DOCSLIB.ORG

Before the Proscribed Organisations Appeal

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Before the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Appeal No: PC/02/2006 Date of Hearing: 23rd-31st July 2007 Date of Judgment 30th November 2007 PROSCRIBED ORGANISATIONS APPEAL COMMISSION Before: SIR HARRY OGNALL (Chairman) MISS L BOSWELL QC MR S CATCHPOLE QC LORD ALTON OF LIVERPOOL & OTHERS (In the Matter of The People’s Mojahadeen Organisation of Iran) Appellants and SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT Respondent For the Appellants: Mr Nigel Pleming QC, Mr Mark Muller QC and Mr Edward Grieves Instructed by Mr Stephen Grosz of Bindman & Partners Special Advocates: Mr Andrew Nicol QC and Mr Martin Chamberlain Instructed by the Special Advocates Support Office For the Respondent: Mr Jonathan Swift and Ms Gemma White Instructed by the Treasury Solicitor for the Secretary of State __________________________________________ OPEN DETERMINATION _________________________________________ 1 A. THE HISTORICAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND (i) Introduction 1. Under Section 3(3)(a) of the Terrorism Act 2000 (the 2000 Act), on the 28th February 2001 the Secretary of State laid before Parliament, in draft, the Terrorism Act (Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order 2001 which sought to add the PMOI (known as “the Mujaheddin-e-Khalq” or MeK) to Schedule 2 of the TA 2000 [5/A2/3-19]. The draft order was approved by affirmative resolution and the Order came into force on the 29th March 2001. 2. By an application dated the 5th June 2001 the PMOI (and Mr Abedini) applied to the Secretary of State pursuant to the provisions of section 4(1) and 2(a) to be removed from the list, or (as is sometimes expressed) to be de-proscribed [5/A5/25-40]. 3. By letter dated 31st August 2001 [5/A6/41-44], the Secretary of State concluded that he remained satisfied that the organisation was then “concerned in terrorism” as defined by the Terrorism Act 2000, in that it “commits or participates in acts of terrorism”. Accordingly, the application was refused. 4. That refusal was the subject of an application for Judicial Review. It was refused by Richards J (as he then was) on the 17th April 2002. The Judge held that, within the relevant statutory framework, the appropriate venue for challenge lay in an appeal to POAC against a refusal by the Secretary of State to deproscribe. 5. Meanwhile an appeal against the refusal to deproscribe was lodged with POAC on 12th October 2001 (the “First Appeal”), and the hearing was ultimately fixed for 30th June 2003. 6. While that appeal was still pending, on the 13th March 2003 the PMOI made a second application to the Secretary of State to de-proscribe (the “Second 2 Application”) relying on the original material supporting the application of June 2001, supplemented by further material lodged as part of the application for Judicial Review and material served on the Secretary of State pursuant to the First Appeal. Additionally, in an undated document (but in context probably sent to the Secretary of State in late May 2003) the then Appellants drew attention to (a) the voluntary surrender of their arsenal of all weapons (save for a limited number of side arms) to the occupying forces in Iraq, and (b) their total non-aggression towards the coalition forces. It was submitted that continued proscription was unjustified [5/9/52-54]. 7. In response, and by letter dated 11th June 2003, the Secretary of State maintained his refusal to de-proscribe [5/10/56-61]. 8. No appeal was made from that second decision, and in June 2003 the then appellants withdrew their still pending appeal to POAC against the Secretary of State’s first refusal of their application (this date is taken from the Appellants’ Procedural chronology [1/A4/145]). 9. We pause to note that the fact that no appeal was lodged against the second refusal, and that the First Appeal was withdrawn is said by the Appellants to have been a “protest” by the PMOI against the decision by the British and US Governments to bomb the PMOI bases within Iraq, shortly before April 2003 [2/Application Paragraph 10]. It is to be observed, however, that representations on behalf of the PMOI were made to the Secretary of State in May 2003 [5/A8/50] and a Witness Statement of Mr Mohammad Mohaddessin dated the 16th June 2003 was prepared [5/B5/224] some time after the bombing of Camp Ashraf. Mr Grosz, in a speech at the Symposium of Parliamentarians & Jurists in London in March 2005 [2/17 /12], appeared to suggest that POAC was “a hostile environment” and that “the PMOI had decided, rightly in [his] view, that their efforts, funds and time could be better spent by effectively promoting democracy in Iran, rather than paying lawyers to go through something which was effectively a charade”. 3 10. We are also aware of other events that may have affected the PMOI at around this time. In particular on the 17th June 2003 the offices of the NCRI near Paris were raided [4A/3-4]. A large number of NCRI members were held, some of whom (including Maryam Rajavi) were remanded in custody. Although a substantial sum of money was found, no prosecutions were brought. In July 2003, the Metropolitan Police arrested a number of MeK sympathisers in the UK and searched associated MeK premises. 