London Law Review Final Final 240x170 and Cover

Pages
1 to
159
Vol. 1, Issue 1 LONDON LAW REVIEW June 2005
88891 06/05
LONDON LAW REVIEW
Volume 1, June 2005, Issue 1
Foreword
This first issue of London Law Review is the start of an ambitious project with
highly commendable objectives. It aims to provide students with the ability to
submit for publication papers on a diverse range of legal issues, and so to enhance
international academic literature with enduring excellence. It further aims to
generate revenue to plough back into legal education. To do either would be an
achievement: to do both, a fine achievement indeed.
As reference to the papers in this first issue shows, the title “London Law Review”
conceals a diverse international content. Highlights include papers on international
terrorism complemented with an array of scholarship about Alternative Dispute
Resolution, mediation in particular. These latter have a full European and
international spectrum on a range of dispute resolution procedures which have
gained increased prominence at a time when the cost and other strains of adversarial
litigation accumulate. The international content is maintained with a paper about
privacy and confidence relating to the media: the European theme with a paper on
Insider Trading in the Netherlands.
I am delighted to express my support for the launch of this publication; to

congratulate all those who have contributed to its initial success; and to give every
encouragement for its future establishment as a prominent source of legal academic
excellence.
Anthony May
Royal Courts of Justice
London
LONDON LAW REVIEW
First Published in 2005 by
LONDON LAW REVIEW

27 Old Gloucester Street
London WC1N 3XX
UK
© London Law Review 2005
All rights reserved.
Copyright for individual articles generally remains with the authors.
ISSN 1747- 9436 (Print)
The content of this journal does not necessarily reflect the position or views of Lord
Woolf or the London Law Review.
Printed by
Brunel University Press

Uxbridge UB8 3PH
UK
LONDON LAW REVIEW
CONTENTS
FOREWORD
The Importance of the Law Review
Rt. Hon. Lord Justice ANTHONY MAY
EDITORIAL
Looking toward the future of the LLR
ARTICLES
Mediation Opportunities in the EU and Internationally 1
KARL MACKIE
Proposal for an EU Directive on Aspects of Mediation 5

PROF. MARIANNE ROTH
Med-ARB Hybrid: A Viable Solution? 27

ANDREW BURR
Mediation: Moving to a more Flexible Access to Justice 49

PAOLA FERRONI
Is ADR a Viable Solution or Simply Second Class Justice? 59

T. ANDREW DE BEAULAC
Injunctions Against the World 69

PAUL DOUGAN
Insider Dealing: A Dutch Perspective 95

DIRK P.F. MEERBURG
Critical Analysis of International Terrorism Legislation 109

JOHN PICKLES
Why is Suicide Terrorism Increasingly Becoming the Tactic of First Resort? 115
JASMINE CHADHA
Home Secretary’s Proposal on House Arrest 141

KELECHI ONWERE
The Juvenile Death Penalty Under International Law 145

FERDERIQUE BIET
LONDON LAW REVIEW
CORRESPONDENCE
The LONDON LAW REVIEW invites letters in response to scholarship appearing in the
Review within the current year. Correspondence should be brief and should be
addressed to LONDON LAW REVIEW, 27 Old Gloucester Street, London, WC1N 3XX.
We cannot guarantee that letters received will be published. Those letters that are
selected for publication will be edited with the cooperation of the author.
The LONDON LAW REVIEW is published quarterly (June, September, December, March) by the London
Law Review. Editorial and general offices are located in the Monomark Building, 27 Old Gloucester
Street, London, WC1N 3XX.
Subscriptions: A year subscription for Volume 1 is £48 payable in advance (add £10 for foreign surface
mailing). Remittance must be made by British Pound Sterling drafts payable to London Law Review or
via the website (http://www.lawreview.org.uk) through a secure PayPal account. Payments in cash
cannot be guaranteed. Inquire for multivolume prepaid rates and agency rates. Subscription requests
received after the first issue of a volume has been printed will run for four issues of that volume, unless
otherwise indicated by the subscriber.
Claims: Domestic claims fro non-receipt of issues should be made within 90 days of the month of
publication, overseas claims within 180 days; thereafter, the regular back issue rate will be charged for
replacement. All subscriptions will be renewed automatically unless the subscriber provides timely
notice of cancellation. Address changes will be effective within three months of notice. Please provide
an old mailing label or the entire old address; the new address must include the postal code. Address
changes or other requests for subscription information should be directed to the Business Manager.
Manuscripts: The LONDON LAW REVIEW invites the submission of unsolicited articles, essays, and book
reviews. Manuscripts cannot be returned unless a self-addressed, postage-paid envelope is submitted with
the manuscript. The address for overnight deliveries is: LONDON LAW REVIEW, 27 Old Gloucester
Street, London, WC1N 3XX, UK. Manuscripts can be submitted online at http://www.lawreview.org.uk.
Scholarship Committee : The committee will be made up of various legal practitioners, academics and
members of the judiciary. If you are interested in becoming part of the scholarship committee then please
email: Editor-in-Chief @lawreview.org.uk
Copyright: Copyright © 2005 by the London Law Review. Pieces herein may be duplicated for
classroom use, provided that (1) each copy is distributed at or below cost; (2) the author and the LONDON
LAW REVIEW are identified; (3) proper notice of copyright is affixed to each copy; and (4) The London
Law Review is notified of its use.
Production: Citations in the Review conform to the BIG OSCOLA 2002: The Oxford Standard for the
Citation of Legal Authorities. The Journal is printed by Brunel University Press in Uxbridge, UK.
Publication number is ISSN 1747 9436 (Print).
Internet Address: London Law Review’s home page is located at http://www.lawreview.org.uk

LONDON LAW REVIEW
MASTHEAD
PATRON
Rt. Hon. Lord Chief Justice of England & Wales
Lord Woolf
Executive Editor-in Chief Editor-in-Chief
Paul Dougan T. Andrew de Beaulac
Managing Editor
John D. Pickles
Editorial Board
Production Editor Research Editor Business Editor

James Doheny Julie Wright Suzanne Alyamani
Articles Editor EU & Constitutional Editor Comments & Notes Editor

Rebecca Frankel Tina Green Rukia Dames
Ruth Pogonowski Frederique Biet Umsilla Moodley
STAFF
Akar Kayma Steven Hanson Norma Burke
Luba Fjordorova Denise Williams Justin Richards
Isaac Fabelurin Greg Reynolds Heike Hamercher
Sharon Ajakaiye Kelechi Onwere Henry Male
Carla Ballard Nicole Abraham Nicola Sawyer
Julian Torres Asim Gaba Robert Bruce
Tim Finch Edward Glen Erica Novium
Sarah Earl Barbora Hamblin Carl Latchford
Aliya Syzdykova-Baxter Guillaume Lecat
***
LONDON LAW REVIEW
EDITORIAL
Welcome to the first issue of the London Law Review, a quarterly journal devoted to
timeous and critical analysis of contemporary legal issues. It is envisaged that the
publication will become a forum for contributions both from academia and the legal
professions, though a central aim of the Review is to provide a platform to enable
students to further their academic writing skills through interaction with and
publication alongside these legal academics and practitioners.
The articles in this issue demonstrate just how diverse and exciting the area of
international law and dispute resolution can be. Two practitioners articles, written by
Karl Mackie, Chief Executive of CEDR and Andrew Burr from Atkin Chambers in
London, provide thoughtful insights into the present state and future of dispute
resolution here in the UK whilst Professor Marianne Roth and Paola Ferroni look at
similar developments in mainland Europe. Dirk Meerburg from De Brauw
Blackstone Westbroek Advocaats in London provides an extremely interesting
analysis of insider dealing in the Netherlands.
The issue concludes with our student-written articles, including a piece by

