DOCSLIB.ORG

The Limits of Punishment Transitional Justice and Violent Extremism

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Limits of Punishment Transitional Justice and Violent Extremism i n s t i t u t e f o r i n t e g r at e d t r a n s i t i o n s The Limits of Punishment Transitional Justice and Violent Extremism May, 2018 United Nations University – Centre for Policy Research The UNU Centre for Policy Research (UNU-CPR) is a UN-focused think tank based at UNU Centre in Tokyo. UNU-CPR’s mission is to generate policy research that informs major UN policy processes in the fields of peace and security, humanitarian affairs, and global development. i n s t i t u t e f o r i n t e g r at e d t r a n s i t i o n s Institute for Integrated Transitions IFIT’s aim is to help fragile and conflict-affected states achieve more sustainable transitions out of war or authoritarianism by serving as an independent expert resource for locally-led efforts to improve political, economic, social and security conditions. IFIT seeks to transform current practice away from fragmented interventions and toward more integrated solutions that strengthen peace, democracy and human rights in countries attempting to break cycles of conflict or repression. Cover image nigeria. 2017. Maiduguri. After being screened for association with Boko Haram and held in military custody, this child was released into a transit center and the care of the government and Unicef. © Paolo Pellegrin/Magnum Photos. This material has been supported by UK aid from the UK government; the views expressed are those of the authors. © 2018 United Nations University. All Rights Reserved. ISBN: 978-92-808-9041-9 Table of Contents About the Project Team..................................... 4 Acknowledgements ........................................ 6 Introduction to the Project .................................. 7 Framework Paper . 12 Iraq Case Study . 44 Nigeria Case Study . 83 Somalia Case Study ........................................ 126 About the Project Team Vanda Felbab-Brown: Dr. Vanda Felbab-Brown is the author of the Nigeria and Somalia case studies for The Limits of Punishment project. She is a senior fellow in the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC. She is an expert on international and internal conflicts and nontraditional security threats, including insurgency, organized crime, urban violence, and illicit economies. Her fieldwork and research have covered, among others, Afghanistan, South and Southeast Asia, the Andean region, Mexico, Morocco, and Eastern and Western Africa. Dr. Felbab-Brown is the author of The Extinction Market: Wildlife Trafficking and How to Counter It (Hurst-Oxford 2017); Narco Noir: Mexico’s Cartels, Cops, and Corrup- tion (Brookings Institution Press, 2019, forthcoming); Aspiration and Ambivalence: Strategies and Realities of Counterinsurgency and State-Building in Afghanistan (Brookings Institution Press, 2012) and Shooting Up: Counterinsurgency and the War on Drugs (Brookings Institution Press, 2010) and co-author with Harold Trinkunas and Shadi Hamid of Militants, Criminals, and Warlords: The Challenge of Local Governance in an Age of Disorder (Brookings Institution Press, 2017). A frequent commentator in US and international media, she is also the author of numerous policy reports, academic articles, and opinion pieces and regularly provides US congressional testimony. Mark Freeman: Mark Freeman is the founder and Executive Director of the Institute for Integrated Transitions (IFIT). Over the last two decades, he has supported and advised social, political and busi- ness leaders in over 25 countries. Before founding IFIT, Mark served as Chief of External Relations at the International Crisis Group and as a lecturer-in-law at KU Leuven. Prior to that, he helped launch and direct the International Center for Transitional Justice, in New York and Brussels. Mark holds a B.A. from McGill University, a J.D. from the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law, and an LL.M from Columbia Law School where he was a Human Rights Fellow and James Kent Scholar. He is the author of Necessary Evils: Amnesties and the Search for Justice (Cambridge UP, 2010) and Truth Com- missions and Procedural Fairness (Cambridge UP, 2006), which received the American Society of International Law’s highest award. Currently he is co-authoring a new book, Negotiating Transitional Justice (Cambridge UP, forthcoming 2019), which draws on the years he worked as adviser inside the Havana peace talks between the Colombian government and FARC-EP. Siobhan O’Neil: Siobhan O’Neil is a Project Advisor for The Limits of Punishment project. She joined the United Nations University Office in New York as Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration Project Manager in February 2015. Prior to joining UNU, Ms O’Neil was a consultant at the UN Mine Action Service (UNAMS), providing strategic guidance and programme support for key mine action programmes in Mali and Palestine. Ms O’Neil has experience in both the security and intelligence fields: In the wake of the 11 September 2001 attacks, she worked for the newly created state homeland security agencies in New York and New Jersey, helping state and local governments build their capacity to detect, prevent, and recover from terrorist attacks. She later served as the analyst for domestic security and intelligence at the Congressional Research Service, identifying emerging threats and evaluating possible policy responses for Congress. During the course of her doctoral studies, Ms O’Neil worked as a research analyst at the RAND Corporation on projects pertaining to counterinsurgency transitions, insurgent motivations, and