11. The circumstances surrounding these events may provide a more realistic explanation as to why the PMOI did not continue with the appeals to POAC in June 2003. Of course, it is not necessary for this Commission to decide why the First Appeal and Second Application were not pursued by the PMOI. There appears to be no limit to the number of applications to deproscribe (and appeals) that can be made by or on behalf of a proscribed organisation. However, we note the explanation given on behalf of the PMOI and the relevant timetable and surrounding circumstances as this seems, at least to this Commission, to be an example of the unhelpful approach taken by and behalf of the PMOI to events and the evidence. Nothing is quite what it seems. We refer to this in some detail below in relation to the evidence of Mr Mohammed Mohaddessin that we have had to consider. 12. Much complaint is made on behalf of the PMOI in relation to propaganda put out by the Government of Iran and its supporters. In our view the PMOI can equally be criticised for the propaganda that they appear to rely upon and for the shifting approach to the evidence and material which we have had to consider. (ii) The PMOI 13. A short summary of the history of the PMOI appears in the Appellants’ Written Submissions [1/A3/33 and following]. 14. The PMOI is an Iranian political organisation and a member of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) (which is not proscribed in the UK). It 4 was founded in 1965. The purpose was initially to oppose the regime of the Shah. Its present stated purpose is, and has been for some years, the replacement of the existing theocracy with a democratically elected, secular government in Iran. 15. It took an active part in the protest within Iran that ultimately led to the downfall of the Shah in 1979. Thereafter, it speedily came into conflict with the succeeding fundamentalist regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini. The PMOI contend that there followed for several years within Iran a sustained regime of oppression, violence and killings orchestrated by the clerical rulers of the country. This campaign within Iran was contemporaneous with the war between that country and Iraq during the years 1980 to 1988. 16. Towards the end of 1981, many of the members of the PMOI and supporters went into exile. Their principal refuge was in France. But in 1986, after negotiations between the French and the Iranian authorities, the French government effectively treated them as undesirable aliens, and the leadership of the PMOI with several thousand followers relocated to Iraq. 17. There, they were located in a number of areas, but principally in Camp Ashraf – a location some 60 miles North of Baghdad where they constructed what eventually became a small town of about 3000 inhabitants. There they kept, until the invasion of Iraq by the coalition forces in 2003, a formidable arsenal of weapons including tanks and rocket launchers. The significance of this equipment and its ultimate surrender to the forces of the United States features in arguments on both sides which we will hereafter address. 18. From Iraq they lent military support to their hosts in the war against Iran until its conclusion. They conducted violent operations inside Iran until 2001. The nature and the extent of those operations, and the circumstances surrounding their conclusion in 2001 were the subject of considerable controversy. We will review those issues elsewhere. 19. Since the proscription in 2001 and the occupation of Iraq in 2003 the PMOI have continually pursued a campaign to legitimise their status as a secular, 5 democratic movement intent upon the peaceful overthrow of the present undemocratic regime in Iran, to which end they seek to enlist support at the highest level in the United Kingdom (and elsewhere) for the promotion of that object. The organisation has engaged the sympathy of a number of members of both Houses of Parliament. The present Appellants are thirty five in number (one since deceased), being sixteen members of the House of Commons and nineteen members of the Upper House. Included in the latter group are one former Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and five QCs. 20. These Parliamentarians maintain that the continued proscription of the PMOI invokes the constraints imposed by virtue of section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 from their otherwise right to support the PMOI by all available democratic and lawful means.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Expulsion of Aliens