Frederique Biet, looking at issues surrounding the juvenile death penalty, while
Jasmine Chadha addresses the international threat of suicide terrorism, placing it in a
wider context.
The editorial board would like to thank all of the authors for their contributions. We
are committed to providing our readers with broad coverage of timely and important
legal issues, and we appreciate the continued support and advice of our patron, Lord
Woolf, and the hard work of the law review team.
I hope you will find this new arrival on your desk both informative and helpful and
that you enjoy reading this issue of the London Law Review. If you have any
comments or questions, or if you are interested in submitting an article, essay,
speech or other work for publication, please do contact us.
Paul Dougan, Executive Editor-in-Chief T. Andrew de Beaulac, Editor in Chief
LONDON, JUNE 2005

***
! ! ! ! ! ! " ! # ! $! % &
( !' ) ( ! !* (
" * ! ! ! + + ' !
#!% % ! % ! %% ! !! " ! ' + %
! ! ! $! ' $ ', ! ! &
! !*( ! -
$ ! ! # "
! % * ( ! $ %!! * !
$ $ &. / ! ! * ( + ! $ +
%% #( ( ! ) (0 # " #$ $ $ ( *
! 1 "! * % ! + # $ #( !*$ *
! ! ! %% !* -
$ ! $ & ! + # *!! !*
!* # $! * $ ! ! ! !%$ ! ! %
" ! + * !* ! %% ! * ! ( !
*! !* ! %% # #!% !-$ $ # !* * !
( &
2 !( ( ' + " $ ( ! " ! $ ! %

*! !*' ! !* ! !! " ! ! !$ ! " !&
$ ) !+ ( (' $* !+ ! ( ) '
!+ ! # ! % " ! " "
% ! ! !* " ! $ &
# ! ! " !* ! ! ! ! ) ! # $ %
! 3 !! % ! ! ! ! ! ! '
!$ ! ! % ! " &4
† Karl J Mackie, founding Chief Executive of CEDR (Centre for Dispute Resolution) in London,
Honorary Professor in Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Faculty of Law of University of
Birmingham, and Director of Studies for Negotiation and Management Skills programmes for the
Commerce and Industry Group of the Law Society of England & Wales. A barrister and psychologist by
training, Professor Mackie is a mediator and Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.
1
According to the Overriding Objective of the Civil Procedure Rules in England and Wales, the courts
are obliged to ‘encourage the parties to use an alternative dispute resolution procedure if the court
considers that appropriate and facilitating the use of such procedure’, Part 1 CPR volume 1, r 1.4(2)(e).
2
For a review of typical international cases mediated through CEDR see the appendix of International
Mediation: The Art of Corporate Diplomacy, Kluwer Law International, 1999, E Carroll and K Mackie.
2 LONDON LAW REVIEW [Vol. 1: 1
!( " + ( * $ '
+ # % !* % ! ! !3 $ ! " & !
" (+ ! $ ! ! ! # $* ! ! % %
! " $ $ !0 1 % % ! % " - $
% *! & !% ) !* !$ ' ! !+
!$ !-$ ! + !
+ (& $ ! % # !
!%$ ! ) ! $! + ! ( $* ! '+
" # ! 5$ + + ! $ !* * (
* ! ' ! $ !* $ !! &6
/ ! !% $ % ! 3# !$ $ !
! % !* ' % $ % ! (
! % ! 7 !8& / ! (
! ! #$ % *$ ! % ! *!* % !' !
! $ ! ! # ! % & /
! !*( !+ * + ! $ !, ! %
) ! ' !* ! ! % % ! #$ #
$ !-$ ( ' !+ + %3 *$ !
! ! $ * ! %# &
! ! $ 3 %3 $ $ ! * " ( !
% .99:'+ ! $ !, ! $ % + # ( %
!* ! $ $ ! ! %% ! ! !! $*
$ 3 %3 $ $ & + "! $* ! !*# *
% !! ! $ '! !* % * ! ! !%$ ! "
3# !$ & $ ! , ! !
!$ # % $ ! !* % % $ 3 %3 $
! $ ! % !$ $ ' * '; % (
$ < ! ! &: ! 4==.'+ $ !, !
%$! !*', ! " % 2 ! '> *$ ' !
! ( #! " ! % ! ! &
!" " ! %( !* " $ " $* $ !
" !* ! ! ! " ! % !+ !
' ! $ !* ! ! !* ! ' ! !
+ $ ( & %! !* + ! " *
3
The EU Mediation Atlas: Practice and Regulation, Appendix 1 comparative tables on the new member
states: Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia.
4
Directive on Legal Aid, 18 July 2002
5
Proposal for a Regulation concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments
in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility, 3 May 2002, COM/2002/0222
final/2
6
Directive 2000/31/EC on Electronic Commerce, 8 June 2000
2005] Meditation-Opportunities 3
0 (-
$ * ! ! ( %-
$ %% 1% .< #
&
! 4==4' $ !, ! $# ? ! !
7 ! " $ $ ! !, " ! +8@ ! $!
" # % !$
!" " ! # $ $* ! " !
&
#** !* ! 4==6 + ! $ !
! ! * $ !, ! + !
! " ! % $ ! %$ ' ! !
$ * ! %# '! % ! % % !
*$ !& , '! ! ? ! ' ##
"* $ ( % # ! !# & " " *$
$ ! % ( + $ !( " " (
" !&
( ' + ! %4==6' ! $ % $ !
!8 ! ! $ ! + $ !
, !' , ! $ * ! ! ! %
$ !, %, ! $ % ! ! ! !
! % ! " !& , %, ! $
+ ! ! # " $! ( ! %3 *$ ( + "
$ %% " ' ! % & % %
" #( $ !, !0 $ $
( " 1' $* ! % %$ # ('
*! ! ! !$ % & % ! %
! # + ! $ ! !' ! !
! $ + % 0! !% ! (' !% ! ! !
1 !$ ! 3# &
+ * ! # * $! % ( " ! % % ' " ( %

! ! ! * + !* ! ' ! ! $ '
, % + !A B % ! !
+ ! ! ! ! + % ', , ! !! & *$
$ ! ! ! -
$ ! ! "
*$ ! $ % ! ! " $ $! &C
#- " + D
7
Green Paper of 19 April 2002 on Alternative dispute Resolution in civil and commercial matters, COM
(2002) 196 final
8
The EU Mediation Atlas: Practice & Regulation published by LexisNexis UK can be obtained from
CEDR, e-mail info@cedr.co.uk or call +44 (0)207 536 6000.
• %(+ ! !* ! % # %
• $! ! %* + % ! + ! %% !
-
$ !
! !* % ! !*'
% !' $ 3 % ! ! "
!+ ! !* ! %%
! ! * ! !* ! ( % $ ! !
$ $ !% ! (
• " #! * ! + %$ $ " ! !#
&
!* % " *$ ! ! % ) !* !
' !( % % # %$ $ ' " # ! "! & %
$! '! ! + ! " ! " (+ ' %%
$* & ! ! + $ !* !
" $ ( $! " -
$ !& ! $ * ! % *
$! ! !* % # '+ # !
" !* ! ! ! !* $ +
%! $ & , ! !$ !* #
!* * % " ! ! $! ! !* !
! ! ! ( ! " ( ! !* + # ! $ !
! " " ! % ! !
! ! ! $ $ ! !&
! 4==< , !! $! - * ! + 8
* ! " 'E & %% ! %#
*! ! ! ) ! " '+ # '! $ !! % " !*
! " * ! $ + ! ! $ & $
' " ! ! ! ! $ # !* ! %
+ $ ' ! ! ! ( % % & !
! # (% $ ! ! + %* # !! " !
!-
$ ( ! " !% !* !&
!" #$ %& " ' '
&$ "# #( )' " * $ + +
," - . )!" # #" $" "% $ #
$ "# $ / # % +
#- #( ' + #" #( ' "
$ + '# " '# # $' 0 $
!
" ($ /1
"& " '( " '

