Subject: International Human Rights law. Inspiration: How to consider Israel's punishing pounding of life out of everyone who happens to live in Gaza these days - including small women and children, day in and day out, including the destruction of their government buildings, and the terrorizing of the civil population with random threats, injury, death, leaflets and armed surprise in their homes and businesses, without the ability to flee or defend themselves.
International human rights have grown in their importance to the world community over the last century as nations continue to resist peace-making and conflict resolution. However, most people probably are not aware of what these rights include. Nor do they know precisely how to think about them. If someone robs a grocery, we know there is a law against robbery, and that a law has been broken: the concept and our understanding of its social context is known to us. Not so with that nebulous but heavenly 'thing,' "international human rights law." I was asked to address this subject in my International Legal English course this past Spring, and created some materials I thought I should upload now, as a result. First, the most familiar of the international human rights documents: click here to see the U.N's "Universal Declaration of Human Rights." This is a 'copied-off' version, English first, followed by a Norwegian version. This can also be found at the U.N.'s website: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Pages/WelcomePage.aspx along with many other human rights instruments. Another such document is the U.N.'s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, or ICCPR. You will find a short list I created of the ICCPR Articles indicating the basic rights they reference here: ICCPR Articles summary list.
And last but not least, how should we think about these rights from a legal standpoint? How can we try to evaluate if a nation has violated an international human right? I created a basic outline of the international human rights law with respect to its caselaw notions. The document covers the bases for cases in this legal area, and should help you identify the areas of "State" (ie: nation) responsibility, as well as some of the procedural points. The document was designed for my students to become somewhat familiar with these concepts, and concludes with an exercise with questions that can be applied to one's "Case of Choice." It was not designed to 'practice law by,' but simply to sketch some of the broader concepts in international human rights law so that my students would be familiar with the English vocabulary and how it is applied generally. I hope you find this interesting and informative. I would appreciate any comments you may have, in reply: Governing Principles of International Human Rights law.
The much overdue subject of our next blog post should, rightfully, be the question that is spread as a full-sized headline across the front page of Norway's Aftenposten newspaper today. Against a scene of billowing black smoke rising from Gaza, it reads in large block letters, ""Hvorfor er det ingen som gjør noe?" -Alaa Khalid (14), døende." For the Norwegian-challenged, as well as readers of Aftenposten's English news who are now missing the defunct translation copy, this means: "Why is there no one who is doing anything?" Fourteen is Alaa's age, and døende means dying, which means he is probably now dead. Like too many other innocents in this tragic and foolhardy contest.
Well, here we are, on the other side of a lovely summer, and enjoying a rather outstanding 'sensommer' or, literally, late summer, to boot! What could be better?
Answer: Perhaps (1) a bit more 'international justice' at home (in Norway), and (2) a bit less generosity of our Prime Minister with OPM - that is, other people's money.
We note two stories that made the headlines this past summer. First, in case you did not know it, Norway is a good place for international criminals to hide - from justice, that is. Reasons are various: Norwegian authorities actually let them in, on purpose, that is, and then don't prosecute them or send them back home; and, Norwegian authorities don't have much money, staff, or time (read: small country) for the creation of international tribunals on our own soil, and really don't want to take the time to 'bring these folks to justice,' as we might say in the U.S. - well, not as long as they stay out of trouble and keep a low profile. That low profile can even include a free apartment and a monthly welfare endowment, so, hey, why not come to Norway? As long as you can stand the cold and dark months, it's like the global stage version of 'Home Free.'
That said, we have one especially high profile world terrorist who has been in Norway - for his own safety, of course, with his family for some years, and manages to threaten the authorities on a regular basis if they suggest they might honor a legitimate request for extradition from the country in which he committed his terrorism atrocities, that is, Iraq. He goes by the name of Mullah Krekar, and a file of articles published on his warnings and statements to Norway reveal a clever man, formerly a deadly killer, wreaker and leader of planned havoc. This lawyer used his case as a Moot Court example in the International Legal English course of 2006, with good success: We came to the conclusion that, since he had already been found by a Norwegian court to qualify, officially and legally, as a "terrorist," his case needed to go to court. Alternative to extradition, the case should proceed in Norway, with a jury of his country's peers. And, while he was walking around free, doing whatever he wanted whenever he wanted to, his liberty should, in the meanwhile, be curtailed. And finally, two years later, the state of Norway has taken the suggestions of this small class of eager international legal English students forward. Well, at least in part...they are holding his passport, which he had been using to violate the terms of his permissions - ie: to go anywhere and do any terrorism business he wanted whenever he wanted to - and they have curtailed his internet usage and his ability to work. Nice job, Norway. A good start, that is.