    United Nations A/CN.4/565 General Assembly Distr.: General 10 July 2006 Original: English International Law Commission Fifty-eighth session Geneva, 1 May-9 June and 3 July-11 August 2006 Expulsion of aliens Memorandum by the Secretariat Summary The present study was prepared to assist the International Law Commission in the consideration of the topic of the expulsion of aliens. The study endeavours to provide a comprehensive analysis of the possible issues which may require consideration in the context of the present topic. It further provides an analytical summary of the relevant legal materials contained in treaty law, international jurisprudence, other international documents, national legislation and national jurisprudence. It surveys relevant materials adopted at the international level, the regional level as well as the national level. It also reproduces the relevant extracts of the various legal materials for ease of reference. The study is based on the premise that every State has the right to expel aliens. However, this right is subject to general limitations as well as specific substantive and procedural requirements. Traditionally, the right of expulsion was subject to general limitations such as the prohibition of abuse of rights, the principle of good faith, the prohibition of arbitrariness and standards relating to the treatment of aliens. Contemporary international human rights law has had a significant impact on the law relating to the expulsion of aliens in terms of the development of more specific substantive and procedural requirements. Recent trends in national law and practice with respect to the expulsion of aliens suspected of involvement in international terrorism may raise issues with respect to compliance with these requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Bedau’S Introduction Sets out the Issues and Shows How the Various Authors Shed Light on Each Aspect of Them
    CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE in focus How can civil disobedience be defined and distinguished from revolution or lawful protest? What, if anything, justifies civil disobedience? Can nonviolent civil disobedience ever be effective? The issues surrounding civil disobedience have been discussed since at least 399 BC and, in the wake of such recent events as the protest at Tiananmen Square, are still of great relevance. By presenting classic and current philosophical reflections on the issues, this book presents all the basic materials needed for a philosophical assessment of the nature and justification of civil disobedience. The pieces included range from classic statements by Plato, Thoreau, and Martin Luther King, to essays by leading contemporary thinkers such as Rawls, Raz, and Singer. Hugo Adam Bedau’s introduction sets out the issues and shows how the various authors shed light on each aspect of them. Hugo Adam Bedau is Austin Fletcher Professor of Philosophy at Tufts University. ROUTLEDGE PHILOSOPHERS IN FOCUS SERIES General Editor: Stanley Tweyman York University, Toronto GÖDEL’S THEOREM IN FOCUS Edited by S. G. Shanker J. S. MILL: ON LIBERTY IN FOCUS Edited by John Gray and G. W. Smith DAVID HUME: DIALOGUES CONCERNING NATURAL RELIGION IN FOCUS Edited by Stanley Tweyman RENÉ DESCARTES’ MEDITATIONS IN FOCUS Edited by Stanley Tweyman PLATO’S MENO IN FOCUS Edited by Jane M. Day GEORGE BERKELEY: ALCIPHRON IN FOCUS Edited by David Berman ARISTOTLE’S DE ANIMA IN FOCUS Edited by Michael Durrant WILLIAM JAMES: PRAGMATISM IN FOCUS Edited by Doris Olin JOHN LOCKE’S LETTER ON TOLERATION IN FOCUS Edited by John Horton and Susan Mendus CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE in focus Edited by Hugo Adam Bedau London and New York First published 1991 by Routledge 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • New Perspectives on Nationalism in Spain • Carsten Jacob Humlebæk and Antonia María Ruiz Jiménez New Perspectives on Nationalism in Spain
    New Perspectives on Nationalism in Spain in Nationalism on Perspectives New • Carsten Humlebæk Jacob and Antonia María Jiménez Ruiz New Perspectives on Nationalism in Spain Edited by Carsten Jacob Humlebæk and Antonia María Ruiz Jiménez Printed Edition of the Special Issue Published in Genealogy www.mdpi.com/journal/genealogy New Perspectives on Nationalism in Spain New Perspectives on Nationalism in Spain Editors Carsten Humlebæk Antonia Mar´ıaRuiz Jim´enez MDPI • Basel • Beijing • Wuhan • Barcelona • Belgrade • Manchester • Tokyo • Cluj • Tianjin Editors Carsten Humlebæk Antonia Mar´ıa Ruiz Jimenez´ Copenhagen Business School Universidad Pablo de Olavide Denmark Spain Editorial Office MDPI St. Alban-Anlage 66 4052 Basel, Switzerland This is a reprint of articles from the Special Issue published online in the open access journal Genealogy (ISSN 2313-5778) (available at: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/genealogy/special issues/perspective). For citation purposes, cite each article independently as indicated on the article page online and as indicated below: LastName, A.A.; LastName, B.B.; LastName, C.C. Article Title. Journal Name Year, Article Number, Page Range. ISBN 978-3-03943-082-6 (Hbk) ISBN 978-3-03943-083-3 (PDF) c 2020 by the authors. Articles in this book are Open Access and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license, which allows users to download, copy and build upon published articles, as long as the author and publisher are properly credited, which ensures maximum dissemination and a wider impact of our publications. The book as a whole is distributed by MDPI under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND.