!
" 0 " $ - & #
" $ " $ #$ $ # +
$ +# # ' 12&
3224/3 #( ' & ( 1&3225 " # ( #
#0 +# 6 7 '(
' " $ " ( $ + $ +
#% # 0 - /8 & ," 0 .
" $ 0 + %
+ / #$ $ + $ $ + &
† Doctor iuris, LL.M. (Harvard), Vice-Dean and Professor of Law, Paris Lodron University Salzburg,
School of Law, Austria.
1
See Preamble, No. 6 of the proposed directive, infra note 2; explanatory memorandum to the proposed
directive, infra note 2, No. 1.1.3.; Mähler & Mähler, in BECK’SCHES RECHTSANWALTHANDBUCH 251 et
seq. (8th ed. 2004); Grilli, Vom Anwalt zum Schlichter, 49 DEUTSCHES ANWALTSBLATT 533, 533-36
(1997); Steinbrück, Wirtschaftsmediation und außergerichtliche Konfliktlösung—Chancen für
Unternehmen, Anwälte und Gerichte, 49 DEUTSCHES ANWALTSBLATT 574, 578 (1999).
2
Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and the Council on certain aspects of mediation in
civil and commercial disputes of 22.10.2004; 2004/0251 (COD); COM (2004) 718 final;
http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2004/com2004_0718en01.pdf.
3
Act on Mediation in Civil Matters (Zivilrechts-Mediations-Gesetz) 2004, Federal Law Gazette
(Bundesgesetzblatt, abbreviated BGBl.) I 2003/29, http://www.ris.bka.gv.at. Section VI of the Mediation
Act concerning educational establishments and mediation courses went already into effect on January 1,
2004. See Roth & Markowetz, Bundesgesetz über Mediation in Zivilrechtssachen - Ein Überblick über
die neuen Bestimmungen, 126 JURISTISCHE BLÄTTER, 296-302 (2004).
## 0 '( . " 9 $# 0 .$
%"# ( 0 - / $$ - $ " "
$ $ + & #" % " #0
$ /
# 1&$ /1 $ $ # .$ #( + 9 '! + *
# $" #" '( $ % "

'( " % " # $' 0
!
" #$ %/
& $ $ + 0 ($ $ + * #(&
$ + 0 '#% ' + #( $ "
6 /7& #(& + #$ " # "# 0 "
" # $' 0 !" #$ % 6 /7/
$ " # "# %
# % + 6 /1/7& $
#( "' ," !
" #$ % 6 /3/7&
0 ## "$ # $ 6 /8/7/
" $ $ $ + ," #
" "%% $ &0 $$ $ 6 /1/7/
& ' "# $" $# + ," # ( #
% $ + + %
6 /3/7/
:( % " " 0 " $

" (& $ $ # $" % ," # %
0 !
" #$ % * #( # $ "# $" &"
" 0 ## & #( $ $
" "# ' + $ % $$ $
$" #" /4
'! + $ $ + "##( # 0 "

+# / $" # #(& " '
$ % ' ' # ' $ % /5
4
Explanatory memorandum to the proposed directive, supra note 2, No. 1.1.2.
5
See Explanatory Notes to Government Bill, 24 Supplements to the Stenographic Minutes of the National
Assembly, XXIIth Legislative Period, hereinafter EBRV 24 BlgNR XXII GP (Erläuternde Bemerkungen
zur Regierungsvorlage, 24 der Beilagen zu den stenographischen Protokollen des Nationalrates, XXII.
2005] Meditation Directive 7
' $ #( " " %$ #

" % % " $ &
$$# $ $ " / # & ' %
# - $ # " / "& $"'#
# + $" #" $
" & $ + #% # 0 - +#
' / $ "# & 0 #0 #% # ,"
0 ## ," # ( /;
% # 1&$ /3 $ $ #& + ## $$#(

+# # /
+ "% # % # ( % $ #% #
," $ "# #( $ )' " & $
+ # $" / " #
$ 0 "# # 0 $ ### # % # % 0
$ '#( % $ + $
+ / & " # ( 0 "# ' -
( " 0 ## $ + + &
" 0 "# "%% $ #(& $ %
#+ )' # & /%/& $ 9$# &
$# & $# $ " / + &
$ # $" % # + $$# '# (
+ $ &0 "# " )'
# "% $# "
$" ' "# # 0 '( + /
" & 0 + &0 "# " " $ $# #
- 0 ## " $ $# (
%"# ( 0 - + "# '" /<
" $$# . #" + #( = +#

>& %= ## # %"# + # " + !
"
>/? & +# # #" #
& '" . #" # " ' +
Gesetzgebungsperiode), at 19; Hoffmann, Der aktuelle Beitrag—Mediation, 63 ÖSTERREICHISCHES

ANWALTSBLATT 361-62 (2001).
6
See Roth & Markowetz, The Austrian Law on Mediation in Civil Matters. An Overview of the New
Provisions, 22 ADR & THE LAW (forthcoming 2005).
7
Explanatory memorandum to the proposed directive, supra note 2, No. 1.2.
8
See Austrian Mediation Act, supra note 3, at § 3, ¶ 1, No. 1.
$ %& 0 #$ % + # '#/@ 0 + &

#0 ( ( 0 $ "# #% # $" A0
+ 0 A' "'! +# " ! " / %
$" + $$ + # $ $ " $# / "
# 0 "# ## $ #( " !" +
" / # & 0 + & " %
%'" % 0 # + ## 0 $ %/
& .$# ( " "
" 0 "# ' +# /12
$" $ $ $ +
($ 0 0 $ $" '(
$ ( % #
$" & % # 0 $ '(
$ & "%% '( " $ ' '( #
#0 6 #3# $ $ #7/
!
" ($ . #" $& $
0 $ ( " #"
$" & 0 #% ##( ' % / "& ' $ %&
'" & " $# & .$
+ '( $ $ + 6 '#& / ?
$ $ #7/ # & $ '( !
" % # $
0 " + #$ % . #" & $
$ % ," + # '# !" %
"' + $ + + 0 "# ' #+
" / & " ) . &
0 ' " '( !" % " &
+ '( $ $ + /
= >
( $ ( " % & % #
$ $ ( '
0 ( $ ( ' $$
," " 6 # 3 # '
$ $ #7/
9
See generally MEDIATION IM ÖFFENTLICHEN BEREICH (Ferz & Pichler eds., 2003) (explaining the
settlement of public law disputes through mediation).
10
See EBRV 24 BglNR XII GP, supra note 5, at 20.
% # 0 0
$$# + & " #% # " #(
0 0
$ $ $ '# %
$"'# 9 # + $" #" /11
% 1&$ /1 " &
+ #" ( + ( 0 ##( &

" # (B C" $
( ##( " ' 0 $" %
$ 0 # % #" #
0 $ #+ $ '#/13
+ % ##( 0 " $
+ % #
# / "& # #" '( ' $ # #$
$ # + #% " "
" # 0/18 $ ,"
" $ $ $
+ #" #(/ & $ (' + #+ 0 "
%+ % % 0 ##/14 0 + & + #
$ $# + #" !" %
"$ # % $ %$ + / & #
## 0 + #" ( ," $ (9 ! " 9
= "%% > " # + + (
+ % + #" #% # " /15 ##(& ##0
% = > " " &
$ % " ' " '( " # / '#(&
$ ' " #! " ' "
$ $ / ,"
' $ + " % /
"& &#- ! " % &1; " ' " ' $ #/1<
11
Cf. EBRV 24 BlgNR XXII GP, supra note 5, at 19.
12
This statutory definition is in harmony with conventional definitions of mediation found in the
literature. See, e.g., BREIDENBACH, MEDIATION: STRUKTUR, CHANCEN UND RISKEN DER VERMITTLUNG
IM KONFLIKT 4 (1995).
13
See EBRV 24 BlgNR XXII GP, supra note 5, at 19.
14
See Judgement of July 15, 1997, Austrian Supreme Court, Oberster Gerichtshof, OGH 1 Ob 161/97a
(unpublished); Ganner, Vertragsgerechtigkeit durch Mediation, 56 ÖSTERREICHISCHE JURISTENZEITUNG
710, 712-14 (2003).
15
See EBRV 24 BlgNR XXII GP, supra note 5, at 19; RECHBERGER & SIMOTTA, GRUNDRISS DES
th
ÖSTERREICHISCHEN ZIVILPROZESSRECHTS 438 (6 ed. 2003).
16
See Judicial Service Act (Richterdienstgesetz) § 57; Jurisdictional Norm (Jurisdiktionsnorm) § 19. Cf.
Code of Criminal Procedure (Strafprozessordnung) § 72 (with respect to the criminal sector).
$ "# & " "'! + # %

