ILNews

International law CLE to be webcast

IL Staff
January 1, 2008
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
A free CLE program featuring discussion about the international prosecution of war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity will take place in the Indiana Supreme Court's Courtroom from 3 to 4:30 p.m. May 7. Event organizers have received enough RSVPs to fill the room, but stand-by reservations are still being accepted as of today for what planners say is a short waiting list so far.

This program has been approved for 1.5 CLE credit hours. For those unable to make it, there will also be a webcast, which will be live and archived for viewing after the event. Those that view the webcast but are not in the courtroom are not eligible for CLE credit.

Indiana Court of Appeals Judge Nancy Vaidik will be one of the speakers. She recently returned from teaching a seven-day seminar in Arusha, Tanzania, to attorneys who are prosecuting genocide and crimes against humanity that occurred in Congo, Sudan, Rwanda, and the former Yugoslavia in the United Nations' International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and the International Criminal Court. A story about her work was published in the Feb. 20 - March 4, 2008, edition of Indiana Lawyer.

The other speaker is the director of the Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis' Program in International Human Rights Law professor George Edwards. He has worked on a variety of international cases including for the defense side of Slobodan Milosevic, the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, and Omar Khadr. A group of his students recently presented reports to U.N. human rights experts as reported in the April 30 - May 13, 2008, edition of Indiana Lawyer.

Judge Vaidik and Edwards will address the differences between and among war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity; what bodies of international and domestic law apply during civil war, international armed conflict, and/or peacetime; what are the trial and appellate procedures in international criminal tribunals; and who chooses and trains those tribunals' prosecutors, defense counsel, and judges.

For more information or to add your name to the waiting list, contact Sarah Hachey at (317) 232-2550 or e-mail, at shachey@courts.state.in.us, or go to the event's Web site.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT