Linda Leung (2018) Technologies of Refuge and Displacement: Rethinking
Digital Divides (Lanham, MA: Lexington Books), hardcover, 141 pages;
ISBN: 978-1-14985-0002-9 In her book Technologies of Refuge and Displacement: Rethinking Digital
Divides , Linda Leung – a researcher at University of Technology
Sydney, Australia – provides a systematic empirical analysis of data collected
between 2007 and 2011, which involved more than 100 interviews with individuals from
Four Decisive Challenges Confronting Humanitarian Innovation
Gerard Finnigan and Otto Farkas
28 , 998 , doi: 10.1353/hrq.2006.0039 .
ACFID ( 2016 ), Innovation for Impact: How Australian NGOs Nurture
and Scale Up New Ideas ( Deakin :
Australian Council for International
Age and Disability Capacity Programme
(ADCAP) ( 2018 ),
Standards for Older People and People with Disabilities: Age and
Disability Consortium ( London
Sandvik , K.
B. ( 2018 ), ‘ Technology, Dead
Male Bodies, and Feminist Recognition: Gendering ICT Harm
Theory’ , Australian Feminist Law
Journal , 44 : 1 ,
49 – 69 .
Sandvik , K.
B. ( 2019 ), ‘ Technologizing the
Fight against Sexual Violence: A Critical Scoping’, PRIO
Paper (Oslo: PRIO) , www
The book explores the relationship between violence against women on one hand,
and the rights to health and reproductive health on the other. It argues that
violation of the right to health is a consequence of violence, and that (state)
health policies might be a cause of – or create the conditions for – violence
against women. It significantly contributes to feminist and international human
rights legal scholarship by conceptualising a new ground-breaking idea, violence
against women’s health (VAWH), using the Hippocratic paradigm as the backbone of
the analysis. The two dimensions of violence at the core of the book – the
horizontal, ‘interpersonal’ dimension and the vertical ‘state policies’
dimension – are investigated through around 70 decisions of domestic, regional
and international judicial or quasi-judicial bodies (the anamnesis). The concept
of VAWH, drawn from the anamnesis, enriches the traditional concept of violence
against women with a human rights-based approach to autonomy and a reflection on
the pervasiveness of patterns of discrimination (diagnosis). VAWH as theorised
in the book allows the reconceptualisation of states’ obligations in an
innovative way, by identifying for both dimensions obligations of result, due
diligence obligations, and obligations to progressively take steps (treatment).
The book eventually asks whether it is not international law itself that is the
ultimate cause of VAWH (prognosis).
Article 12 is one. Articles 1 and 2 are agreed as stating the position, and we would
consider it inadvisable to alter them. Article 12 is the first serious one; Article 17,
Article 24 or certain portions of it, Article 36, Article 40, Article 41, Article 50,
Article 55, Article 58, Article 65, Article 67, Article 77, Article 79.18
Ibid., col 480, 20 September 1922. The three Dominions he refers to are Canada,
Australia and the Union of South Africa.
Ibid., cols 498–9, 20 September 1922. Churchill said something similar but in relation to the
the UK government issued a formal apology and set up a £20m support package. 17 But some victims, now in their fifties, seek more comprehensive compensation. An Australian class action against Grünenthal and Diageo (which now owns Distillers) reportedly settled in 2013 for the sum of AUD89 million (£52m). 18 And in June 2014 eight victims of thalidomide filed a claim in the High Court. 19
The anti-rheumatic drug Opren, withdrawn from the UK in 1982, is alleged to have caused kidney and liver damage, and even death, in some of its elderly users. Patients
It should also be noted that, although the Australian Constitution (The Commonwealth
of Australia Act 1900) did not expressly confer a power of judicial review upon the
High Court, the doctrine developed years later and is said to be based on a number
of provisions in the Constitution. See Anthony Mason, ‘The Role of a Constitutional
Court in a Federation: A Comparison of the Australian and the United States
Experience’ (1986) 16 Federal Law Review 1, and K.E. Foley, ‘Australian Judicial
Review’ (2007) 6 Wash U Global Studies Law Review 281.
those of the Dominions (Canada, South Africa, Australia), the older constitutions
such as the Swiss, French and American constitutions, the postwar constitutions
of Poland, the Baltic states, Germany, Austria, Czechoslovakia and Estonia as
well as a mix of other countries such as Mexico, Norway, Sweden and Denmark.
The Committee was impressed with the enthusiasm for democratic ideals and
popular sovereignty which permeated the postwar constitutions. In particular,
the German (Weimar) Constitution of 1919 was frequently referred to during
Interview with Tom
once they have seen the Constitution
because they will be horribly frightened by the bad example that the Constitution
gives to independent elements of the Dominions; I am sure that they will make desperate efforts to get the Oath into the Constitution on the ground that they have stuck
it into the Acts creating Dominion Governments in Canada, Australia and Africa.37
He goes on to say they should not concede this point about the inclusion of the
oath as it is within their rights to leave it to standing orders. He also notes that he
is apprehensive of the concessions
of the British Territorial Waters Jurisdiction Act, 1878, 41 and 42
Vict. c. 73.
See, e.g., the law in Australia, Canada and the
United Kingdom; see also Green, ‘Canadian law, war crimes and
crimes against humanity’, 59 Brit. Y.B. Int’l Law