" #( " " $ 0
$ $ + 0 " #( -
," # ( % " $ " #(
/ %" 0 $$# "# &
.$ + $$# %+ "
"# ' %% '( " $ ," '(0
0/1? % 9 "
" $ # 0 $" " $$ * + " %
'#% % ##( + D
( # 0 " $ "
$ '( " $ E"#(3&3224/1@
- '# + 9
+ #" ( ," " / # $ $
+ - $"# (& # . #"
$ '# ( ' $ + " "# &$ + (
$ ( $ 9 % !
" #( & $ ##(
)' " /32
# " $ #( $ '(
(# / "& + #( "
" # + $" #" * '#%
' ## 0 " $ 6 1/7/
$ #& 0 + & '( $ " *
+ # '#% ' $ + ," # ( +
"$," # % 6 3/7/
# 8&$ /1 $ $ #$ +
17
See EBRV 24 BlgNR XXII GP, supra note 5, at 20. See Kollros, Die Rechtsstellung des Mediators
nach dem Zivilrechts-Mediations-Gesetz, 14 ECOLEX 745, 745 (2003).
18
Commission Staff Working Paper, Annex to the proposed mediation directive, supra note 2,
22.10.2004, SEC (2004) 1314;
http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/ejn/adr/adr_ec_annex_mediation_en.pdf.
19
The European Code of Conduct for Mediators was presented by the European Commission on 2 July
2004; http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/ejn/adr/adr_ec_code_conduct_en.pdf. See also infra III.1.
For its drafting history see Mähler & Kerntke, Initiativen der EU - Verhaltenskodex und
Richtlinienvorschlag, 7 ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR KONFLIKTMANAGEMENT 151 (2004).
20
See Article 3, ¶ 2 of the proposed directive and infra III.1.
" ' 0 ' "% (&0 $$ $

+ % % ## " & +
$ " # $" / "
( ( + ," $
" /
$ + " $ # $ '# (
" % #+ % $" / $" $ " (
+ '#% $ 0
## ' " / " $ "# #( " '#
0 $$ $ ! $ '# ( #( " # -
- 0# % / ( + & 0 + & $ %
0 " ##( + " &" #
" ' $"# ( " $$# '# #
# 0/ " # % # 0 "# ' + # + & #
8&$ / 3 $ $ # .$# #(
+ " $ !0
" ##% # - %
" $"# ( "'! + &
0 ' !
" #$ % + &$ +
" #% # $ %
!
" #( & $ "# " 0 $
' " /
# $ + # 8&$ / 1 $ $
+ & " +# " #( + (% #
"# $ + % *
" (&0 $$ $ & "%% $ ") ) "

$" #" /
$ + ' #" '( 3224 #

324&$ /1 " +# " .
$ '( !
" % # $ "
!
" #$ %/ + 0 $ + .
3228 ) " % 31 0 ##
" +# *
"% " $ % B $ # $ '# & #9

& . C " " - $
21
Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt, abbreviated BGBl.) I 2003/111, in force since 01.01.2005,
http://www.ris.bka.gv.at.
" $ '# % /33 "

% % ' .$ + "$$ ") ) "
" &$ % "# ' " $ #+ # %
. % . &" # #(
0 "# $ $"'# $ + $ '(
$ % /38
0 + & ## "# $ "# #( (

$ + ( / "& " +#
$ " ## 0 0 ## + ' %#(/
! "# $
" ( " # + $" #" &

$ "# #( 0 % #% # ," & "
( % ," # ( + / "& # 4
$ $ #$ +
1/ ' ## $
" % + #$ + #" (
" '( % $ + %
+ & " ( 0 ## ##+ #& 0 ##
+ ," # ( # % $ +
+ /
3/ ' ## $ " % %
## 0 $ $"
0 0 ##' '# + #( "
.$ '( $ /
$ + % " ( $
#. ' # ( $ / & $ $ +
$ #( " % #) %"# ( " " ( 0 ##
##+ # "% & . $#& + #$ + #" (
" / & # ( E"#( 3&3224 " $
$ " $ " 34
%-( $ $ &" $
22
§ 13, ¶ 3 of the Non-Contentious Proceedings Act, § 177a, ¶ 1 and 2 of the Austrian Civil Code for
proceedings on the attribution of parental responsibilities and § 108 of the Non-Contentious Proceedings
Act for contact proceedings.
23
§ 29 of the Non-Contentious Proceedings Act.
24
Supra note 19.
$$ & $ $ # (&
$ & % & ," /35
+ "% # 4 $ $ #$" $ $
#) %"# &0 % " '
$$ $ $ #( " $" $ & $ $ +
# + # % % ' 0 ,"
," # ( + "# ' " / "
$ + #) %"# ( " D " ," # (
+ '( % # % !
& %"# % % '# %
" # " 0 ## + #
E" ## /
# '( # E"
$"'# # ##( + ' /3; #( 0
%# 0 %
D3< & #( % # $ #
$ $ + '( " *3? % . $
"( ( +# #$ % ## 0 % 3@
( + $ # % '#% " &"

"( " $ '" " #% # ,"
&0 $$ $ &# ' " #% # + /82
( 0 0 ' % # " ' + 3?

( %& ##( ," # & " 0 ( " + $$ $
# '# ( " /81 % ," %" (
% $ $ # " ( # .$ /83 :(
#" % $ " 0 $ ," % &
#0 $ # % ," #- ,"
$ #% "$ & " !" % &88 ( &84 &85 $ ( # % &
25
For a discussion of the European Code of Conduct‘s provisions in comparison with the Austrian
Mediation Act see Pitkowitz, Die neuen Mediationsregeln der EU - Ist Österreich noch Wegbereiter?, 3
ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR SCHIEDSVERFAHREN - GERMAN ARBITRATION JOURNAL 81, 88-90 (2005).
26
http://www.mediatorenliste.justiz.gv.at/mediatoren/mediatoren.nsf/docs/home; see Austrian Mediation
Act, supra note 3, at § 8.
27
Id. at § 3, ¶ 1, No. 2.
28
29
See Code of Civil Procedure (Zivilprozessordnung) § 320, No. 4; Code of Criminal Procedure
(Strafprozessordnung) § 152, ¶ 1, No. 5. See also discussion infra Part IV.2.
30
Roth & Markowetz, Rights and Obligations for Mediators under the Austrian Law on Mediation in
Civil Matters, 3 INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS LAW BULLETIN (2004), http://www.cils.net/iblb/index.htm.
31
See Austrian Mediation Act, supra note 3, at § 9, ¶ 1, No. 1-4.
32
33
See Judicial Service Act (Richterdienstgesetz) § 57.
34
See Attorneys Act (Rechtsanwaltsordnung) § 5, ¶ 2 and § 30, ¶ 3.
$( $ 8; / " 0 ' $ + '( "' %

. % +
#/ ' $ 0 #( " 0 #% #
$ ," 9 $ # + & /%/& (&
(& $ ( $ /8<
#0 $ (
$ # 9 #
," # *" 12&$ / 1& ##(," #
- 0# % -## ' $ #F
% # 0 9 # # % #' /
9 - 0# % " # $ #( #'
&0 #" $ ( #% # #' / - ##
#( $$# ," #- 0# % & '" #
$ # .$ 0 $ $ + ," " %
$ # %& " #)$# ( %/ " & " #
' # 0 #% # ' + &$ "# #(
$ + # 0/8?
$$# 0 "# # ## $ ," @&$ / 1

% ' % # /8@
% # # + ( / ( &'" #
' .$ % &
$$#( 0 % /42 % 0 # %
$ ," % ##' - # / # &
0 $#( 0 " % " '#%
," " 32 41 0 % #(
+ # " & $ #( $ 0 %& ## #
' + # % /43
," # ( " & % '

% " % ##( ' $# #( " #
'# " # '( #
E" /48 . $ & 0 + &$ "# #( $$# 0
0 ' 0 ," %0 0 "
35
See Notaries Act (Notariatsordnung) § 11, ¶ 3, No. 1 and § 117a, ¶ 3.
36
See Psychologists Act (Psychologengesetz) § 10, No. 4 and § 11, No. 4.
37
See Austrian Mediation Act, supra note 3, at § 11, ¶ 2.
38
EBRV 24 BlgNR XXII GP, supra note 5, at 24.
39
Id. at 17.
40
Austrian Mediation Act, supra note 3, at § 13, ¶ 2.
41
A mediator is obliged to take at least 50 hours of training in a five-year period in the form of technical
seminars, workshops, supervision in his or her occupation, case analysis, or similar activities.
42
Austrian Mediation Act, supra note 3, at § 14, ¶ 1.
43
Id. at § 10, ¶ 1.
# /44 3@&$ / 3 & #$

% ," 322 822 %" $$# )
$ &122 322 %" / #$ & " " "
," - 0# % ## 0 % ! *$ " & &
$ D' " 6$ "# #( ," %
% % ," # % % " 7D #
#( D$ #( (D # #% # ," &$ "# #(
+ ## 0 ," # % /45 $$# ) $
" $ #( $ % "$ 0 - 0 -& #" %
$ $ "$ + & $
" ," 6 . $#& # $# ( %& "# &
# 7/4; & & % ,"
" + #$ ( ##(& # E"
" F " %"# 0 # $ +
% "# %0 " # /4<
% ## # " " ," # (

+ " & " $# % " /
$ & " #0 # ( "##( $# 0 $ $
" $ + /
% & ' ( "
' 0 #$ !
" % - $#
+ # * " ," $
" #( $" &'" (
# # % & ( ##0 + $"
# % " / #(& ( % + #
% ' "% & $ ( #
" % & ## % + #$ % ' #"
(0 (/ #(& " 0 $ +#
$ % #( $" & #( #
% # % $ '# ( ( $ %
- " /4?
" ' $ ' 0 #$ " ## 0 &

' 0 # % $ " ' "
44
45
See Austrian Mediation Act, supra note 3, at § 29, ¶ 2, No. 1.
46
Id. at § 29, ¶ 2, No. 2.
47
Id. at § 29, ¶ 1. See also id. at § 4, ¶ 1 (stating that this Council is to be set up to advise the Federal
Justice Minister on mediation matters).
48
Explanatory memorandum to the proposed directive, supra note 2, No. 1.1.2.
# &" ," ##$ 0 '# ' % #0 "

& #( 0 % #
$ / % ' 0 # %
#" + 0 ## ' " '( $ %
+ " ##(' / # & ," 0 + %'
# " % '# + "' ," !
" #
$ % &' ( # $" "'!
& % ' $ "# $ / "&
+ (' " '# $" #"
%+ &$ ( $ !
" #$ % + 0
" /4@
& #% # (& $ $ + '# %

'# $ '# #% # 0 - 0 " $ /
" % " # $' 0 !
" #$ %
'" $" % ," # % 0 !
" #
$ % '( #($ " /
! "
$ '# ( - % # % '# $ "#

)' " &0 $ (9 #" "
% ( $ ( # #0 " /
$ + -& # 5& $ / 1 $ $ + ,"
' $ + $$ $ $ " 0 '( # (
' '# #( *52 "
' ## " & "$ ," $ &

# % "# '
!
" % & & " " (
'( " $"'# " ( %
'# # !
" % " ## 0&
$ + % ( " $ #0
## 0 ' 0 ," /
$ $ " '( 0 # '#

$ '# ( ' / $ $ + ,"
#( ' # ( #0 ( 0 $"'# " (
#0 #( ( ," $ /51
0 + &0 $"'# " ( " (& /%/&
49
Ibid.
50
Commission Staff Working Paper, supra note 18, No. 2., Comments on Article 5.
51
Ibidd.
," #+ #" / $ ( $ + "

+ " ' 0 $ ' 0 ' # (&
# 5&$ / 3 $ $ # ," *
' " $"'#

" $ + % ,"
0 $ % $ 1/
$ '# ( % # % '# # (
. " ' * '( "' % % (
+ " " & '( "' %
" $ $ " " " ##( &0 '(
% '# 0 ( !
" % /53
: $ " + # % '
% ' " %"#
% " $ 0 " (
$ % /58 # + #(&
" " ( # ' " :" # %"#
0 & 0 + & ," # '# (
/54 #( ## % 0 $ :" # '
%"# $ + #% * # $ #
$ '# ( % ' 0 $ '#
' " $ ( # '
' 0 " + %' $$ + '( "
$"'# " (/55
" & '# ( (' ' + #

* $ 0 +
# + "' % ( +
'# # " /5; $ '# (
$ - ' # '" # 0 "$ # &
52
Ibid.
53
See Regulation (EC) No. 805/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004
creating a European Enforcement Order for uncontested claims, OJ of April 30, 2004, L 143/15, Articles
3, ¶ 1 lit. a and d, 24 and 25.
54
See Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2001 of December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and
enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, OJ of January 16, 2001, L 12/1, Article 57 in
connection with Articles 38 ff.
55
Council Regulation (EC) No. 2201/2003 of November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition
and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing
Regulation (EC) No. 1347/2000, OJ of December 23, 2003, L 338/1, Preamble, No. 22.
56
§ 3 of the Austrian Notaries Act (Notariatsordnung), § 1, No. 17 of the Austrian Enforcement Code
(Exekutionsordnung).
0 '# " ## 0&5< #

' #0 % &5? 0 '# #(
" & '" # ##( " 1@5? +
% % ' # 0 6= 0 G -
+ >7/5@ $ + % # % '(
' # '" #& 0 + & #( " '# $ '
$ # $" + & + % "
' &$ # / # $ '# ( + # '#
!
" #$ %* $ $ ( "
# % + % '#
" # /;2 + 0 + " $ '# . "
" #0 # % "%
'#& " " $# % "
% /;1
) $
$ 9 ( # " % 0 ##
' -$ # " $ & "" # "
$ ," " /;3 % $ $# $ (
" (&0 '# % -( + % & $
% #( $ / 0 + #
0 % $ & &
+ #($ # (/ '#( "' ,"
!
" #$ % &0 " ( $ %
#( ," #( & . $# & '
0 / !
" # % ##( %"# % $
57
§ 605, No. 1 of the Proposal for an Arbitration Law Amendment (Schiedsrechts-Änderungsgesetz 2005,
expected date of entering into force: 1.1.2006), § 1, No. 16 of the Austrian Enforcement Code
(Exekutionsordnung). See Liebscher, Country Report-Austria, in PRACTITIONER’S HANDBOOK ON
INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 574 (WEIGAND ED., 2002).
58
§ 605, No. 2 of the Proposal for an Arbitration Law Amendment (Schiedsrechts-Änderungsgesetz 2005,
expected date of entering into force: 1.1.2006). See OBERHAMMER, ENTWURF EINES NEUEN
SCHIEDSVERFAHRENSRECHTS 113-15 (Rechberger ed., Veröffentlichungen des Ludwig-Boltzmann-
Instituts für Rechtsvorsorge und Urkundenwesen, Vol. XXVII, 2002).
59
UN Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, New York, June 10,
1958, UN-Doc. E/Conf.26/8/Rev.1, Austrian Federal Law Gazette (Bundesgesetzblatt, abbreviated BGBl)
1961/200.
60
§ 204 of the Austrian Code of Civil Procedure (Zivilprozessordnung), Article 58 of the Brussels I
Regulation. See Judgment of 25 January 1989, Austrian Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof), 67
ÖSTERREICHISCHE RICHTERZEITUNG (1989) No. 53.
61
But see Pitkowitz, Die neuen Mediationsregeln der EU - Ist Österreich noch Wegbereiter?, 3
ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR SCHIEDSVERFAHREN - GERMAN ARBITRATION JOURNAL 81, 85-90 (2005) (ignoring the
European Enforcement Order Regulation).
62
See Kollros, Die Rechtsstellung des Mediators nach dem Zivilrechts-Mediations-Gesetz, 14 ECOLEX
745, 745-46 (2003); BREIDENBACH, MEDIATION: STRUKTUR, CHANCEN UND RISKEN DER VERMITTLUNG
IM KONFLIKT 288-89 (1995).
#( $ +
/ '# % %"# $ 0 '
' " '($ # (&0 # / %+ "
$ + + % % "$& ## $
$ + $ #( $
$ % # 9$ /;8
$ $ + # 0 ," #(
$ # ;/ $ + # %"#
'# ( + # + #!" #
$ % /;4 ## 0 *
1/ & 0 ## ($ + #+
+ & ## +#! " #$ % %+
( + % % ( ## 0 %*
67 + '( $ ( %%
$ (0 0 ## % $ $ D
6'7 0 .$ "%% '( $ (

