Applying the Due Diligence Framework Northeastern ... · Northeastern University School of Law...
Transcript of Applying the Due Diligence Framework Northeastern ... · Northeastern University School of Law...
Applying the Due Diligence Framework Northeastern University School of Law
November 7, 2013
Professor Julie Goldscheid, CUNY Law School Professor Debra J. Liebowitz, Drew University
} United States } Canada } Australia } New Zealand
} (for more information on the report, contact either author)
} Expands domestic conception of rights
} Substantive equality } Non-discrimination } Positive obligation } Root causes } Public / private divide } Non-state actors } Participation
} Prevention } Protection } Prosecution / Investigation } Punishment } Provision of Redress
} Comprehensive ◦ Encompass all jurisdictions ◦ Include clear goals and measurable outcomes ◦ Be adequately funded and supported ◦ Be culturally competent ◦ Should be available to and targeted at all communities
} Coordination } Root causes
} Research-based program design
} Services should be:
◦ Comprehensive ◦ Multi-sectoral and coordinated ◦ Empowering
} Types of services: ◦ integrated health services; ◦ helplines and websites; ◦ shelter and housing; ◦ counseling and legal services; ◦ tailored for specific groups of victims.
} Access to services - Barriers
} Provision is inadequate and uneven } Chronically underfunded } Lack of coordination } Prejudicial treatment
} Critical strategies:
◦ Civil orders of protection
◦ Training
} Laws authorizing arrest, investigation and prosecution are a start, but not enough.
} Laws should apply to all communities in all contexts.
} Concerns about under- and over-enforcement.
} Differences of opinion about all mandatory interventions.
Reporting, Arrest, Prosecution
} Favored practices: ◦ Streamlining policing and prosecutorial
practices. ◦ Multi-agency facilities and specialized
courts. ◦ Translation services. ◦ Coordination with immigration authorities. ◦ Training. ◦ Civil legal services. ◦ Support for survivors.
} Barriers to justice: ◦ Low rates of reporting, charging and prosecution. ◦ Lack of law enforcement accountability. ◦ Jurisdictional barriers. ◦ Law enforcement bias. ◦ Custody and visitation.
} Controversies: ◦ Role of customary and religious laws and practices;
◦ Use of alternative dispute resolution.
} Inconsistent sentencing
} Need for research
} Batterers’ programs
} Alternative approaches
} Restitution } Victim compensation } Civil suits } Alternative approaches ◦ Redress ◦ Medical and psychological care ◦ Economic independence
} Persuasive authority in law enforcement
accountability cases ◦ “State-created danger” ◦ Equal protection ◦ State law claims
} Legislation ◦ Local human rights resolutions,
ordinances
} Persuasive authority in other domestic violence cases ◦ Orders of protection ◦ Custody ◦ Hague convention ◦ Writs of mandamus ◦ Contempt ◦ Tort
} DOJ investigations ◦ New Orleans ◦ Puerto Rico
} Community organizing and public education