iwannarock
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,256
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2003
it will be the happiest day in my life if he doesn't break the mould and just gives me a 6.GoodToGo said:
i will jump up and hug rafiq if he gives me a 6.
-
Finished your HSC? Check out our University Discussion, Non-School forums or help out next year's HSC students! -
YOU can help the next generation of students in the community! Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
400/500 Law Electives (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter MaryJane
- Start date
i will jump up and hug rafiq if he gives me a 6.
melsc
Premium Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2004
- Messages
- 6,365
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2005
Yeah, I don't think I realised (or it was clear enough to me) that it supposed to be that pragmatic. In my mind I was trying to be realistic...I know for next time at least. I do see how I was a little confused and tangental but I still feel it was relevant enough for a pass. I suppose I saw the question broadly and then took a narrow focus that wasn;t in the direction they wanted.MaryJane said:
My friend and I who are both third years and this is our first elective both realised that we did not exactly what was expected as we are used to core units were its more knowledge and skills based rather than research and based. At the very least we know what to do now and he did say I should be able to turn my marks around (probably not as much as I'd like).
With referencing lectures, again I'll put it down to experience because I have never had anyone complain about it before (as you said I usually only use it when I can't find it anywhere else) but I haven't done a subject at this level so again its something I can take on board.
Anyone who passed can you tell me how many sources you used and what yous solutions were so I can get an idea what I did wrong.
I had about 7 sources (I read more but they were irelevant so I did not include them in bibliography). My strategies were:
1. Embracing current standards and simple things to induce compliance. Media enforcing compliance by bring issue to light. Ensuring people understand the current level of compliance and how coverage is generally of the few failures (a few other things I cant remember).
2. Finanical reform of un - trying to promoted awareness of limited resources. Either accept current levels of compliance or increase funding by creating better sanctions for those who fail to pay (like the US) so the UN has money to do things and increase legitimacy.
3. restructure of SC - allocate six permenant seats attached to regions in the world with rotating membership to increase legitimacy and relevance. Would be better to give them veto but unlikely to happen so limit use of veto by permenant members or make them justify it to general assembly which may lead to eventual phasing out.
I acknowledged with all these the difficulties they faced but noted that most of these hadn't been proposed for 10 years and times have changed as and the frustration with the current system increased blah blah blah...
Re: class participation.
Rafiq warned me that he will allocate the marks the way G2G said (he was telling me so I could try and maximise the marks I have left to get) and that those people he keeps asking questions and they fail to answer (like those people he pointed to in the back of las class) he is trying to get an answer out of them because he suspects they are unpreparedand when they don't answer that affirms it. he said make sure you ask questions and they are relevant and show evidence you understand the topic.
I would make sure you try and answer/ask early on anything you know something about! Although i believe the reason why no one talks is because he doesn't have tutorial questions or anything to go by and expects us to come up with questions. But if you understood everything or are trying to digest all the info...what are you going to ask?
I just hope I can try and keep my GPA up and try not to fail...
MaryJane
Extraordinary Machine
From what you've said above, I think its pretty harsh that you didn't pass melsc. And, as I said, you do so well in other LAW units that this really shouldn't have been that different.
I had 8 sources (including two books, one of which was my ADR book by David Spencer!), plus cases and treaties and made reference to the tribunals of Rwanda and Yugoslavia.
My strategies were:
1. 'Nation States': I basically talked about how all States are driven by self-interest and reputation, and so to ensure compliance focus should be given to this. I bullet pointed my actual strategies and for this area it was: striving to make all international agreements focus on the greater good, thus over-riding self-interest and increasing compliance. And that region-specific treaties should only be open to those in that region to sign, and the treaty again should focus on benefiting only that area, as to maximise the number of signatories. And that all international agreements should focus on subject matters that are currently in line with natural law and existing domestic law within that region.
2. 'The Creation of international Instruments': Talked about the reason some treaties result in non-compliance is because they are arbitrary and unrealistic. My strategies were: to create a open forum (eg. via the UN) where States send a representative and all countries sit down and have a chat and reach a consensus on the draft instrument. Additionally, that in this forum, all parties should be able to 'bargain' their position. And that subject matter should again come from customary or aspirational agreements. And that all agreements should be non-confrontational, forward-looking and facilitative. Basically this whole section was based on what I had learnt in ADR, about people 'owning' the dispute resolution process, which enhanses compliance.