$ $ '# # $" D
67 '( $ ( "
D
67 $ # '( D
67 $ ( 0 ## % $
$ $ # # '( D
67 " $ $ ##( $" $ /
3/ % $ 1 ## $$#( $ +
+ /
8/ # " $ % $ 1 ##
' '( " !
" #" ( + #!
" #
$ % & " +
+ $ % $ 1& + ## '
63
64
The protection of confidentiality outside any subsequent judicial proceedings does not call for a
regulatory intervention. It is purely a question of a contractual rule, which would be made mandatory if it
were to be laid down in law (possibly subject to if the parties have agreed otherwise), and there is not
sufficient public interest to establish binding rules on this issue at Community level. Commission Staff
Working Paper, supra note 18, No. 2., Comments on Article 6.
'#/ + # &" (' #

+
67 . ," $" $ $#
# % "#
&
6'7 + % $"'# $ # (& $ "# 0

," " $ # $ +
$ ( # $( #% # % ( $ &
67 $ % /
4/ $ + $ % $ 1&3 8 ## $$#( 0
!" #$ % # $" 0
"'! /
5/ "'! $ % $ 1& + 0 '#

!
" #$ % ' '# ,"
+ %' " /
# ; $ $ + ' ## "$
$ %$ + # 12 # #0
# # # /;5 $ "# & "
0 " $ $ 0 + '(
# (& % "#& ' '
$$ $ + % % " %"# "
/;;
& $ $ + " &

1?& ," 0 ## ( % + (% #0 (
- $ # ( # '( "
. & 0 ## ( " $ $ + '(
. / # %0 9 "(
# (& $ # # $ #"
" % !" #$ % + 0 %
/;< 0 ' "( #(
65
General Assembly A/57/17; http://www.uncitral.org/english/texts/arbitration/ml-conc-e.pdf. For a
critical analysis of the UNCITRAL model law in light of U.S. mediation law and rules see van Ginkel,
The UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Conciliation. A Critical Appraisal, 21
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, 1-65 (2004).
66
67
See EBRV 24 BlgNR XXII GP, supra note 5, at 30; Kollros, Die Rechtsstellung des Mediators nach
dem Zivilrechts-Mediations-Gesetz, 14 ECOLEX 745, 745-46 (2003).
( " ## '# ( " 81 "

$ ( .$ #( # $ " / 0 + &
" $ '# $" + % #
" ' " '# $ + $"'# /;?
& . $#& $ # #
/;@
# % $ $ + &. $ $ $#
#( ' + % $"'# $ # (&
0 $ . $# $ #
$ + $ ( # $ ( #% # % ( $
+ ' $ ## " / & .$ . $ ' $ +
$ # % &
" " ( F 0 " ," " ' '# #(
+ - $ $ /
( + #+ & /%/& ," % + # ( #
% $# 0 ## 0 '# ( "% /
$ $ + & ," #( # # ; %
$ # (& #( $$# +# +
0 "# ' '# #$ %/
# + #$ % + " ' 0
$ $ + " # 0* " & #( +#
" <2&'" # # " <1 $ + #%
* +#$ % % ( '
," 0 $ 0 0 " #
. / 0 # $ $ +
#$ %/ & % + % "
%+ + 0 % '+ & 0
$ 0 0 " # " /
"& $ % 1? " &#
$ " # 0 % # #" $ %
#( /
## ##& " #0 % $ #(
$ $ "# '# ( +
"' ," !
" #$ % ' 0
$ "# $ $ + / #( "
#% # + ," " %% # #" " 0
68
69
FUCHSHUBER, MEDIATION IM ZIVILRECHT, NEUE WEGE DER KONFLIKTLÖSUNG 24 (2004).
70
See Austrian Code of Civil Procedure (Zivilprozessordnung), at § 320, No. 4.
71
See Austrian Code of Criminal Procedure (Strafprozessordnung), at § 152, ¶ 1, No. 5.
% $ 0 + + '(
# ( ," / & "
# " '
% # #" % . $
# ( ," * $"'# '# $ + !
" (
' 9 "( # (/<3 % ## "
F . $ + %" & (# + ' $ "
$ $ /<8 " ' & 0 + & #(
' % " !" ) $"'# '# $ + )
#( # 9 ## '# (& $ #
0 $ D'" ( $ + ($ '# (
," %+ ( + % % #+
+# #$ %/ & $
. $ "# ' . '( 9 #
# '# ( $ + #% +#
#$ " /<4
" $ " $ "#

0 ## '# !
" $ #$ %
# % & "# " " ' " "#& "
' #% #$ + "$ " % (# $ " %
$ / 0 &$ 0 "# ' "
$ " # # " 0 # % %
$ # $ " %/ " ' + " &
0 + & 0 "# ' " $ " + '# #"
$" $ $ #0 " $ " &
0 % + ' ## "$ /
# <&$ / 1 $ $ + 0
%% "$ ($ $ $ # % %
# "'! *
67 $ % " &
6'7 " '( " &
67 '#% " " ## 0

' /
72
§ 31 of the Austrian Mediation Act.
73
FERZ/FILLER, MEDIATION, GESETZESTEXT UND KOMMENTAR, § 31 Austrian Mediation Act, at fn. 2.
74
See also Pitkovitz, Die neuen Mediationsregeln der EU - Ist Österreich noch Wegbereiter?, 3
ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR SCHIEDSVERFAHREN - GERMAN ARBITRATION JOURNAL 81, 85 (2005).
# & # <&$ / 3 $ $ + $ #( %"#

" " 0 $ " " %/
0 " # % &
$ " " % 0 "
# % & " % 0 '
$ #
+ #( 0 0 / $ ## ( +
. # 0 "
" %& . $ 0 $ 0 0
" ' ' "% $ + $ + # # "
+ + - /
# $ + & " #0
%"# "$ # $ % # 0 (*
33&$ /1 ## 0 *
$ $ " '(
% "$ " % #
% % - % # '( /<5
.$# ( - # $
# "$ " & #
$ " " %" # #" /<;
" $ $ + & ## % # #( #% #
# $' 0 $ #
'( % $ /<<
% # "#& 33&$ /3 "

$ $ + #( /
& "$ # + ## . % % #
#( # 0 " ' 0 $ &+ ( #(
75
The suspensive effect applies to statutes of limitations as well as to so-called preclusive periods. Roth
& Markowetz, Bundesgesetz über Mediation in Zivilrechtssachen - Ein Überblick über die neuen
Bestimmungen, 126 JURISTISCHE BLÄTTER, 296, 301-302 (2004). See generally on the suspension of
limitation periods KOZIOL & WELSER, BÜRGERLICHES RECHT I 206 (12th ed. 2002); HOLZHAMMER &
ROTH, BÜRGERLICHES RECHT 93-94 (6th ed. 2004).
76
§ 22, ¶ 1 of the Mediation Act, however, does not affect current case law under which mere settlement
negotiations only suspend the expiration of the period of limitation until the end of negotiations plus a
short grace period. See EBRV 24 BlgNR XII GP, supra note 5, at 31; Roth & Markowetz, Bundesgesetz
über Mediation in Zivilrechtssachen - Ein Überblick über die neuen Bestimmungen, 126 JURISTISCHE
BLÄTTER, 296, 301-302 (2004); DEIXLER & ROTH, DER ZIVILPROZESS IN DER PRAXIS 71 (3rd ed. 1999)
(providing examples on the suspensive effect of settlement negotiations and references to case law).
77
'( /<? :( 0 % & 0 + & $

