UK parliamentary debate analysis: bombing ISIL in Syria.

This paper examines the arguments presented for and against the UK government's motion for the UK to intervene militarily in Syria in the House of Commons debate on ISIL in Syria that took place on 2 December 2015. It considers what the most common arguments were in favour of and in opposition to the motion as well as which arguments were given the most emphasis, in order to understand the prime justifications given that led to the decision to approve the motion. It suggests that due to the shadow of the 2003 Iraq war, politicians in the debate placed a considerable emphasis on the legal justification for military intervention. It argues that the focus on the national security of the UK and its allies in this particular debate seems to contrast with previous military interventions where humanitarian motives were more widely stated. This paper calls for further comparative research of parliamentary debates in order to track such changes in the rhetoric used by UK politicians to defend their support for military intervention.

Cultural consequences of miscarriages of justice.

Social science scholarship has tended to focus more on the causes than the consequences of miscarriages of justice. Within the literature on consequences, the overwhelming emphasis has been on individual consequences: psychological and material impacts on the wrongly convicted individual and, in some cases, other indirectly impacted individuals such as family members of the wrongly convicted and victims of the true perpetrator's future crimes. Some attention has been devoted to social harms, the impact of miscarriages of justice on the broader society within which they are situated, such as the undermining of the legitimacy of the criminal justice system. This paper focuses on what are called here cultural consequences of miscarriages of justice: the way in which some high-profile miscarriages of justice can shape the public's beliefs about some of the most basic "facts" about crime, such as the nature, prevalence, or even existence of certain categories of crime and the types of individual who tend to perpetrate particular types of crime. In this way, the paper argues, miscarriages of justice may have hitherto underexplored consequences: reshaping, based on false premises, the public's belief about the very nature of crime itself. This paper discusses three cases studies of miscarriages of justice that for varying periods of time created widespread false beliefs about the nature of crime in large segments of the public. The paper concludes by noting that the "righting" of these false beliefs was in most cases fortuitous. This suggests that unexposed miscarriages of justice may still be shaping popular beliefs about the nature of crime, and aspects of the public's current conception of crime may yet be based on false premises.

Cluster munitions: public health and international humanitarian law perspectives.

As a result of civilian deaths in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Chechnya, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon, cluster munitions have been recognised to pose a grave threat to civilian populations because of their limited precision and problematically high rate of initial failure to explode. Efforts are intensifying to ban cluster munitions and to mandate those who have discharged them to defuse them effectively so as to reduce the risks to civilians. This editorial reviews these efforts and identifies a need for them to be actively supported by both the legal and medical communities.