DOCSLIB.ORG

U.S. and Mexican Counterdrug Efforts Since Certification

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
U.S. and Mexican Counterdrug Efforts Since Certification S. HRG. 105±??? U.S. AND MEXICAN COUNTERDRUG EFFORTS SINCE CERTIFICATION JOINT HEARING BEFORE THE SENATE CAUCUS ON INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL AND THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION OCTOBER 29, 1997 Printed for the use of the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations ( U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 44±791 CC WASHINGTON : 1998 SENATE CAUCUS ON INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL CHARLES GRASSLEY, Iowa, Chairman ALFONSE D'AMATO, New York JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware FRANK MURKOWSKI, Alaska BOB GRAHAM, Florida JEFFREY SESSIONS, Alabama DIANE FEINSTEIN, California COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS JESSE HELMS, North Carolina, Chairman RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware PAUL COVERDELL, Georgia PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming CHARLES S. ROBB, Virginia ROD GRAMS, Minnesota RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California BILL FRIST, Tennessee PAUL D. WELLSTONE, Minnesota SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas JAMES W. NANCE, Staff Director EDWIN K. HALL, Minority Staff Director (II) CONTENTS Page Banks, Samuel H., Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs Service, Department of Treasury ............................................................................................................ 53 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 55 Davidow, Hon. Jeffrey, Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Af- fairs ....................................................................................................................... 40 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 42 Ferrarone, Donald F., Former Special Agent-in-Charge, Houston Field Divi- sion, Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Department of Justice ............ 72 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 75 Godson, Roy, Ph.D., Professor of Government, Georgetown University, Presi- dent, National Strategy Information Center ..................................................... 78 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 80 Kneir, Hon. Thomas, Deputy Assistant Director, Organized Crime and Drug Branch, Federal Bureau of Investigation ........................................................... 58 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 59 McCaffrey, Hon. Barry R., Director, Office of National Drug Control Policy ..... 14 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21 Milford, James, S., Jr., Acting Deputy Administrator, Drug Enforcement Ad- ministration, U.S. Department of Justice .......................................................... 46 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 48 APPENDIX Additional Material Submitted for the Record Prepared statement of Senator Russell D. Feingold ...................................... 91 Additional Questions Submitted for the Record to Barry R. McCaffrey, Direc- tor, Office of National Drug Control Policy Questions Submitted by Senator Helms ......................................................... 92 Questions Submitted by Senator Grassley ..................................................... 103 Questions Submitted by Senator Biden .......................................................... 105 Additional Questions Submitted for the Record to Jeffrey Davidow, Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs Questions Submitted by Senator Helms ......................................................... 108 Questions Submitted by Senator Biden .......................................................... 111 Additional Questions Submitted for the Record to James S. Milford, Jr., Acting Deputy Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. De- partment of Justice Questions Submitted by Senator Helms ......................................................... 113 Questions Submitted by Senator Grassley ..................................................... 117 Additional Questions Submitted for the Record to Samuel H. Banks, Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs Service, Department of Treasury Questions Submitted by Senator Helms ......................................................... 119 Questions Submitted by Senator Grassley ..................................................... 136 Additional Questions Submitted for the Record to Thomas Kneir, Deputy Assistant Director, Organized Crime and Drug Branch, Federal Bureau of Investigation Questions Submitted by Senator Helms ......................................................... 141 Questions Submitted by Senator Grassley ..................................................... 