. ( #( # 0 # . #" $# #(/
+ #(& $ +#
0 % # "$ % # # ' 0
'( /
$ % " #0 0 $ $ + &
' # %"# "$ #
$ #( & " #0 # - $ ( $ $
+ 0 / % "$ # $ &
0 # % " # 0* #(&
"$ # $ " # ( - $# 0
$ % " #(0 " ##(
/ 0 " 0 %% "$
# $ " + & 0 + & ( " #( "
" & " ( '#%
" " " # 0/
0 # $ .
* + $ $$ $ $
# . $ $ 0 0 " '
' "% $ + $ + # " #$ /
% )
+ 0 " $$ $ # # $"
#" &' $ $ + 0 ##
" # 0 $" " '! + * #
!
" +# # '( $ % "
" % " # $ ' 0 !
" #
$ %/ & 0 + & $ ' 0 '
"# / # ( 0 .
' + '#(* %
$" #" & " #0 $# ( 0
&0 $ $ + " 0
" #( + % (# % "'! + # "
% " #( & %" 0
$$# "# / (' # $ 0 $$ ' "
D " $ #0 $ + # " "
0 ## + ' %#(/
78
: $ $ + 0 ## "
-( " & "% #+ #
$ (* ," # ( + #" % %
& $ #( "$ #
$ / # " #0 $ + # %"# %
," # ( + % & #(
% # "# $ ," #(
"$ # $ 0 # - #
," '( $ $ + / &0 % $
" #0 " '
$ $ + /
# & $ + $ + "
+# " " 9 # / . %
"# . " 9 $ # %
' + %" $ "# $ +
0 $ $ + ," /
&0 % % #
% "% & " #0 # ( "##(
$# 0 ," $ $ + & + "%
$ + #% $ " / # %
(' - ( &0 '# #( "
" " #0 " &'" # " " $ " & #(
%"# % " $ 0 ##
:" # %"# / # & # % ('
" # ' # # & + ' #
0 % &0 ' ## '
0 G - + % ' #
0 /
## ##& ( #" + "% " 0 ## +

$# $ + $ $ + &
3228 " # % . # ( $# 0
.$ "# / :( - % + # '# % #(," # +
'($ + % $ '# # % # 0 - & "
# + # #% # ( #$
$ ' # $" /
***
MED-ARB: A VIABLE HYBRID SOLUTION?
Andrew Burr††
Introduction
This article sets out first, to provide a working definition of the concept
“Med-Arb”; secondly, to consider precisely where that concept fits into the
general dispute resolution landscape; thirdly, to provide a short history of its
use (including a bibliography of the available literature), and finally to
consider the various pros and cons of Med-Arb.
A dispute resolution roadmap
Low cost; reduced stress Parties attempt to reach

compared to litigation joint settlement
Negotiation
Less direct and indirect Mediator assists parties

cost; reduced stress Mediation in negotiations and
compared to litigation facilitates settlement
Less direct and indirect Neutral performs case

cost; reduced stress Settlement evaluation and advises as
compared to litigation conference to probable result; assists
in negotiations
† Andrew Burr MA (Cambridge), 1 Atkins Chambers, Barrister specialising primarily in domestic and
international construction and technology disputes. Acts generally as advocate in litigation and
arbitration, in an advisory capacity with regard to ADR and sits as adjudicator under the TeCSA rules.
Member of Midland and Oxford and European Circuits, TECBAR and COMBAR.
28 LONDON LAW REVIEW [VOL. 1:27
Less direct and indirect Evaluator narrows

cost; reduced stress Early neutral issues; assists with
compared to litigation evaluation discovery plan, case
management and
settlement
Structured adversarial Panel hears summary

case presentation; case presentation;
Mini-trial
voluntary, or court neutral panel member
ordered may assist with
settlement negotiations
Structured adversarial Voluntary, or paid jury,

case presentation; hears summary case
Summary jury trial
voluntary, or court presentations and issues
ordered non-binding decision
Private, confidential Mediator assists parties

assisted negotiation. in negotiation. If no
Med-Arb
Structured proceeding if settlement continues to
case goes to arbitration arbitration
Structured adversarial Arbitrator presides over

case presentation; case and issues a
Arbitration
voluntary, contractual, or binding award subject to
court ordered court review
Structured adversarial Judge hears case

case presentation Litigation presentation and issues
binding judgment subject
to appeal
Figure 1 : Explanation of dispute resolution methods. Mediation is the least

adversarial whilst litigation is the most so. The selected method should obviously
match the perceived needs of the case and of the particular clients.
Dispute resolution methodologies
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR), touted as the fast and cost-effective

solution to litigation, is often regarded as cumbersome, time-consuming and
as costly as many cases put before the courts. But parties that enter into ADR
often enjoy a more economical resolution and a speedier determination of
the issues in dispute than if the case was litigated.
2005] MED-ARB: A Viable Hybrid Solution 29
Figure 1 above highlights the available methods of dispute resolution which

are examined in greater detail below. Each process has its advantages but
also carries risks. Proper use requires a thorough analysis of the case, the
parties’ needs and the potential methods of resolution. The objective should
be to employ the least expensive and intrusive method to achieve the most
positive result for the client, whilst also taking into account the personality
of the parties; vexatious would-be litigants are unlikely to be content with a
straightforward mediation process. The following summary adopts a
“trickle-up” approach.
Negotiation
Negotiating a settlement is an efficient and cost effective way to resolve

disputes as settlement is reached without the expense of a neutral third
party but may not be appropriate if one of the parties is in a position of
power or control over the other. Since it is based on voluntary disclosure of
information and good faith of the parties discovery may need to be
undertaken.
Mediation
Mediation is recommended when the parties’ emotions or positional

bargaining have restricted their ability to negotiate but they do not wish to
hand the decision-making to a judge or arbitrator. The mediator, a neutral
and impartial third party, facilitates communication between the parties but
has no decision-making authority and cannot give legal advice. It is
inappropriate if the case requires precedent-setting issues for judicial
opinion and may not be successful if the mediator’s attitude or style is
inconsistent with the needs of the parties. Mediation does however increase
the likelihood of settlement.
Settlement conferencing
A neutral and impartial legal professional hears both sides of the case,
conducts an informal assessment and negotiation session and then may
advise the parties on the law and precedent relating to the dispute and
suggest a settlement. The difference between mediation and a settlement
conference is primarily one of style: mediation uses facilitative bargaining
techniques and settlement conferences use directive and reality-testing
techniques. There are risks involved in settlement conferences as some
element of trial strategy may be disclosed or compromised in the process.
Early neutral evaluation