    [Show full text]
  • Proscribed Terrorist Organisations
    By Joanna Dawson 26 August 2021 Proscribed Terrorist Organisations 1 Overview 2 Proscription prior to the Terrorism Act 2000 3 Proscription under the Terrorism Act 2000 4 Appeals against proscription 5 Analysis 6 Annex: proscribed organisations commonslibrary.parliament.uk Number 00815 Proscribed Terrorist Organisations Disclaimer The Commons Library does not intend the information in our research publications and briefings to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. We have published it to support the work of MPs. You should not rely upon it as legal or professional advice, or as a substitute for it. We do not accept any liability whatsoever for any errors, omissions or misstatements contained herein. You should consult a suitably qualified professional if you require specific advice or information. Read our briefing ‘Legal help: where to go and how to pay’ for further information about sources of legal advice and help. This information is provided subject to the conditions of the Open Parliament Licence. Feedback Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in these publicly available briefings is correct at the time of publication. Readers should be aware however that briefings are not necessarily updated to reflect subsequent changes. If you have any comments on our briefings please email [email protected]. Please note that authors are not always able to engage in discussions with members of the public who express opinions about the content of our research, although we will carefully consider and correct any factual errors. You can read our feedback and complaints policy and our editorial policy at commonslibrary.parliament.uk.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    INTRODUCTION Cristina Rosillo-López In 1964, the French director Louis Malle directed Les amants, a film which ends with the married Jeanne Moreau leaving with her lover, thus depicting adultery as a happy end with no punishment. A cinema showed the film and was fined for it by the State of Ohio on grounds of obscenity. The case went to the Supreme Court, where a discussion about the differences between art and pornography ensued. One of the judges, Justice Stewart Potter, wrote a well-known speech that has become a standard point of reference in such thorny debates: “I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [hard-core pornography]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelli- gibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that”.1 Public opinion also remains a concept that is difficult to characterise. By the mid-1960s more than fifty definitions had been collected; its number has increased, as is fitting for a subject thriving in many academic disciplines, including history, sociology and political studies.2 Some scholars have even rejected giving a specific explanation of public opinion, preferring to set out some of its characteristics.3 However, as Justice Stewart Potter asserted about art and pornography, public opin- ion is something that is easily distinguishable when we are faced with it. The works that comprise this book were discussed in a seminar that took place in Seville in September 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • A House Divided Against Itself: the Threat of Contemporary Civil Disobedience to the American Legal System
    Catholic University Law Review Volume 18 Issue 1 Article 3 1968 A House Divided Against Itself: The Threat of Contemporary Civil Disobedience to the American Legal System Richard R. Molleur Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Richard R. Molleur, A House Divided Against Itself: The Threat of Contemporary Civil Disobedience to the American Legal System, 18 Cath. U. L. Rev. 37 (1969). Available at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview/vol18/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Catholic University Law Review by an authorized editor of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A House Divided Against Itself: The Threat of Contemporary Civil Disobedience To The American Legal System RICHARD R. MOLLEUR* During the last ten years, Americans have witnessed, perhaps as never before, the boiling cauldron of racial unrest and a growing tide for complete imple- mentation of civil rights and social justice. More recently there has emerged a by-product of this struggle-a new idealism seriously challenging not only our established social mores, but also many of the political and moral atti- tudes long accepted as the fabric of our democratic way of life. All of this has not been spontaneous, however, and can be traced to those post-World War II years when the world, still reeling from the enormity of war's destruction, was shocked with the inconceivable horror of mass genocide in Nazi Germany.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Burns's Satiric Poetry. Jane Bowling Kennerly Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1976 Robert Burns's Satiric Poetry. Jane Bowling Kennerly Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Kennerly, Jane Bowling, "Robert Burns's Satiric Poetry." (1976). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 3026. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/3026 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image.