3. 'Enforcement': Here I suggested that the role of the ICj be changed to one of 'managing' rather than 'adjudicating' compliance, so it would let them respond pre-emptively to non-compliance. And that the ICJ should be linked to the domestic legal systems of States (like the ECJ in Europe -- again, this knowledge came from my EU law unit). And that sanctions in treaties should be wide in scope and variety and should range appropriately based on how important a treaty is. And finally talked about how an international police force - whilst desirable - is not pragmatic.
Maybe the problem is not so much that you're too young or inexperienced to take on an elective (because your GPA reflects otherwise), but maybe its because you haven't done other electives, and therefore your knowledge is still confined just to core units? As in, I was able to draw on both my ADR, EU and International Organisations knowledge, which may have made it sound like I knew what I was talking about
I had 8 sources (including two books, one of which was my ADR book by David Spencer!), plus cases and treaties and made reference to the tribunals of Rwanda and Yugoslavia.
My strategies were:
1. 'Nation States': I basically talked about how all States are driven by self-interest and reputation, and so to ensure compliance focus should be given to this. I bullet pointed my actual strategies and for this area it was: striving to make all international agreements focus on the greater good, thus over-riding self-interest and increasing compliance. And that region-specific treaties should only be open to those in that region to sign, and the treaty again should focus on benefiting only that area, as to maximise the number of signatories. And that all international agreements should focus on subject matters that are currently in line with natural law and existing domestic law within that region.
2. 'The Creation of international Instruments': Talked about the reason some treaties result in non-compliance is because they are arbitrary and unrealistic. My strategies were: to create a open forum (eg. via the UN) where States send a representative and all countries sit down and have a chat and reach a consensus on the draft instrument. Additionally, that in this forum, all parties should be able to 'bargain' their position. And that subject matter should again come from customary or aspirational agreements. And that all agreements should be non-confrontational, forward-looking and facilitative. Basically this whole section was based on what I had learnt in ADR, about people 'owning' the dispute resolution process, which enhanses compliance.
3. 'Enforcement': Here I suggested that the role of the ICj be changed to one of 'managing' rather than 'adjudicating' compliance, so it would let them respond pre-emptively to non-compliance. And that the ICJ should be linked to the domestic legal systems of States (like the ECJ in Europe -- again, this knowledge came from my EU law unit). And that sanctions in treaties should be wide in scope and variety and should range appropriately based on how important a treaty is. And finally talked about how an international police force - whilst desirable - is not pragmatic.
Maybe the problem is not so much that you're too young or inexperienced to take on an elective (because your GPA reflects otherwise), but maybe its because you haven't done other electives, and therefore your knowledge is still confined just to core units? As in, I was able to draw on both my ADR, EU and International Organisations knowledge, which may have made it sound like I knew what I was talking about
Someone was telling me on Thursday that there was a push in the Law Faculty at some stage (I think last year) to include International Law as a core subject.
I dont why this was pushed but one tutor said it is a subject that is remarkably different from the basic law units that have a question, stated law and definite answer and that many students at a variety of different universities find that distinction a lot more difficult when dealing with something that isnt as static and definite.
Would International Law be better served as an elective unit or a core unit in your opinion?
I dont why this was pushed but one tutor said it is a subject that is remarkably different from the basic law units that have a question, stated law and definite answer and that many students at a variety of different universities find that distinction a lot more difficult when dealing with something that isnt as static and definite.
Would International Law be better served as an elective unit or a core unit in your opinion?
MaryJane
Extraordinary Machine
Actually, I remember someone saying the same thing to me, Maka, about how international law is totally different from every other law unit because its so abstract and there is no substantive law to it.
