I went with a group of women searching for firewood at the border, but I was alone when I was attacked.  A man from Chad, not a solider, caught me, beat me, and raped me.  Afterwards I became sick, with fever and dizziness.  My arms and legs and belly swelled up and I was yellow.  I went to the clinic, but I could only get paracetamol and fluid.  When my husband came back some months later and found that I was pregnant, he left me.  Now I have two babies from this, but not enough milk or food.  I am very sad.

This story is one account of a Sudanese refugee woman in Chad.  There are currently 200,000 Sudanese refugees located in twelve Chadian refugee camps.  With many of the men in Sudan "killed, imprisoned, or off to war, women in the Darfur region constitute large majorities of the population in refugee camps and in those villages that remain."  In fact, many of these women choose to flee to Chad to escape the sexual violence they have experienced in Sudan.

Rape has frequently been used as an element of government and Janjaweed attacks on the civilian populations in Sudan.  It has been used as a "deliberate strategy with a view to achieve certain objectives, including terrorizing the population, ensuring control over the movement of the IDP population and perpetuating its displacement."  In the Darfur region alone, the U.S. State Department found that twenty percent of refugees interviewed had witnessed a rape during the attacks.  

There is documentation of "multiple perpetrators [committing rape against] large numbers of women and girls . . . by Sudanese government forces and militias."  The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR) concluded that "rape and gang rape continue to be perpetrated by armed elements in Darfur, some of whom are members of law enforcement agencies and the armed forces, and the Government appears either unable or unwilling to hold them accountable."  The Commission also noted that Sudanese police officials often refuse to register and investigate allegations of sexual violence made by women.

The women and girls fleeing this sexual torment are not safe once they have left.  Rather, when they arrive in refugee camps outside Sudan in Chad, they are faced with this same violence.  They are exchanging one rapist, the Janjaweed or other military or state rapists, for another in Chad.  Women and girls in these refugee camps are being raped by Chadian armed forces and militia, Sudanese armed forces and militia, and other refugees.  This must be stopped.  How much violence must this group continue to suffer before the international community steps in and says enough?  This paper sets forth the legal basis for the international community to respond to these rapes as a means to strengthen the effort of the international community in this endeavor.  It is my hope that in writing this, the message to the world to help will be louder and stronger. 

More specifically, Part II examines the sexual violence in these refugee camps.  Part III sets forth how to hold Sudanese and Chadian armed forces and militia responsible for these rapes under international law.  Part V examines the culpability of rapes by other refugees under international law.  Finally, Part VI suggests who should be held responsible for these rapes to prevent future rapes from occurring not only in the refugee camps in Chad, but in all refugee camps around the world.

Human activities have increasingly impacted the health of the planet’s many ecosystems.  Habitat destruction, global warming, and other human-induced environmental degradation have spurred an international effort to combat this phenomenon.  Beginning in the 1970s, the international community began addressing environmental concerns through the adoption of international treaties, agreements, and declarations designed to curb these problems.   Following the Rio Declaration of 1992, a large majority of States undertook to develop strategies to reverse the trend and protect the global environment.  In an effort to preserve the remaining vestiges of the natural world, States have designated portions of their national territories as legally protected areas.  Many of these protected areas have been set aside with the goal of conserving biological diversity, or biodiversity.  A familiar type of protected area is the national park.

The protected status of these various areas has had a significant impact on indigenous and local communities living in and around reserves, national parks, and other protected areas.  As management regimes developed in relation to biodiversity conservation, governments and conservationists at first ignored important rights of the people most dependent on the areas under protection.  Now, they have begun to better understand the intrinsic link between communities living near areas which are either designated as protected areas or under consideration for such designation.  In fact, it has become increasingly clear that effective biodiversity conservation and protected area management cannot occur without the full participation of the communities who have traditionally depended on those areas for their culture, livelihoods, and survival, notably indigenous and tribal communities.  In essence, with the recognition of substantial human rights over the past century, international agreements recognizing substantive human rights have accompanied the growing body of international environmental laws. 

In late 2007, a majority of States adopted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.  The Declaration elaborates many recognized rights of indigenous peoples, including the right to consultation regarding their land.  It recognizes the importance of land and biodiversity to indigenous populations, as do a number of other international human rights and environmental agreements.  In order to achieve effective biodiversity conservation and respect the internationally recognized legal rights of indigenous and local peoples, governments and management agencies must observe indigenous and local communities’ right to consultation when establishing and managing protected areas.

This paper will analyze the status and effect of the obligation to consult indigenous peoples on matters that directly affect their rights to their lands.  Although this analysis applies to all categories of protected areas, it will specifically focus on national parks.  Part II explores the significance of land and biodiversity to local tradition, culture, and lifestyle in two countries: Gabon and Panama.  It sets forth the general facts concerning two groups of people in each country who live near national parks.  Part III examines the meaning of the word indigenous in international law and applies the definition to the people discussed in Part II.  Emphasizing the rights of indigenous communities with regards to the environment, Part IV argues that the right to consultation concerning any action which may affect traditional use of land falls within customary international law.  Part V studies the practical application of the obligation to consult in Gabon and Panama.  The paper concludes by reconciling potential conflict between human rights and environmental protection through a consultative process.

When the Red Army entered Germany at the end of World War II, it seized 2.3 million objects including paintings, sculptures, and other works of art. At the time of this writing in 2009, the bulk of those objects are still in Russia. In addition to hundreds of thousands of pieces that belonged to German citizens and German museums the Russians hold paintings that the Nazis had stolen from all over Europe. Many of the works in question have been kept in locked rooms in the basements of museums since the end of the war. Although there were some encouraging signs that the art might be returned, or at least allowed to be displayed, with the end of the communist government, it does not appear that Russia is considering a large scale return of the art at this time. To the contrary, the Russian government has long held that the art is restitution for the destruction and theft of Russian art by the Nazis, and passed a law in 1998 that declares that the art is state property. This article explores the international legal remedy for procuring that art from the Russian government. “[U]ntil every one of those paintings, prints, sculptures, tapestries, and artifacts is returned, it will be impossible for us to walk through most of the world’s museums and galleries without wondering if we are staring into the haunted face of the spoils of war.” At the outset, a conclusion: favorable verdicts are obtainable, but the successful conclusion of litigation will only be the beginning of the exceedingly difficult task of enforcing a verdict against an obstinate and neo-nationalistic Russian government.