing the diplomatic relations between the two countries, the move towards each other, initiated by the President Obama and his counterpart, President Raul Castro, must be regarded as an important step forward. Even if the process will take months, the rapid initiation of talks after more than half a century of isolation and economic sanctions provides hope for the normalization of relations, wherefrom both countries would gain. Cuba in particular, given its own and Venezuela’s economic situation, and the U.S. will both benefit economically from the (partial) lifting of the embargo. However, the most important gain from the improvement of relations could be political, namely reducing the burden that its isolationist policies placed on U.S. relations with other Latin American countries. Thus, although many obstacles remain on the path towards the normalization of U.S.-Cuba relations, the steps that both countries have made towards each other – namely abandoning the isolationist policy that failed miserably – certainly are steps in the right direction.

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

50

Tres Comandantes: Cuba’s Fidel Castro, center, delivers a speech next to Camilo Cienfuegos, right, and Ernesto “Che” Guevara in 1959 in Havana.

51 PHOTO: RAUL CORRALES

TED

“THE COMING CRISIS IN ANTIBIOTICS”

By Ramanan Laxminarayan

TEXT: NATHALIE BIENFAIT / PHOTO: GETTY IMAGES

We have all heard the story of how, in 1928, Alexander Fleming discovered the drug penicillin by accident because of a forgotten petri dish. This story is retold by Ramanan Laxminarayan in this well-balanced TED talk which paints a picture of the problem of the overuse of antibiotics within a wider context of sustainability as a whole and including it into a general discussion on the sustainability of our environment and the world in which we live. Laxminarayan expands the metaphor by comparing our oil consumption to our use of antibiotics, suggesting that many of the techniques and combat strategies used by environmentalists can be used in slowing the march of resistance to antibiotics.

The science behind antibiotics, and the reason they’re a problem, is reasonably simple: if you have an illness which is caused by a bacteria, then your body will try and fight what is called the ‘antigens’ with ‘antibodies’ in your blood. When these antibodies are not able to overcome the infection, then the patient can be given antibiotics which are a synthesised antibody which is custom-made for your infection. If we take a course of antibiotics, we are usually told to take them for around two weeks. After one week, we are likely to feel better and this is because the weakest bacteria have been killed by the antibiotic, leaving just a few for our body to cope with. It is at this moment that the problem lies, because many people would then be tempted to simply stop taking their medication, or even forget about them. If an individual stops taking their antibiotics, however, they have selected for the

stronger bacteria still in their system, which means that these bacteria will then multiply, leaving the individual even sicker than before.

This TED talk begins with a story of the first person treated with antibiotics: a policeman in Oxford, England, who, despite his eventual death, proved to doctors that this was a “wonder-drug” which could save millions of lives across the world. Just less than 80 years after this event, we can see the truth in such a statement: every one of us will have had to take antibiotics at least once in our lives, not necessarily in life-threatening situations, but we are all familiar with their benefits and their indispensable role in medicine today. It is this very fact that Laxminarayan addresses in this talk; the fact that we have all taken antibiotics is not cause for celebration, instead it is a worrying sign of the way we, as a human race, are exploiting resources with little consideration for the future. He explains that, because of the “massive use of antibiotics around the world” such “selection pressure” has been put upon bacteria that “we have selected for just the resistant bacteria”. Laxminarayan goes on to make plain the fact that we cannot underestimate the scale of this problem; “this is serious” he clarifies. In this point, he reveals the point of the TED talk: he is advising his audience that the world, as a whole, does not understand the gravity of this issue and fervently demands that we take it seriously, reflected in the way he cites example of antibiotics having been used “therapeutically” in the production of cheap meat, saying that they “have been used NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

52

TED TALK

NATHALIE BIENFAIT / LLB 1

rather frivolously in fact”. “It’s a global issue, affecting both rich and poor countries”.

Laxminarayan then takes the talk further, mentioning a popular misconception that the misuse of antibiotics is “really just a medical issue” and that doctors and patients should just simply be more well-informed and that pharmaceutical companies should be working harder to make more antibiotics.

It is an interesting idea and one which, up until now, has been able to work; however, now that we are facing this “coming crisis” in antibiotics, Laxminarayan is just one among many arguing for a fundamental change in our mindset towards these unique drugs. Their uniqueness is clarified in the researcher’s explanation that as one of us uses antibiotics, we affect not only ourselves but also every single other person on this planet because of the resistance that we create - the so-called ‘positive selection’ problem.

Laxminarayan presents the idea that we must think of ourselves as part of a global community in which every time one of us takes antibiotics we are not only affecting ourselves but also every single other member of that community. He emphasises his argument with the analogy of using a car to make a journey: fuel use, explains Laxminarayan, “both depletes energy as well as leads to local pollution and climate change”, something which is “analogous” to the subject of antibiotics.