Re: making it a core unit, I think that would be a good idea but ONLY if it had decent teaching staff. It couldn't be a core unit in its current state. I say that it would be a good core because what you learn in it - as in the topics covered - are interesting, and it gives you a different, more... complete view of the "law". And, its always going to be relevant - arguably moreso than juris!! - and so having that background to me seems valuable.
But this may also be skewed by the fact I'm interested in international and human rights law
Re: making it a core unit, I think that would be a good idea but ONLY if it had decent teaching staff. It couldn't be a core unit in its current state. I say that it would be a good core because what you learn in it - as in the topics covered - are interesting, and it gives you a different, more... complete view of the "law". And, its always going to be relevant - arguably moreso than juris!! - and so having that background to me seems valuable.
But this may also be skewed by the fact I'm interested in international and human rights law
MJ...
From what I have seen of International Law at USYD from my friends assessment questions and the like, their course seems to be a more mechanical look at International Law compared to the idealistic MQ based course.
They had an assessment which was basically a problem question that focused upon private international law ie business transactions across borders.
I think International Law at MQ needs to be divided into 3 courses if it is going to be a core subject.
There could be the core International Law that is basically an overview and then you could add two electives of Private Int. Law and Public Int. Law which allows students to focus upon one of these subjects.
UTS has the Public and Private International Law divide plus the specialist International Law areas such as Human Rights etc.
The need for a core International Law subject I agree would be useful in a different form. Perhaps it could move away from effectively a research orientated unit towards something that is more balanced where students are gradually eased from their comfort zones of problem questions towards more holistic research questions.
From what I have seen of International Law at USYD from my friends assessment questions and the like, their course seems to be a more mechanical look at International Law compared to the idealistic MQ based course.
They had an assessment which was basically a problem question that focused upon private international law ie business transactions across borders.
I think International Law at MQ needs to be divided into 3 courses if it is going to be a core subject.
There could be the core International Law that is basically an overview and then you could add two electives of Private Int. Law and Public Int. Law which allows students to focus upon one of these subjects.
UTS has the Public and Private International Law divide plus the specialist International Law areas such as Human Rights etc.
The need for a core International Law subject I agree would be useful in a different form. Perhaps it could move away from effectively a research orientated unit towards something that is more balanced where students are gradually eased from their comfort zones of problem questions towards more holistic research questions.
Tabris
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2004
- Messages
- 806
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
At USYD, int law is convened by our txtbk writer Triggs, its a core unit over there.
If u want a complete view of law, that is, contextual and textual, do labor law....everything in law seems to be from a Marxist perspective, the law as a result of the class conflict between labor and capital.....
If u want a complete view of law, that is, contextual and textual, do labor law....everything in law seems to be from a Marxist perspective, the law as a result of the class conflict between labor and capital.....
Do you like Labour Law this semester Tabris?
I really enjoy it myself. I think Frank's teaching method is really different but it is the one class every week I like attending.
I dont think Frank focuses to much on a Marxist perspective. Its his view but he often talks about the alternatives or lets others offer their opinons.
It really is a good take on law as essentially Labour Law is based upon the class conflict of employer vs employee.
I really enjoy it myself. I think Frank's teaching method is really different but it is the one class every week I like attending.
I dont think Frank focuses to much on a Marxist perspective. Its his view but he often talks about the alternatives or lets others offer their opinons.
It really is a good take on law as essentially Labour Law is based upon the class conflict of employer vs employee.
MaryJane
Extraordinary Machine
Just a random addition - but I'm so relieved!
It seems the entire law faculty have gone insane with marking. Firstly there was IL where all the great BOSers failed
And then I get my Int. Orgs essay back today. Firstly, Natalie is insane because she marked the entire units worth of essays in 10 days! Crazy and very impressive. But then I get my mark. This essay was - from my point of view - the worst one I have ever written. And I had a mini-breakdown over it, which has never happened before. So, there I am, praying for 25/50 and I get it back..........
43/50
Its a HD!
*dances*
So....... hopefully the IL guys take a sip of whatever Natalie was drinking when she marked my essay and then we'll all rock in the final!