civil-military coordination during domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive attacks. Mara Revkin: Mara Revkin is the author of the Iraq case study for The Limits of Punishment project. Mara is a Ph.D. Candidate in Political Science at Yale University and an Islamic Law & Civili- zation Research Fellow at Yale Law School, from which she received her J.D. Her research examines The Limits of Punishment: Introduction to the Project | 5 state-building, lawmaking, and governance by armed groups with a current focus on the case of the Islamic State. During the 2017-2018 academic year, she will be collecting data for her dissertation in Turkey and Iraq supported by the US Institute for Peace as a Jennings Randolph Peace Scholar. Mara is a member of the New York State Bar Association and is also working on research projects concerning the legal status of civilians who have lived in areas controlled and governed by terrorist groups. She is currently the lead researcher on Syria for United Nations University’s forthcoming study on Children in Extreme Violence. Her academic work has been published in the Annual Review of Law and Social Science, the Oxford Handbook of Islamic Law, and the UCLA Journal of Near Eastern and Islamic Law, among others. Before graduate school, she was a Junior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (Middle East Program) and a Fulbright Fellow in Jordan and Oman. She holds a B.A. in Political Science and Arabic from Swarthmore College. Cale Salih: Cale Salih is the Project Lead for The Limits of Punishment project. She is a Research Officer with the UNU Centre for Policy Research focusing on the changing nature of conflict. Prior to joining UNU, she was a Project Manager at the Institute for Integrated Transitions in Barcelona, focusing on post-conflict and post-authoritarian transitions in fragile and conflict-affected states. She has also held a number of research positions focused on the Middle East, including with the International Crisis Group, the European Council on Foreign Relations, and Integrity. In addition, she has worked for media outlets including Al-Monitor and The Atlantic, and has published op-eds in, among others, The New York Times, Foreign Affairs, and The Guardian. She holds a Masters of Studies in International Human Rights Law from Oxford University and an undergraduate degree (A.B.) from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Ronald Slye: Ronald Slye is a Professor of Law at the Seattle University School of Law. He has provided advice to numerous countries in their efforts to address a legacy of gross violations of human rights, including Tunisia, Colombia, Burundi, South Africa, and Uganda. He is a legal advisor and board member of the Documentation Center of Cambodia, which has addressed the legacy of the atrocities committed by the Khmer Rouge. From 2009 to 2013, Professor Slye served as one of three international commissioners (and the only commissioner not from Africa) on the Kenyan Truth Justice and Reconciliation Commission. He is the author of the forthcoming book, The Kenyan TJRC: An Outsider’s View from the Inside (Cambridge University Press), and is co-author of a best-selling casebook in the United States, International Criminal Law and Its Enforcement (Foundation Press). Professor Slye received his B.A. from Columbia University, his M.Phil in International Relations from the University of Cambridge, and his J.D. from the Yale Law School. Adam Day: Adam Day is a Project Adviser for The Limits of Punishment project. Adam joined as Senior Policy Adviser in the UNU Centre for Policy Research in January 2017. Prior to UNU, he served for a decade in the UN, focused on peace operations, political engagement in conflict settings, mediation and protection of civilians. Prior to the UN, Mr Day worked in Human Rights Watch’s Justice Program, for the Open Society Justice Initiative in Cambodia, and supported the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. An attorney and former member of the New York Bar Association, Mr Day was an international litigator in New York, where he also worked pro bono for the Center for Constitutional Rights on behalf of Guantanamo detainees in their suits against former US officials for torture. Mr Day holds a Juris Doctorate from UC Berkeley School of Law, a Masters in Law and Diplomacy from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, and a Masters in Comparative Literature from Brown University.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Lost Women of Iraq: Family-Based Violence During Armed Conflict © Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights and Minority Rights Group International November 2015
    CEASEFIRE centre for civilian rights Miriam Puttick The Lost Women of Iraq: Family-based violence during armed conflict © Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights and Minority Rights Group International November 2015 Cover photo: This report has been produced as part of the Ceasefire project, a multi-year pro- Kurdish women and men protesting gramme supported by the European Union to implement a system of civilian-led against violence against women march in Sulaymaniyah, Iraq, monitoring of human rights abuses in Iraq, focusing in particular on the rights of November 2008. vulnerable civilians including vulnerable women, internally-displaced persons (IDPs), stateless persons, and ethnic or religious minorities, and to assess the feasibility of © Shwan Mohammed/AFP/Getty Images extending civilian-led monitoring to other country situations. This report has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of the publishers and can un- der no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union. Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights The Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights is a new initiative to develop ‘civilian-led monitoring’ of violations of international humanitarian law or human rights, to pursue legal and political accountability for those responsible for such violations, and to develop the practice of civilian rights. The Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights is registered as a charity and a company limited by guarantee under English law; charity no: 1160083, company no: 9069133. Minority Rights Group International MRG is an NGO working to secure the rights of ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities and indigenous peoples worldwide, and to promote cooperation and understanding between communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Rules of Evidence: 801-03, 901
    FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE: 801-03, 901 Rule 801. Definitions The following definitions apply under this article: (a) Statement. A "statement" is (1) an oral or written assertion or (2) nonverbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by the person as an assertion. (b) Declarant. A "declarant" is a person who makes a statement. (c) Hearsay. "Hearsay" is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. (d) Statements which are not hearsay. A statement is not hearsay if-- (1) Prior statement by witness. The declarant testifies at the trial or hearing and is subject to cross- examination concerning the statement, and the statement is (A) inconsistent with the declarant's testimony, and was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition, or (B) consistent with the declarant's testimony and is offered to rebut an express or implied charge against the declarant of recent fabrication or improper influence or motive, or (C) one of identification of a person made after perceiving the person; or (2) Admission by party-opponent. The statement is offered against a party and is (A) the party's own statement, in either an individual or a representative capacity or (B) a statement of which the party has manifested an adoption or belief in its truth, or (C) a statement by a person authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the subject, or (D) a statement by the party's agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment, made during the existence of the relationship, or (E) a statement by a coconspirator of a party during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Al Shabaab's American Recruits
    Al Shabaab’s American Recruits Updated: February, 2015 A wave of Americans traveling to Somalia to fight with Al Shabaab, an Al Qaeda-linked terrorist group, was described by the FBI as one of the "highest priorities in anti-terrorism." Americans began traveling to Somalia to join Al Shabaab in 2007, around the time the group stepped up its insurgency against Somalia's transitional government and its Ethiopian supporters, who have since withdrawn. At least 50 U.S. citizens and permanent residents are believed to have joined or attempted to join or aid the group since that time. The number of Americans joining Al Shabaab began to decline in 2012, and by 2014, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) replaced Al Shabaab as the terrorist group of choice for U.S. recruits. However, there continue to be new cases of Americans attempting to join or aid Al Shabaab. These Americans have received weapons training alongside recruits from other countries, including Britain, Australia, Sweden and Canada, and have used the training to fight against Ethiopian forces, African Union troops and the internationally-supported Transitional Federal Government in Somalia, according to court documents. Most of the American men training with Al Shabaab are believed to have been radicalized in the U.S., especially in Minneapolis, according to U.S. officials. The FBI alleges that these young men have been recruited by Al Shabaab both on the Internet and in person. One such recruit from Minneapolis, 22-year-old Abidsalan Hussein Ali, was one of two suicide bombers who attacked African Union troops on October 29, 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Cartels" Under the New German Cartel Statute
    Vanderbilt Law Review Volume 11 Issue 2 Issue 2 - A Symposium on Trade Article 1 Regulation and Practices 3-1958 "Cartels" Under the New German Cartel Statute Heinrich Kronstein Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr Part of the Labor and Employment Law Commons Recommended Citation Heinrich Kronstein, "Cartels" Under the New German Cartel Statute, 11 Vanderbilt Law Review 271 (1958) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol11/iss2/1 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW VOLUME 11 MARcH, 1958 Nuavim 2 A SYMPOSIUM ON TRADE REGULATION AND PRACTICES "CARTELS" UNDER THE NEW GERMAN CARTEL STATUTE HEINRICH KRONSTEIN* Introduction On January 1, 1958, the "Cartel Statute" of the Federal Republic of Germany' became effective. American interests in this event are threefold: (1) During the past decade Americans have tried to convince the Western world that in an industrial, democratic society legislation of the American antitrust type is imperative. Is the German cartel statute a piece of legislation of this type? (2) The enactment of the statute brings to an end the application of Law No. 56 enacted by the American Military Government on January 28, 1947. The Paris Treaty between the Allied Powers and Germany provided that the Allied "cartel laws," though administered by the German Minister of Economics, should remain in effect until the German legislature could agree on a new statute.