143 (III) U.S. AND MEXICAN COUNTERDRUG EFFORTS SINCE CERTIFICATION WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 29, 1997 SENATE CAUCUS ON INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS CONTROL AND SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. The Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations met jointly, pursuant to notice, at 2:10 p.m. In room SD±106, Dirksen Senate Office Build- ing, Hon. Paul Coverdell and Hon. Charles E. Grassley, presiding. Present from Foreign Relations Committee: Senators Coverdell, Hagel, Frist, Biden, Dodd, Kerry and Feinstein. Present from Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control: Senators Grassley, Sessions, and Graham [Senators Biden and Feinstein are members of both the caucus and the committee]. Senator COVERDELL. Ladies and gentlemen, let me bring to order a joint meeting of the Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, chaired by Senator Grassley of Iowa. We're both going to make opening statements then turn to our first panel, General McCaffrey, and I'm going to turn to my good colleague, Senator Grassley, for his opening statement. Senator GRASSLEY. First of all, thanks to General McCaffrey and all the other witnesses who are joining Senator Coverdell and me and other members of the Caucus and the committee at this critical hearing. As everyone in this room knows, our growing contact with Mex- ico is one of our mostÐin fact, you might say, the single mostÐ important relationship. And what both of our countries do to deal with the calamity of drug production and use is one of our most important efforts. This hearing is to address concerns about the nature of coopera- tion with Mexico. It follows up on questions raised earlier this year about the extent of that cooperation. Congress raised a number of concerns about the direction as well as the scope of our joint efforts to deal with problems that seem to undermine it. I believe that the Congress made clear its concerns that we not just have more high-level happy talk, but real results. This is one of the reasons that the Congress asked for the detailed report on progress to this point since March. We received that report on September 15. While it contains a lot of information, I believe that we need to hear more about the sub- ject. It is like a lot of government reportsÐit is long on inputs, (1) 2 short on outcomes, and even some of the outcomes are not all that they appear to be. The Congress is in the process of making deci- sions on Mexico in the context of cooperation on drugs. We needÐ the public needsÐmore substance. The report, for example, talks about Operation Success that re- sulted in the seizure of almost 3 tons of cocaine. That is all well and good, but what is not mentioned is that the seizure was of drugs fished out of the water. No one was arrested. No boats were seized. No one knows who was moving the drugs. In short, this was about Operation ``Partial'' Success. The report also talks about working groups, and also, individuals who have been trained. That is very important. But what is left out is how many groups are truly operating, how many arrests there were of key figures, how many extraditions, how many prosecutions of major figures. The report skates over these because the results are not there. Now, I do not want to get into a numbers game or into so-called ``body counts'', but we need to understand something. While we definitely need cooperation to achieve a common purpose, coopera- tion by itself is not a value. It is a means to an end, it is ends that we are concerned about. And the oneÐand one of the ways that we have of knowing if that end is being achieved is through results. If the results are skimpy, then maybe we need to take a long and hard look at the nature of the effort, and I hope that is what we are doing here and going to do here in this hearing. That is the intent of it. I would like to make just one more pointÐthat concerns the cer- tification process. The debate over Mexican cooperation is also a de- bate over this country's right to determine what cooperation looks like. I'm concerned about recent remarks by theÐby our Nation's leaders on a tool that the State Department makes clear is not only working but is critical in ensuring continued cooperation. I am concerned, if reports are to be believed, that our Nation's leaders in the war on drugs have suggested on recent
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Organized Crime and Terrorist Activity in Mexico, 1999-2002
    ORGANIZED CRIME AND TERRORIST ACTIVITY IN MEXICO, 1999-2002 A Report Prepared by the Federal Research Division, Library of Congress under an Interagency Agreement with the United States Government February 2003 Researcher: Ramón J. Miró Project Manager: Glenn E. Curtis Federal Research Division Library of Congress Washington, D.C. 20540−4840 Tel: 202−707−3900 Fax: 202−707−3920 E-Mail: [email protected] Homepage: http://loc.gov/rr/frd/ Library of Congress – Federal Research Division Criminal and Terrorist Activity in Mexico PREFACE This study is based on open source research into the scope of organized crime and terrorist activity in the Republic of Mexico during the period 1999 to 2002, and the extent of cooperation and possible overlap between criminal and terrorist activity in that country. The analyst examined those organized crime syndicates that direct their criminal activities at the United States, namely Mexican narcotics trafficking and human smuggling networks, as well as a range of smaller organizations that specialize in trans-border crime. The presence in Mexico of transnational criminal organizations, such as Russian and Asian organized crime, was also examined. In order to assess the extent of terrorist activity in Mexico, several of the country’s domestic guerrilla groups, as well as foreign terrorist organizations believed to have a presence in Mexico, are described. The report extensively cites from Spanish-language print media sources that contain coverage of criminal and terrorist organizations and their activities in Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Diplomatic Immunity Number: 610