It seems the entire law faculty have gone insane with marking. Firstly there was IL where all the great BOSers failed
And then I get my Int. Orgs essay back today. Firstly, Natalie is insane because she marked the entire units worth of essays in 10 days! Crazy and very impressive. But then I get my mark. This essay was - from my point of view - the worst one I have ever written. And I had a mini-breakdown over it, which has never happened before. So, there I am, praying for 25/50 and I get it back..........
43/50
Its a HD!
*dances*
So....... hopefully the IL guys take a sip of whatever Natalie was drinking when she marked my essay and then we'll all rock in the final!
melsc
Premium Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2004
- Messages
- 6,365
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2005
Yeah MJ congrats
What ever she's on give it to Iain...we're still waiting on const essays handed in on Monday week 8.
What ever she's on give it to Iain...we're still waiting on const essays handed in on Monday week 8.
MaryJane
Extraordinary Machine
Same here with advanced torts. But ours were handed in before the mid-semester!! Its getting a bit annoying...
So, have you all started on your IL yet? I'm doing research at the moment. Know what I want to talk about, but not sure how to set it out. Its on humanitarian intervention, like most of us here. How have you structured your essay, Tabris? I'm going to talk about sovereignty and whether its compatible with HI, and then about the Charter, and whether it could be classified as part of customary int. law. And I'm going to go into a few examples, like Kosovo (naturally), and Somalia etc.
Sigh. 3000 words isn't much, but it seems like a lot when you've only got a week left
So, have you all started on your IL yet? I'm doing research at the moment. Know what I want to talk about, but not sure how to set it out. Its on humanitarian intervention, like most of us here. How have you structured your essay, Tabris? I'm going to talk about sovereignty and whether its compatible with HI, and then about the Charter, and whether it could be classified as part of customary int. law. And I'm going to go into a few examples, like Kosovo (naturally), and Somalia etc.
Sigh. 3000 words isn't much, but it seems like a lot when you've only got a week left
melsc
Premium Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2004
- Messages
- 6,365
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2005
I have begun researching and like you MJ I dont know exactly how to structure or approach writing it yet...sigh...getting really stressed now.
Tabris
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2004
- Messages
- 806
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
Hows everyone going?? half way through editing and trying to polish the work up....
hopefully 18+ sources will be ok......
Humanitarian intervention topic is broad..... maybe 4000 words to get the gist of it....hopefully
and IWR, if your here, i can lend a hand with some sources if u need help...
hopefully 18+ sources will be ok......
Humanitarian intervention topic is broad..... maybe 4000 words to get the gist of it....hopefully
and IWR, if your here, i can lend a hand with some sources if u need help...
melsc
Premium Member
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2004
- Messages
- 6,365
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- 2005
I'm still reading, but writing is usually the easiest part for me. Trying to read all the articles I have found since I didn't have enough last time. I am really worried though....
MaryJane
Extraordinary Machine
Well I'm 1700 words through... getting there slowly. Its amazing how much time this is actually taking, there is no way you could research and write it in a day. And HI is such an extensive topic as Tabris said.
I have 13 sources - academic sources - and some newspaper articles... and then I have to add in the Charter and judgements, things like that.
Not sure if I will go back and edit it truthfully. I'm trying to do it as I go. My lack of editing worked in Int Orgs, so maybe I'll try it in IL
melsc, you'll be fine! Great, even. Dont stress about it too much. Because its free choice they cant mark you down for not answering the question this time.
I have 13 sources - academic sources - and some newspaper articles... and then I have to add in the Charter and judgements, things like that.
Not sure if I will go back and edit it truthfully. I'm trying to do it as I go. My lack of editing worked in Int Orgs, so maybe I'll try it in IL
melsc, you'll be fine! Great, even. Dont stress about it too much. Because its free choice they cant mark you down for not answering the question this time.
Tabris
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2004
- Messages
- 806
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
What judgments did u use? apart from Nicauragua and Belgium v Yugoslavia (which didnt really say anything), there wasnt a heap of cases.....there had been prior examples but nothing solid in terms of ICJ judgments.....unless i have seriously overlooked something...
I've contemplated using Sudan and Burma as possible examples of potential humanitarian intervention situation but they both dont fit very well.....