    [Show full text]
  • Tol, Xeer, and Somalinimo: Recognizing Somali And
    Tol , Xeer , and Somalinimo : Recognizing Somali and Mushunguli Refugees as Agents in the Integration Process A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Vinodh Kutty IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY David M. Lipset July 2010 © Vinodh Kutty 2010 Acknowledgements A doctoral dissertation is never completed without the help of many individuals. And to all of them, I owe a deep debt of gratitude. Funding for this project was provided by two block grants from the Department of Anthropology at the University of Minnesota and by two Children and Families Fellowship grants from the Annie E. Casey Foundation. These grants allowed me to travel to the United Kingdom and Kenya to conduct research and observe the trajectory of the refugee resettlement process from refugee camp to processing for immigration and then to resettlement to host country. The members of my dissertation committee, David Lipset, my advisor, Timothy Dunnigan, Frank Miller, and Bruce Downing all provided invaluable support and assistance. Indeed, I sometimes felt that my advisor, David Lipset, would not have been able to write this dissertation without my assistance! Timothy Dunnigan challenged me to honor the Somali community I worked with and for that I am grateful because that made the dissertation so much better. Frank Miller asked very thoughtful questions and always encouraged me and Bruce Downing provided me with detailed feedback to ensure that my writing was clear, succinct and organized. I also have others to thank. To my colleagues at the Office of Multicultural Services at Hennepin County, I want to say “Thank You Very Much!” They all provided me with the inspiration to look at the refugee resettlement process more critically and dared me to suggest ways to improve it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Right to Reparations for Acts of Torture: What Right, What Remedies?*
    96 STATE OF THE ART The right to reparations for acts of torture: what right, what remedies?* Dinah Shelton** 1. Introduction international obligation must cease and the In all legal systems, one who wrongfully wrong-doing state must repair the harm injures another is held responsible for re- caused by the illegal act. In the 1927 Chor- dressing the injury caused. Holding the zow Factory case, the PCIJ declared dur- wrongdoer accountable to the victim serves a ing the jurisdictional phase of the case that moral need because, on a practical level, col- “reparation … is the indispensable comple- lective insurance might just as easily provide ment of a failure to apply a convention and adequate compensation for losses and for fu- there is no necessity for this to be stated in ture economic needs. Remedies are thus not the convention itself.”1 Thus, when rights only about making the victim whole; they are created by international law and a cor- express opprobrium to the wrongdoer from relative duty imposed on states to respect the perspective of society as a whole. This those rights, it is not necessary to specify is incorporated in prosecution and punish- the obligation to afford remedies for breach ment when the injury stems from a criminal of the obligation, because the duty to repair offense, but moral outrage also may be ex- emerges automatically by operation of law; pressed in the form of fines or exemplary or indeed, the PCIJ has called the obligation of punitive damages awarded the injured party. reparation part of the general conception of Such sanctions express the social convic- law itself.2 tion that disrespect for the rights of others In a later phase of the same case, the impairs the wrongdoer’s status as a moral Court specified the nature of reparations, claimant.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Hearsay Issue Sheet
    COMPILED BY: AEQUITAS: THE PROSECUTORS’ RESOURCE ON VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN Medical Hearsay Issue Sheet I. ROLE OF THE SANE/SAFE NURSE A. National Definition of a SANE/SAFE: The 2004 National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations define SAFEs as, “health care professionals who conduct the examination.” SANEs are defined as “registered nurses who received specialized education and fulfill clinical requirement required to perform these exams. Additionally, SAFE and SANEs “are often used to more broadly denote a health care provider who has been specially educated and completed clinical requirement to perform the exam.” B. How do SANE/SAFE’s define themselves: The definition of the SANE/SAFE is crucial to the determination of the primary purpose of the sexual assault exam. The definition of the SANE/SAFE role will vary by jurisdiction and it must be clear that the SANE/SAFE is not a branch of law enforcement but an independent medical professional who has a two pronged responsibility to the community: (1) to provide access to comprehensive immediate care; and (2) also to facilitate investigations. The national protocol emphasizes a “coordinated community response,” focusing on “victim centered care.”1 II. CRAWFORD OBJECTIONS A. What is a Crawford Objection? Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004) held that statements by witnesses that are testimonial are barred under the confrontation clause, unless witnesses are available and defendant had prior opportunity to cross examine, regardless of reliability. In determining whether testimony is admissible under Crawford/Davis, first ask yourself two questions; (1) Is the statement testimonial? And (2) What was the primary purpose for obtaining a statement? 1 National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Cartel Enforcement Global Review – September 2020 CARTEL ENFORCEMENT GLOBAL REVIEW – SEPTEMBER 2020
    Cartel Enforcement Global review – September 2020 CARTEL ENFORCEMENT GLOBAL REVIEW – SEPTEMBER 2020 Fight against cartels continues to consolidate around the world The period between 2017 and the beginning of 2020 has shown the importance of the prosecution of cartels in the context of global competition law enforcement. Competition authorities are intensifying their initiatives and concluding investigations in strategic sectors such as technology and digital services, construction, transport and mobility services, life sciences, financial services, retail and consumer goods, agriculture, food and energy. In many jurisdictions, fines imposed against participants In the EU, Directive (EU) 2019/1 (ECN+ Directive), in cartels have increased significantly or remained at a aimed at providing competition authorities of high level in the reference period. the Member States with the means to implement competition rules more effectively and to guarantee In 2019, the European Commission imposed cartel the proper functioning of the internal market, should be fines of around EUR1.4 billion. Taking into account fines implemented by Member States by February 2021. of National Competition Authorities, the total fines imposed within the EU (excluding the UK) exceeded The criminal prosecution of cartels continues to be a key EUR4 billion in 2019. factor in many jurisdictions, with particular regard to US, Canada, Australia and Ireland. New Zealand introduced In the US, the amount of fines for cartels, criminal penalties adopting a law that will come into after an important decrease in 2017, rose again force on April 8, 2021. In the UK, the authorities to USD356 million in 2019. continue to seek directors’ disqualification orders in addition to monetary penalties.
    [Show full text]
  • Functions of Reparation Systems
    CHAPTER2 Functions of Reparation Systems INTRODUCTION In order to think effectively about the diversity of reparation systems and what they accomplish, it may be useful to attempt an analysis of the functions which might be desired in reparation systems and to note how these functions seem to be served at the present time. One may start by asking why reparation should be made at all; a dozen ideas come quickly to mind. "Justice" and "fairness" may lead the list and will as quickly be laid aside as one recalls the end­ less disputes about what is just and fair. To some observers, justice imperatively demands a negligence standard, while the negligence standard is just as clearly unjust in the minds of others. Further­ more, a little investigation reveals that there is no unanimity among civilized countries, nor among advanced and industrialized countries, nor among Christian and free-enterprise countries, about what is "just" or "fair" in this sphere. In any event, "justice" seems to be a package of ideas which can be better understood if they are pulled apart and examined one by one. It would be easy to list twenty or thirty distinguishable objec­ tives of reparation, but it will probably prove more useful to pre­ sent a smaller number of categories under which functions may be grouped and to employ concepts broad enough to accommodate items more numerous than can be detailed here. To this end, reparation functions will be discussed under the following head­ ings: 1. Conferring benefits on injury victims and their families 2. Allocating the burdens of reparation 75 76 INJURY REPARATION IN THE UNITED STATES 3.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legitimation of Extrajudicial Violence in an Urban Community