    TAKOMA PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT - GENERAL ORDERS TITLE: DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY NUMBER: 610 EFFECTIVE DATE: August 6, 2012 REVIEW DATE: August 16, 2022 New X Amends Rescinds Dated March 23, 2002 AUTHORITY: TOTAL PAGES: Chief Drew Tracy 8 01 Purpose: To establish guidelines that ensure the department’s enforcement procedures conform to federal law regulating diplomatic immunity. 02 Policy: It is departmental policy to support the principles of international law and to extend privileges and immunity, when warranted, to members of foreign diplomatic missions and consular posts. However, the department also recognizes that most such privileges and immunity are not absolute and, therefore, will assure the appropriate degree of immunity is afforded once the immunity claimant has been precisely identified. The department will further maintain its fundamental responsibility to protect the public welfare in connection with criminal law enforcement actions involving foreign diplomatic personnel. Foreign diplomats who violate traffic laws shall be cited. Allegations of serious crime or other serious difficulties with diplomatic or consular personnel will be fully investigated, promptly reported to the U.S. Department of State, and procedurally developed to the maximum permissible extent. 03 Background: Departmental policy and procedures relative to diplomatic immunity is drawn from publication 9533, “Guidance for Law Enforcement Officers,” issued by the United States Department of State (USDS). Dealing with diplomatic immunity poses particular problems for law enforcement officers, and officers may react improperly if they do not understand its purposes or rules. Diplomatic immunity is a well-established doctrine of international law. In general, diplomats, their families, and their staff enjoy complete immunity from the criminal laws of the host nation.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Relationship Between Militarization in the United States
    Exploring the Relationship Between Militarization in the United States and Crime Syndicates in Mexico: A Look at the Legislative Impact on the Pace of Cartel Militarization by Tracy Lynn Maish A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Criminology and Criminal Justice) in the University of Michigan-Dearborn 2021 Master Thesis Committee: Assistant Professor Maya P. Barak, Chair Associate Professor Kevin E. Early Associate Professor Donald E. Shelton Tracy Maish [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8834-4323 © Tracy L. Maish 2021 Acknowledgments The author would like to acknowledge the assistance of their committee and the impact that their guidance had on the process. Without the valuable feedback and enormous patience, this project would not the where it is today. Thank you to Dr. Maya Barak, Dr. Kevin Early, and Dr. Donald Shelton. Your academic mentorship will not be forgotten. ii Table of Contents 1. Acknowledgments ii 2. List of Tables iv 3. List of Figures v 4. Abstract vi 5. Chapter 1 Introduction 1 6. Chapter 2 The Militarization of Law Enforcement Within the United States 8 7. Chapter 3 Cartel Militarization 54 8. Chapter 4 The Look into a Mindset 73 9. Chapter 5 Research Findings 93 10. Chapter 6 Conclusion 108 11. References 112 iii List of Tables Table 1 .......................................................................................................................................... 80 Table 2 .........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • DIPLOMATIC and CONSULAR LAW Right of Legation
    DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR LAW Right of legation/ Right of Diplomatic Intercourse It is the right of the state to send and receive diplomatic missions, which enables states to carry on friendly intercourse. It is governed by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961). The exercise of this right is one of the most effective ways of facilitating and promoting intercourse among nations. Through the active right of sending diplomatic representatives and the passive right of receiving them, States are able to deal more directly and closely with each other in the improvement of their mutual intercourse. NOTE: As the right of legation is purely consensual, the State is not obliged to maintain diplomatic relations with other States. If it wants to, a State may shut itself from the rest of the world, as Japan did until the close of the 19th century. Disadvantage: A policy of isolation would hinder the progress of a State since it would be denying itself of the many benefits available from the international community. Agents of diplomatic intercourse 1. Head of State 2. Foreign secretary or minister 3. Members of diplomatic service 4. Special diplomatic agents appointed by head of the State 5. Envoys ceremonial Diplomatic corps It is a body consisting of the different diplomatic representatives who have been accredited to the same local or receiving State. It is headed by a doyun de corps, who, by tradition, is the oldest member within the highest rank or, in Catholic countries, the papal nuncio. Functions of a diplomatic mission (Re-P-Pro-N-A-R) 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Breaking Bad and Cinematic Television