Page 27 in Cassese sets out a criteria in which humanitarian intervention can "possibly" develop so as to become a special norm exception under art 53/64 of VCLT (Which is similar to Charny, Chinkin and Lowe)
http://www.ejil.org/journal/Vol10/No1/100023.pdf
I have thought about it, and i really doubt Burma would fit in since they accepted aid and there have been some cooperation and alleviation.
As for Sudan, its gets very tangled and i dont have any words to spare for Burma, let alone Sudan...
Oh, the latest journal article on Kosovo is here
http://hrlr.oxfordjournals.org.simsrad.net.ocs.mq.edu.au/cgi/content/full/7/2/275
Check out the footnotes, especially 7, 8, 9 where it shows nearly all the sources showing why it should, should not and could be legal
Anyway heres how wordcout goes
Intro+conclusion = 200 words
Facts on the recent Kosovo 250
Legality of HI within Un charter context = 600
existence of HI within customary law = 650
Why should we and where should we develop HI = 300
Conditions and underlying principles to develop HI = 950 words
I've contemplated using Sudan and Burma as possible examples of potential humanitarian intervention situation but they both dont fit very well.....
Page 27 in Cassese sets out a criteria in which humanitarian intervention can "possibly" develop so as to become a special norm exception under art 53/64 of VCLT (Which is similar to Charny, Chinkin and Lowe)
http://www.ejil.org/journal/Vol10/No1/100023.pdf
I have thought about it, and i really doubt Burma would fit in since they accepted aid and there have been some cooperation and alleviation.
As for Sudan, its gets very tangled and i dont have any words to spare for Burma, let alone Sudan...
Oh, the latest journal article on Kosovo is here
http://hrlr.oxfordjournals.org.simsrad.net.ocs.mq.edu.au/cgi/content/full/7/2/275
Check out the footnotes, especially 7, 8, 9 where it shows nearly all the sources showing why it should, should not and could be legal
Anyway heres how wordcout goes
Intro+conclusion = 200 words
Facts on the recent Kosovo 250
Legality of HI within Un charter context = 600
existence of HI within customary law = 650
Why should we and where should we develop HI = 300
Conditions and underlying principles to develop HI = 950 words
Last edited:
MaryJane
Extraordinary Machine
I'm looking at Darfur (not in any great detail because I haven't got the words!), but I'm not focusing on Kosovo (just mentioning it in passing several times, like Yugoslavia v Belgium). Other cases are Tunis and Morocco... But most of my other sources are direct resolutions (like Uniting for Peace).
I've also considered talking about Burma, but I dont think it would get up. It probably would under this new principle that the High Panel are trying to introduce called 'responsibility to protect'.
I'll give you my breakdown once I've finished it off a bit more.
edit: Okay, just finished. its 3100 bum bum bum! I wonder if we get the 10% leeway...
intro: 213
sovereignty: 361
customary: 286
UN: 1086
how and where to do it: 695
Darfur: 341
conclusion: 127
I've also considered talking about Burma, but I dont think it would get up. It probably would under this new principle that the High Panel are trying to introduce called 'responsibility to protect'.
I'll give you my breakdown once I've finished it off a bit more.
edit: Okay, just finished. its 3100 bum bum bum! I wonder if we get the 10% leeway...
intro: 213
sovereignty: 361
customary: 286
UN: 1086
how and where to do it: 695
Darfur: 341
conclusion: 127
Last edited:
Tabris
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2004
- Messages
- 806
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2004
thx for that, a new idea, anyway heres more of the responsibility to protect.... i dont know if u already found it:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/humanint/index.htm#articles
http://www.jstor.org.simsrad.net.oc...esponsibility+to+protect)&Search=Search&hp=25
http://www.globalpolicy.org/empire/humanint/index.htm#articles
http://www.jstor.org.simsrad.net.oc...esponsibility+to+protect)&Search=Search&hp=25
Last edited:
iwannarock
Active Member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,256
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2003
well i now have a bunch of articles.
time to read them all.
thanks for the suggestions.
i need 27/50 to pass the course.
time to read them all.
thanks for the suggestions.
i need 27/50 to pass the course.