    [Show full text]
  • To Love Or Hate Thy Neighbor: the Role of Authoritarianism and Traditionalism in Explaining the Link Between Fundamentalism and Racial Prejudice
    bs_bs_banner Political Psychology, Vol. 35, No. 2, 2014 doi: 10.1111/pops.12077 To Love or Hate Thy Neighbor: The Role of Authoritarianism and Traditionalism in Explaining the Link Between Fundamentalism and Racial Prejudice Mark J. Brandt Tilburg University Christine Reyna DePaul University Fundamentalism is consistently related to racial prejudice (Hall, Matz, & Wood, 2010), yet the mechanisms for this relationship are unclear. We identify two core values of fundamentalism, authoritarianism and tradition- alism, that independently contribute to the fundamentalism-racial prejudice relationship. We also contextualize the fundamentalism-racial prejudice relationship by suggesting that fundamentalists may show prejudice based on conceptions of African Americans as violating values but show tolerance when prejudice is less justifiable. These ideas are tested and confirmed using three data sets from the American National Election Studies. Across all three samples, fundamentalism is related to increases in symbolic racism but decreases in negative affect towards African Americans, and these relationships are mediated by both authoritarianism and traditionalism. KEY WORDS: religious fundamentalism, symbolic racism, authoritarianism, traditionalism, prejudice Two important features of American political life are race and religion. Racism is a key component in debates on welfare politics and affirmative action (e.g., Reyna, Henry, Korfmacher, & Tucker, 2006; Sears & Henry, 2005), and religion is often implicated in debates over cultural issues such as same-sex marriage (e.g., Brandt & Reyna, 2010; Campbell & Monson, 2008). However, these two sets of beliefs, religion and racism, are not independent. Fundamentalists tend to be more prejudiced against racial minorities, such as African Americans (e.g., Feagin, 1964; Kirkpatrick, 1993; Laythe, Finkel, Bringle, & Kirkpatrick, 2002), a finding further confirmed in a recent meta- analysis (r = .13, 95% CI = .06–.21, Hall et al., 2010).