    temp Breaking Bad and Cinematic Television ANGELO RESTIVO Breaking Bad and Cinematic Television A production of the Console- ing Passions book series Edited by Lynn Spigel Breaking Bad and Cinematic Television ANGELO RESTIVO DUKE UNIVERSITY PRESS Durham and London 2019 © 2019 Duke University Press All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America on acid- free paper ∞ Typeset in Warnock and News Gothic by Tseng Information Systems, Inc. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Restivo, Angelo, [date] author. Title: Breaking bad and cinematic television / Angelo Restivo. Description: Durham : Duke University Press, 2019. | Series: Spin offs : a production of the Console-ing Passions book series | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018033898 (print) LCCN 2018043471 (ebook) ISBN 9781478003441 (ebook) ISBN 9781478001935 (hardcover : alk. paper) ISBN 9781478003083 (pbk. : alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Breaking bad (Television program : 2008–2013) | Television series— Social aspects—United States. | Television series—United States—History and criticism. | Popular culture—United States—History—21st century. Classification: LCC PN1992.77.B74 (ebook) | LCC PN1992.77.B74 R47 2019 (print) | DDC 791.45/72—dc23 LC record available at https: // lccn.loc.gov/2018033898 Cover art: Breaking Bad, episode 103 (2008). Duke University Press gratefully acknowledges the support of Georgia State University’s College of the Arts, School of Film, Media, and Theatre, and Creative Media Industries Institute, which provided funds toward the publication of this book. Not to mention that most terrible drug—ourselves— which we take in solitude. —WALTER BENJAMIN Contents note to the reader ix acknowledgments xi Introduction 1 1 The Cinematic 25 2 The House 54 3 The Puzzle 81 4 Just Gaming 116 5 Immanence: A Life 137 notes 159 bibliography 171 index 179 Note to the Reader While this is an academic study, I have tried to write the book in such a way that it will be accessible to the generally educated reader.
    [Show full text]
  • The Conundrum of Common Law Immunity
    BETWEEN LAW AND DIPLOMACY: THE CONUNDRUM OF COMMON LAW IMMUNITY Chimène I. Keitner Drawing the line between disputes that can be adjudicated in domestic (U.S.) courts and those that cannot has perplexed judges and jurists since the Founding Era. Although Congress provided a statutory framework for the jurisdictional immunities of foreign states in 1976, important ambiguities remain. Notably, in 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Samantar v. Yousuf that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) does not govern suits against foreign officials unless the foreign state is the “real party in interest.” This decision clarified, but did not fully resolve, conceptual and doctrinal questions surrounding the immunities of foreign officials whose conduct is challenged in U.S. courts and who do not fall within existing statutes. The original research and analysis offered in this Article provides the necessary foundation for approaching, and ultimately answering, persistent questions about what common law immunity entails. This research reveals that the deferential judicial posture of the 1940s was an aberration and that courts retain the authority to assess the rationales for varying degrees of judicial deference in different types of cases. Unpacking these cases points strongly towards the conclusion that, although the Executive Branch remains best situated to assess the potential foreign policy consequences of pending litigation, courts are ultimately Alfred & Hanna Fromm Professor of International Law, U.C. Hastings Law, San Francisco. The author served as Counselor on International Law in the U.S. Department of State in 2016−2017. This Article was written after the author left that position and does not necessarily represent the views of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Than Neighbors New Developments in the Institutional Strengthening of Mexico’S Armed Forces in the Context of U.S.-Mexican Military Cooperation
    More than Neighbors New Developments in the Institutional Strengthening of Mexico’s Armed Forces in the Context of U.S.-Mexican Military Cooperation By Iñigo Guevara February 2018 More than Neighbors New Developments in the Institutional strengthening of Mexico’s armed forces in the context of US-Mexican Military Cooperation By Iñigo Guevara “With Mexico, very, very strong, quiet military-to-military relations” … … “This is a relationship that has been many decades in the making. Just go back - just for an example - go back to World War II. It doesn't start with us. It will not end with us.” -U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis1 Strategic Reasoning for Closer U.S. –Mexico Military Ties Despite the deep cultural and economic diversity of North America’s 486+ million inhabitants, the interconnectedness of the three countries means that they all face, to various degrees, the same threats, which range from serious to existential. Existential threats have long been narrowed to a nuclear war with Russia, to a much lesser degree China, and the now aspiring North Korea. The lack of an existential threat from the south has meant that Mexico was not a priority for the U.S. defense community. Mexico’s non-interventionist interior-looking foreign policy, the lack of an external threat, and an extremely complex politico-military relationship also meant that the defense relationship with the United States was cordial, but distant over several decades. Since the 1980’s, the Mexican Navy and Air Force did source their token conventional fighting capacity from the United States: a squadron of tactical jet fighters and a flotilla of second-hand destroyers and frigates; however, this was mainly out of convenience rather than a strategic decision to develop binational defense ties.