    1174 Social Forces The Legitimation of Extrajudicial Violence The Legitimation of Extrajudicial Violence in an 2020 09 May on user Library Medicine of School NYU by https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/98/3/1174/5382469 from Downloaded Urban Community Jon Gordon, New York University .................................................................................................................. ost scholarship on violence in urban communities accepts the Weberian association between legitimate violence and the state. Under this assump- Mtion, extrajudicial violence is interpreted as a symptom of legal cynicism, which is fomented by a negligent or illegitimate state apparatus. How, then, do we explain communities in which extrajudicial violence and legal authority are seen as legitimate simultaneously? Drawing on ethnographic observations of interactions among an armed group, residents, and police officials in a poor zone of Medellín, Colombia, I found that residents routinely appealed to the armed group and police to supply security and redress grievances. This indicates that structurally induced pro- blems of police corruption and legal cynicism cannot fully explain the patterns of enduring violence I observed. Residents and police situationally endorsed and autho- rized violence specialists and extrajudicial punishments as legitimate elements of the local security system. In doing so, community members played a key role in con- structing violence as an acceptable practice for enhancing security and placating lo- cals who had
    [Show full text]
  • Unilever to Spread Magnum Vegan Reach As Trend Set to Mainstream In
    Food and Beverage Innovation December 2018 - 2019 February Volume 17 ISSN 1570-9108 DOUBLE ISSUE Unilever to spread Magnum Vegan reach as trend set to mainstream in 2019 Unilever has introduced its Magnum suitability going forward, with plant-based Vegan ice cream to Australian markets milks and meat substitutes already rapidly with more European markets to follow this moving into the mainstream. year, as the trend towards reformulating The rise of veganism is indicative classic items in vegan forms accelerates. of a growing theme towards mindful At launch, Unilever, described it as a consumption. “velvety plant-based product” that provides Animal welfare and environmental “a creamy experience without the need concerns form clear goals among the for dairy.” “A first for the Australian following of such a strict diet. Vegan market, the 100 percent dairy-free range products are increasingly associated to will feature two of the brand’s signature ethical packaging (50 percent), organic flavors…allowing vegans the opportunity (31 percent), gluten-free (34 percent) and to enjoy and share a moment of pure GMO-free (27 percent) (CAGR 2014-2018). pleasure,” the company said. In 2018, 60 percent of all products with Last year, two new vegan versions vegan claims were reported in Europe. of the popular Magnum ice cream bars continued on page 3 were launched in Sweden and Finland. TOP MARKETTop SUBCATEGORIES market subcategories OF FOOD & BEVERAGES of food LAUNCHES & beverages WITH A “VEGAN” launches CLAIM (GLOBAL, 2018) Magnum Vegan Classic and Magnum with a “vegan” claim (Global, 2018) Vegan Almond, which are European Vegetarian Union approved, are made 6 from a pea protein base and covered in smooth dark chocolate.
    [Show full text]
  • Jihadism in Africa Local Causes, Regional Expansion, International Alliances
    SWP Research Paper Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs Guido Steinberg and Annette Weber (Eds.) Jihadism in Africa Local Causes, Regional Expansion, International Alliances RP 5 June 2015 Berlin All rights reserved. © Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, 2015 SWP Research Papers are peer reviewed by senior researchers and the execu- tive board of the Institute. They express exclusively the personal views of the authors. SWP Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs Ludwigkirchplatz 3­4 10719 Berlin Germany Phone +49 30 880 07-0 Fax +49 30 880 07-100 www.swp-berlin.org [email protected] ISSN 1863-1053 Translation by Meredith Dale (Updated English version of SWP-Studie 7/2015) Table of Contents 5 Problems and Recommendations 7 Jihadism in Africa: An Introduction Guido Steinberg and Annette Weber 13 Al-Shabaab: Youth without God Annette Weber 31 Libya: A Jihadist Growth Market Wolfram Lacher 51 Going “Glocal”: Jihadism in Algeria and Tunisia Isabelle Werenfels 69 Spreading Local Roots: AQIM and Its Offshoots in the Sahara Wolfram Lacher and Guido Steinberg 85 Boko Haram: Threat to Nigeria and Its Northern Neighbours Moritz Hütte, Guido Steinberg and Annette Weber 99 Conclusions and Recommendations Guido Steinberg and Annette Weber 103 Appendix 103 Abbreviations 104 The Authors Problems and Recommendations Jihadism in Africa: Local Causes, Regional Expansion, International Alliances The transnational terrorism of the twenty-first century feeds on local and regional conflicts, without which most terrorist groups would never have appeared in the first place. That is the case in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Syria and Iraq, as well as in North and West Africa and the Horn of Africa.
    [Show full text]