    [Show full text]
  • The Disciplinary Dilemma Confronting Attorneys Seeking to Counsel Civil Disobedients
    Duquesne Law Review Volume 23 Number 3 Article 10 1985 The Disciplinary Dilemma Confronting Attorneys Seeking to Counsel Civil Disobedients Thomas E. Weiers Jr. Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/dlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Thomas E. Weiers Jr., The Disciplinary Dilemma Confronting Attorneys Seeking to Counsel Civil Disobedients, 23 Duq. L. Rev. 715 (1985). Available at: https://dsc.duq.edu/dlr/vol23/iss3/10 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Duquesne Law Review by an authorized editor of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. The Disciplinary Dilemma Confronting Attorneys Seeking to Counsel Civil Disobedients I. INTRODUCTION I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitu- tions, upon laws, and upon courts. [T]hese are false hopes. Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women.' An attorney sympathetic to a client's moral conviction that a law, validly passed,2 is inherently unjust, must be aware of the im- pending disciplinary sanctions3 that may be faced should counsel- ing be given to such a client who proceeds to engage in acts of civil disobedience. The Code of Professional Responsibility proscribes such counseling, providing that "[a] lawyer shall not ...counsel or assist his client in conduct that the lawyer knows to be illegal "14 An act of civil disobedience necessarily involves a public, know- ing violation of a valid law.' The lawyer, although not actually par- ticipating in the disobedient act, may be subjected to disciplinary, and possibly criminal, sanctions by encouraging and counseling those who seek to engage in this form of behavior.6 This comment seeks to provide a definitional and analytical 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Nationalism, Grassfields Traditions, and State
    introduction Layering Nationalism from Local to Global In Douala in 2003, I was speaking in French with a Cameroonian woman in her sixties about George W. Bush’s decision to go to war against Iraq. She was from the West Province, or the Bamileke Region, the portion of the Grassfields that fell under French administration from 1919 to 1960.1 She was unschooled but spoke fluent French, pid- gin English, and her mother tongue, Medumba. She was against the US invasion and, referring to the United Nations Security Council’s vote against military intervention in Iraq, she said, “But all the other villages did not want to go to war.” Her grandchildren laughed at her use of the term village, but her word choice and the youngsters’ reac- tion to it revealed a generational, linguistic memory gap. She had lived through “the time of troubles,” as Bamileke survivors de- scribe the conflict that, at its beginning, in late 1956, resembled a nation- alist war for independence from European rule; in its middle, the early 1960s, a civil war; and by its end, the late 1960s, seemed to have unraveled into random, unpredictable violence, looting, and revenge. In 1964 the British embassy in Cameroon2 reported that between 61,300 and 76,300 civilians had lost their lives as a result of independence-era violence, from December 1956 to June 1964, and that nearly 80 percent of these casu- alties had occurred in the Bamileke region.3 Inhabitants of the region had plenty of reason during those years to think about the meanings of nation and independence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Proscription Or Listing of Terrorist Organisations: Understanding
    The proscription or listing of terrorist organisations: Understanding, assessment, and international comparisons Special Issue Introduction Lee Jarvis and Tim Legrand1 School of Politics, Philosophy, Language and Communication Studies, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK and The National Security College, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia This article serves as an introduction to this Special Issue on the banning or proscription of terrorist organisations around the world. It begins by arguing for greater attention to proscription powers because of their contemporary ubiquity, considerable historical lineage, implications for political life, and ambiguous effectiveness. Following an overview of the Issue’s questions and ambitions, the article discusses five themes: key moments of continuity and change within proscription regimes around the world; the significance of domestic political and legal contexts and institutions; the value of this power in countering terrorism and beyond; a range of prominent criticisms of proscription, including around civil liberties; and the significance of language and other symbolic practices in the justification and extension of proscription powers. We conclude by sketching the arguments and contributions of the subsequent articles in this Issue. Keywords proscription, banning, listing, terrorist organisations, terrorism Introduction The dramatic increase of academic interest in counter-terrorism powers in the period since 11 September 2001, in particular, has been much discussed
    [Show full text]
  • 1 SATIRE in the HISTORIA AUGUSTA by SHAWN GAIUS
    SATIRE IN THE HISTORIA AUGUSTA By SHAWN GAIUS DANIELS A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2013 1 © 2013 Shawn Gaius Daniels 2 Matri meae 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First, I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Victoria Pagán. When I began to read the Historia Augusta in the Summer of 2010, I was struck most by its humor. Dr. Pagán recommended that I turn to Northrop Frye and his Anatomy of Criticism to find a theoretical basis on which to understand the role of humor, and it is there that I found a definition of satire that took me on the road to the present work. A large portion of the bibliography and the majority of the organizational structure came from the many conversations we held over the past three years. Without her unflagging support and invaluable advice, this project would not have been completed. I owe many thanks to Dr. Trevor Luke, of Florida State University. He found time, even at conferences, to speak with me individually about my research—once even driving down from Tallahassee to discuss a rough draft he had read the week before. His penetrating questions and moral support have kept me critical of my own work. I would also like to thank the other members of my committee, Dr. Andrew Wolpert, Dr. Kostas Kapparis, and Dr. Terry Harpold for sparing their time to help see that I accomplish this task. I would like to thank several former teachers and professors for helping bring me to this point.
    [Show full text]