Laxminarayan then takes the talk in a new direction, arguing that the use of fuel, its contribution to cli53

mate change and the ways which have been put forward by environmentalists to tackle our energy use can be translated to help better combat the problem of the antibiotic crisis. For example, we could “make better use of the oil that we have, and that is analogous to making better use of the existing antibiotics”, or on the other hand we can use the so-called “drill, baby, drill” option, comparable to going to “find new antibiotics”. Laxminarayan addresses the latter option by explaining that if we find new oil or if we put new resources and money into finding more antibiotics, then we “reduce the incentives” to be more sustainable about our usage of these, essentially, finite resources, and fail to preserve their benefits for future generations and users. Furthermore, the “problem of the commons” is also mentioned, highlighting our inability to take individual responsibility for these global issues; it reveals that we, as a race, are incapable of realising the effects of our inaction.

To conclude, Ramanan Laxminarayan makes the point that the balance which we are striking with nature is too fine. He shows us a picture of a cheetah chasing a gazelle, citing Darwin’s theory of survival of the fittest to show us that instead of being the cheetah we are now the gazelles, fighting to keep in front of the pace at which bacteria are evolving.

“We’ve had these technologies to control nature only for the last 70-80 years and essentially in a blink we have squandered our ability to control because we have not recognised that natural selection and evolution was going to find a way to get back.”

Bibliography: King Abdullah - A Reformer?

Ludovica Laccino, ‘Saudi Arabia: Five worst human rights abuses in the reign of King Abdullah’ (Ibtimes.co.uk, 23 January 2015) <http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/ saudi-arabia-five-worst-human-rights-abuses-reign-king-abdullah-1484889> accessed 20 February 2015 Adam Coogle, ‘The Truth About Saudi King Abdullah’s Human Rights Record’ (hrw.org, 23 January 2015) < http://www.hrw.org/news/2015/01/23/truthabout-saudi-king-abdullah-s-human-rights-record> accessed 20 February 2015 Mark Tran, ‘Lagarde calls King Abdullah ‘advocate of women’ - despite ban on driving’ (theguardian.com, 23 January 2015) <http://www.theguardian.com/ world/2015/jan/23/lagarde-king-abdullah-advocate-women-driving-ban> accessed 21 February 2015 Unknown, ‘Abdullah of Saudi Arabia’ (Wikipedia.org, last modified 17 February 2015) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_of_Saudi_Arabia> accessed 20 February 2015 Ibid. (n2) Ibid. (n2) Ibid. (n2) Ibid. (n4) Ibid. (n1) Hala Aldosari, ‘No, King Abdullah Was Not a ‘Reformer’’ (Foreignpolicy.com, 30 January 2015) <http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/01/30/no-king-abdullah-wasnot-a-reformer/> accessed 20 February 2015 Ibid. (n1) Unknown, ‘Human Rights in Saudi Arabia’ (hrw.org) <http://www.hrw.org/middle-eastn-africa/saudi-arabia> accessed 20 January 2015 Ibid (n12) Julian Borger, ‘West’s praise of King Abdullah shows Saudi Arabia is exception to human rights stance’ (theguardian.com, 23 January 2015) < http://www. theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/23/west-reaction-king-abdullah-death-saudi-arabia-exception-human-rights> accessed 20 February 2015 Ibid. (n14) Ibid. (n1) Ibid. (n14) Lizzie Dearden, ‘King Abdullah: UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon praises Saudi Arabia’s ‘remarkable progress’ under rule’ (The Independent, 24 January 2015) <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/king-abdullah-un-secretarygeneral-praises-saudi-arabias-remarkable-progress-under-rule-10000208.html> accessed 20 February 2015

Hacktivism: A Force For Good or Cyber-Terrorism? http://www.economist.com/node/17732839 http://www.computerweekly.com/opinion/Hacktivism-Good-or-Evil http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/features/internet/3414409/what-is-hacktivism-short-history-anonymous-lulzsec-arab-spring/ http://muftah.org/the-role-of-anonymous-in-popular-struggles-in-the-middle-east/#.VQBFQPmG-Xs http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/11/anonymous_book_by_gabriella_coleman_how_the_hacktivist_col lective_splinters.html Film documentary – We are legion: The Story of the hacktivists

3D Printing: Legal and Intellectual Property Issues http://www.skadden.com/insights/intellectual-property-issues-stacking-3-d-printing http://www.zdnet.com/article/3d-printing-overcoming-the-legal-and-intellectual-property-issues/ http://www.paristechreview.com/2014/12/16/3d-printing-ip-rights/ http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2fdd3f59-3a6a-4066-9ded-56501a8aaa45 http://www.forbes.com/sites/oliverherzfeld/2013/05/29/protecting-3d-printing-designs-and-objects/

NEXUS WINTER 2015 |

54

DEAR CONTRIBUTORS AND READERS,

WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR MAKING THE COMPLETION OF THIS MAGAZINE POSSIBLE. WE ARE MAKING THIS MAGAZINE FOR YOU - YES, FOR YOU! THEREFORE, WE RELY ON YOUR FEEDBACK, COLLABORATION, INPUT, AND COMMENTS IN ORDER TO KEEP PRODUCING MAGAZINES THAT YOU WANT TO READ. SO, PLEASE BE IN TOUCH! BEST REGARDS,

THE NEXUS MAGAZINE COMMITTEE

55

Š The Nexus Magazine All Rights Reserved