And thus does Mullar Krekar, with his intense and scary visage, jump off the cover of the Aftenposten's magazine of June 13, 2008, complaining, (as translated by me), "Now I can't feel myself safe in any place." Well, Mr. Krekar, that is one problem with being loose, you know, and since the state of Norway has begun to curtail your freedom of movement, you suddenly do not feel safe in any place. I suggest that the state of Norway therefore proceed with all speed to answer your concerns. This would mean that the state of Norway would be sure to provide you with an expeditious trial and sentencing, umm, as required by international treaties of which Norway is already a member nation. Should you be found guilty of the international crimes with which you have already, for years, been charged, the state of Norway could put you in Norwegian prison for, perhaps, the rest of your life. Then you could feel a bit more safe. We will continue this topic in the future, and fill in some of the background, as little reaches the English press, it seems to me, on this important and neglected international case.
On to our second topic, the Prime Minister's magnanimous suggestion that we double Norway's contribution to development in foreign lands through the U.N. - that is, Aftenposten, Thursday, July 24, 2008, "Norsk rikdom i en fattig verden." Jens Stoltenberg, like many Norwegians who support uncontrolled NGO development, gets lots of moral and ethical brownie points for calling for a 'radical increase' in Norway's contribution . . . at the same time that the effectiveness of 'today's contributions' is in great doubt (per several studies, both Norwegian and international). As all colonial empires did, just throw money at 'them,' and the more the better.
Meanwhile, the tattered 'coalition' government currently residing in Norway and headed by Stoltenberg fails to assure sufficient funding for simple and basic health care needs, services, supplies, hospitals, doctors, nurses, and nursing homes. The situation has become critical, and is well past being a wonderful experiment in efficiency.
Meanwhile, the sorry excuse for effective government now in place in Norway watches the roads and highways crumble, there being no federal authority in this area - or at least not one willing to buy and build the highways and byways needed to effectively and safely transport its citizenry. Go anywhere else in Europe, and you will see better roads than here in Norway, whose oil fund is overflowing with . . . invested wealth. To compare, start with Sweden, which has put together a magnificent highway system, we are told.
Sorry to complain, folks, but perhaps someone is listening - or reading, for that matter. Overall, the summer was lovely. Fresh air and sunshine in Norway were cheap this summer. The fjords became warm and refreshing, and the enjoyment was here for the having. What more could one ask for?
Subject: the notice we overseas Americans have received by mail entitled, "Economic Stimulus Payment Notice"
Context: Some of my tax clients are confused about this. What does it mean?
Perspective: I don't blame them. Here's the scoop.
This letter begins, 'Dear Taxpayer,' but has little else to do with paying taxes. It appears that the economic stimulus that the federal government (ie. the Bush proposal) sought to put into place - in order to create an economic stimulus for 'America,' meaning: help U.S. markets recover from what looks like a buying slowdown, is here in our mailboxes, . . . even those of us abroad.
First, let's assume that the government knows what it is doing, and we Americans overseas are actually supposed to be included in the payout on this 'incentive.' Second, don't ask whether you think it is wise budgetary policy to hand out a huge amount of money to almost anyone who can claim at least $3,000 in CY 2007 income and/or child dependents with Social Security numbers; that's just the way it's going to be. Get it?
What does it mean to you? Well, despite the fact that Americans who pay taxes overseas in their country of residence may have no qualifying income in the U.S., it may mean that if they file their tax forms to the U.S. IRS, they could get a check for the amounts noted. The notice gives the general layout. A similar version is available to read at the IRS website, at: http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=180179,00.html.
If you are not sure whether you would get back some money, why not do the calculation that is provided at the website. The link is: http://www.irs.gov/app/espc/. If you would like me to calculate it, I'm happy to do that for you. I do taxes for overseas Americans and those others, non-resident aliens, with the need to file their personal income tax forms annually with the IRS. Just note: if you do not file tax forms, you do not get a pay-out, even if you might otherwise have qualified for one. So check out your ability to get a payout, even if you would normally fall below the line on need to file CY2007 IRS forms on personal income.
Feel free to contact me for a free inquiry, and an estimate of the cost to do your work for you. In case you are only finding this blog now, for the first time, I note that I wrote about the timeframe for doing overseas taxes on Sept. 30, 2007: you will find that in the archives here, as well as a more recent article on general changes in the 2007 taxing provisions.
Since there are only two things which are certain, Death and Taxes, I suggest you take care of your tax forms! I don't recall forestalling death quite so handily.