    [Show full text]
  • “Control...Over the Entire State of Coahuila” an Analysis of Testimonies in Trials Against Zeta Members in San Antonio, Austin, and Del Rio, Texas
    “Control...Over the Entire State of Coahuila” An analysis of testimonies in trials against Zeta members in San Antonio, Austin, and Del Rio, Texas NOVEMBER 2017 This report does not represent the official position of the School of Law or the University of Texas, and the views presented here reflect only the opinions of the individual authors and of the Human Rights Clinic 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................ 3 2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................. 5 A. Project Description And Purpose ............................................... 5 B. The Trials ................................................................... 6 I. The San Antonio Trial..................................................... 6 II. The Austin Trials ......................................................... 7 III. The Del Rio Trial ......................................................... 9 C. Background Information ...................................................... 9 I. Mexico’s Security Strategy ................................................. 9 II. Coahuila, Mexico ......................................................... 10 III. Brief History of the Zeta Cartel ............................................. 11 3. FINDINGS ON THE ZETA CARTEL STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS ......................... 13 A. Hierarchy and Organization. .................................................. 13 B. Most Important Zeta Members Based on Testimonies .............................
    [Show full text]
  • Nina: Hey, Guys; Welcome to Podcast Fandom, the Official Podcast of Projectfandom.Com
    Nina: Hey, guys; welcome to Podcast Fandom, the official podcast of ProjectFandom.com. I’m your host, Nina. Meghan: I am Meghan. John: And I am John. Nina: Aaaand, I think we’re okay. Meghan-- Meghan: Yes. Nina: Can you hear me? Meghan: I can hear you. Nina: Okay. We’ve been having some technical difficulties; this is like our fourth time trying. Um, so, tonight we’re going to be talking about--for the very last time--Breaking Bad. We put out our episode last week to discuss the series finale “Felina”, and it was already so long when I was editing it--we got into so many discussion about the series as a whole, that it seemed best to do a series retrospective where we could kind of gather our thoughts about everything we’d experienced with the show for five years. Meghan: Sounds so traumatizing. Nina: It is! It’s very traumatizing. And so, we put up some questions no our site last week when we released the episode, and we had a few responses on Facebook. Some interesting stuff that I think is going to be pretty interesting. We had started off discussing what our favorite episode was, and I had a hard time narrowing it down, but John you have one episode that you can say is your absolute favorite. John: Mmhmm… Nina: And it is-- John: Oh, you want me to say it. [group laughter] Nina: Yeah, I setting you up. Meghan: “But I’m not telling you guys.” John: Yeah, that’s a secret.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing the United States-Mexico Border: Cooperative Solutions to Common Challenges
    Managing the United States-Mexico Border: Cooperative Solutions to Common Challenges Full Report of the Binational Task Force on the United States-Mexico Border Full Report Managing the United States-Mexico Border: Cooperative Solutions to Common Problems Full Report of the Binational Task Force on the United States-Mexico Border Executive Summary Task Force Co-Chairs Robert C. Bonner Andrés Rozental Former Commissioner of U.S. Customs Former Deputy Foreign Minister of and Border Protection; Mexico; Former President and Founder Former Administrator, Drug Enforcement Mexican Council on Foreign Relations Administration (COMEXI) Task Force Co-Directors Carlos Heredia Chappell Lawson Research Fellow, Centro de Associate Professor of Political Science, Investigación y Docencia Económicas Massachusetts Institute of Technology; (CIDE); Former Member of the Mexican Adjunct Fellow, Pacific Council on Congress International Policy 1 Full Report Task Force Members Ruben Barrales, President and Chief Executive Officer, San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce, and former Director, White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs Malin Burnham, Vice Chairman, Cushman & Wakefield of San Diego Jorge Chabat, Professor and Research Fellow, (CIDE) Luis de la Calle, Managing Director and founding Partner of De la Calle, Madrazo, Mancera, SC, and former Deputy Secretary of Commerce of Mexico. Lee Cullum, Syndicated Columnist and Television Commentator based at the Dallas Morning News Jeffrey Davidow, President of the Institute of the Americas, former U.S. Ambassador to Mexico, and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Carlos Alfonso de la Parra, Professor and Researcher of the Urban and Environmental Studies Department, El Colegio de la Frontera Norte (COLEF), Tijuana Gary L.
    [Show full text]
  • Diplomatic and Consular Law in the Internet Age
    (2006) 10 SYBIL 117–132 © 2006 Singapore Year Book of International Law and Contributors DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR LAW IN THE INTERNET AGE ∗ by WON-MOG CHOI The web of our life is of a mingled yarn, good and ill together.1 The evolution of diplomacy may involve taking advantage of technological developments such as the Internet. The Internet has become an indispensable means of diplomatic negotiations and communications with various interest groups. In this new environment, the traditional law of diplomacy and consular affairs must also evolve through new interpretation of existing rules. If some of those rules are deficient or insufficient to regulate “Internet diplomacy”, new rules ought to be created. International rules on the inviolability of premises, inviolability of documents and archives, freedom of official correspondence, privilege of tax exemption, and immunity from judicial jurisdiction must be newly interpreted and applied so as to reflect the cyber diplomacy environment. In addition, new rules of inviolability for the “cyber diplomatic or consular bag” must be created. I. INTRODUCTION With the phenomenal growth of communication technology, the Internet has unprecedented potential to affect education, politics, society and the everyday lives of people as no other medium has had in the past.2 One of the reasons for this is the Internet’s usefulness in helping many people overcome geographical barriers and share information freely. With the Internet, it is no longer necessary to maintain costly physical establishments or contact points for sharing and exchanging information. Virtual contact points in cyber-space enable people to communicate easily, even with multiple parties simultaneously.
    [Show full text]
  • LL.B.) (Effective from Academic Year 2019-20)
    UNIVERSITY OF DELHI BACHELOR OF LAW (LL.B.) (Effective from Academic Year 2019-20) PROGRAMME BROCHURE LL.B. Revised Syllabus as approved by Academic Council on XXXX, 2018 and Executive Council on XXXX, 2018 Department of Law, University of Delhi CONTENTS Page I. About the Department 6 II. Introduction to CBCS 6 Scope Definitions 6 Programme Objectives (POs) 7 Programme Specific Outcomes (PSOs) 7 III. LL.B. Programme Details Programme Structure 8 LL.B. Programme (Semester Wise) 13 Eligibility for Admissions 18 Assessment of Students’ Performance 19 and Scheme of Examination Pass Percentage & Promotion Criteria: 20 Semester to Semester Progression Conversion of Marks into Grades Grade Points CGPA Calculation Division of Degree into Classes 23 Attendance Requirement 23 Span Period 23 Guidelines for the Award of Internal Assessment Marks 24 IV. Course Wise Content Details for LL.B. Programme 25- 429 2 Department of Law, University of Delhi I Semester (CORE COURSES) Page No. LB-CC-101 Jurisprudence-I (Legal Method, Indian Legal 25 System and Basic Theory of Law) LB-CC-102 Law of Contract 32 LB-CC-103 Law of Torts including Motor Vehicles Act and 39 Consumer Protection Act LB-CC-104 Law of Crimes-I: Indian Penal Code 48 LB-CC-105 Family Law-I 57 II Semester (CORE COURSES) LB-CC-201 Law of Evidence 63 LB-CC-202 Family Law – II 71 LB-CC-203 Law of Crimes-II: Code of Criminal Procedure 78 LB-CC-205 Property Law 85 LB-CC-206 Public International Law 92 III Semester (CORE COURSES) LB-CC-301 Constitutional Law-I 99 LB-CC-302 Company Law 111 LB-CC-303
    [Show full text]