The parties’ perception of the dispute and their expectation with regard to
the final decision are a major factor in the parties’ determination to continue
with proceedings rather than accept settlement. Clarification of the dispute
can make a decision to reach settlement, but who should provide
clarification? Neutral evaluation is the recommended tool for promoting a
settlement.
A neutral evaluator is either appointed by the court or the parties and

intervenes in order to narrow the issues, assist in case planning and
management and, if appropriate, assist in settlement. Early neutral
evaluation (ENE) is non-binding and confidential evaluation process
conducted in the early stage of a lawsuit by an experienced litigator.
ENE though does have its drawbacks when combined with arbitration. In
complex cases, the neutral evaluator requires considerable time and effort to
study the case and the parties are left asking why they should pay both an
arbitral tribunal and a neutral evaluator to do more or less the same work.
Mini-trial
In a mini-trial, a neutral and an official with settlement authority from each

party listens to the evidence and conduct settlement negotiations. The mini-
trial combines elements of negotiation, mediation and adjudication to
facilitate settlement with the objective of achieving settlement between top
decision-makers of the parties. The risks of using mini-trial include possible
disclosure of trial strategies and the added expense and delay if a trial is
required, but they can be an efficient and cost-effective method of resolving
complex litigation disputes.
Summary jury trial
Summary presentations in complex cases are made before a jury empanelled

to make findings which may or may not be binding and is the only ADR
method providing for case presentation before a jury. The objective here is to
provide litigants with a jury verdict to help them facilitate settlement and
can be an effective, low-risk method to obtain a case assessment on which to
base settlement negotiations.
Med-Arb
Med-Arb is a process whereby a neutral third party is employed to first

serve as a mediator and then as an arbitrator if mediation fails to resolve the
dispute. This process is a combination of mediation and arbitration and has

the benefit that if mediation fails, the parties can move to arbitration to reach
a binding decision. There are risks involved in that the parties may not
disclose facts to the mediator if there is a possibility that he will become
arbitrator.
The process works best when the parties are of relatively equal bargaining
experience and when the efficiency of Med-Arb outweighs the strategic
effect of the mediator’s anticipated role change. It is cost effective since the
same neutral can decide the case and it can help the parties preserve their
relationship by promoting communication and settlement and using
arbitration only to decide those issues upon which settlement cannot be
reached.
Essentially, Med-Arb provides leveraged mediation and when used

successfully the parties rarely go to the arbitration phase.
Arbitration
One or more neutral and impartial expert third parties hear and consider the
evidence provided by the disputing parties and issue a binding or non-
binding decision. Although arbitration is less formal than court proceedings
it is still adversarial. The arbitrator’s decision may be legally binding on the
parties and is enforceable by any court having jurisdiction. The decision can
be non-binding and advisory only if the parties agree in advance.
Differences between mediation and arbitration
Whether parties enter into arbitration or mediation is largely determined

through contractual obligation, voluntary agreement or court order.
Arbitration’s objective is to reach a final and binding award, whereas
mediation’s intention is to bring the parties to a binding agreement,
although this is not an automatic outcome of the process. The arbitrator’s
duty is to make a binding decision, but the mediator has neither duty nor
authority to do so.
In arbitration and litigation, the arbitrator or judge makes a decision in

accordance with the law. However, mediators are able to promote
settlements which go beyond the confines of the contract and the parties are
subject only to public policy in reaching an agreement.
If the arbitrator sees potential for settlement he may recommend the parties
make an attempt at conciliation. The practice of such recommendations is
current in the national courts of a number of countries as illustrated below:
Country Practice
England The Commercial Court issued a Practice Statement where

if the judge feels the action or issues are appropriate for an
attempt at ADR settlement and the parties have not
previously done so, s/he can invite the parties to set ADR
procedures in motion and adjourn proceedings to enable
the parties to take such steps
France Judicial mediation where the court appoints “médiateur”
(consultant/expert) to discuss the case with the parties
outside court. The mediator reports the result, success or
failure, without releasing information about the content of
the mediation or the parties’ position
United Annexed mediation is a frequent feature and is sometimes
States required by law
Figure 2: National court practice in recommending conciliation
This mediation window is met with favour by some arbitration practitioners

but is rarely used in international arbitration. The parties believe that having
engaged in arbitration the arbitral tribunal should settle the dispute and
resent the perceived attempt of the tribunal to transfer its task to a mediator.
An arbitral tribunal may decide certain critical issues in advance of others

and if the parties do not reach agreement the task of a mediator may be used
by the partial award. The effectiveness of a partial award can be questioned
since it treats only part of the dispute and favours the party with the
stronger case concerning the issues decided. That same party however may
be less successful on other issues that have yet to be decided.
Is Med-Arb possible?
The most efficient combination of arbitration and mediation is when the

same person acts both as arbitrator and mediator. But is such a combination
possible? Judges in common law countries are not permitted to become
involved in settlement facilitation, but in civil law countries, the position
varies:
Country Position
Judge can stay any stage of the proceedings to

Austria/ Germany see if an amicable settlement of the dispute or
any contentious issues can be resolved
Section 125 of the Code of Civil Procedures
Brazil expressly proscribes conciliation between the
parties as a judicial duty
Mediation is expressly mentioned as one

France
function of a judge
Italy No provision exists in civil law
Combination is not permitted. Conciliatory

Mexico efforts are performed by a court official
different from the judge trying the case
The law requires courts under certain
circumstances to promote settlement but in
Sweden
practice judges are reluctant to get involved in
settlement attempts by the parties
The practice is known is some cantons, but not
Switzerland
others
Turkey Not permissible
Figure 3: Civil law countries’ approach to Med-Arb
There is therefore a variety of, and fundamental differences in, attitudes

towards a combination of arbitration and mediation, which is reflected in
the cultural differences regarding arbitration and dispute settlement
procedures in general. Conflicts arise where parties of different cultural
background and different experiences meet in international arbitration. It is
necessary for the arbitrators and counsel to proceed with caution when
conducting Med-Arb and when settling procedural aspects of such
combination. The following should be taken into consideration when a case
in arbitration moves to mediation:
(i) Idea of settlement discussions;

(ii) Starting conciliation proceedings;
(iii) Participants in the mediation;

(iv) Methods and scope of the discussion;
(v) Settlement proposals;
(vi) Meeting parties separately;
(vii) After the conciliation.
(i) Settlement discussions
The arbitral tribunal must not engage in settlement attempts without

the parties’ prior consent. It must be cautious when raising the idea
of assisting the parties in their settlement attempts and be aware
that the parties have conflicting expectations and interests.
Arbitrators should leave no doubt about their willingness to decide
a dispute and all issues which the parties fail to settle. If the tribunal
is prepared to assist the parties in their settlement attempt at a later
stage in the proceedings the parties should be made aware of this
from the start and be allowed to express reservations, even if the
attempt is envisaged only for a later stage.
(ii) Starting conciliation
In view of the differences between arbitration and mediation it is

important to distinguish between the two. When the arbitrator
commences mediation, all parties should be made aware that they
are entering a new stage of the proceedings. At this time, all points
giving rise to the conflict and differences in Med-Arb must be
clarified.
It is worth considering confirming that settlement is made at the

request or express consent of the parties; that in case settlement fails
arbitration may proceed before the same arbitral tribunal and that
participation of the arbitrator in mediation is no grounds for the
parties objecting to that person as arbitrator; that if agreed the
arbitral tribunal is required to make a settlement proposal; and if so
agreed the arbitrator may meet the parties separately.
(iii) Participants
The mediation process must be supported by a full arbitral tribunal.
Meetings should be attended by decision makers within the
organisation and that those involved in the origin of the dispute
should be discouraged from creating a negative impact when their
own responsibilities and emotions are involved.
(iv) Method and scope

The arbitrator may give an indication to the parties of the views that
might be taken when deciding the case but avoid any exaggeration,
e.g. cost, duration, to avoid the risk of a negative outcome. Pressure
on the parties in their efforts to reach a settlement should also be
avoided although some situations may be justified, for example,
where the solution to the dispute in a decision based on law may not
make commercial sense or the value of the dispute is out of
proportion to the costs.
(v) Settlement proposals

Is it admissible or suitable to make a settlement proposal? The
specific request or authority must be given to the mediator before
such a proposal can be made.
(vi) Meeting parties separately

This aspect of mediation raises the most serious objections to the
arbitrator’s settlement efforts. There is widespread opposition in
common law countries to private meetings with parties, for
example:
Germany Against
Hong Kong Positive reaction
India Not permissible
Switzerland Not uncommon but controversial
USA Against
The objections raised concern:

(i) the effectiveness of conciliation and private meetings if the mediator
later has to decide the case as arbitrator (providing the parties agree,
it cannot now be argued that it is inadmissible for a mediator to
continue as arbitrator); and
(ii) continuation of proceedings after a failure of settlement

attempt and use of confidential information obtained by the
arbitrator in private meetings.
(vii) Post conciliation

If mediation is successful, it is advisable to record the settlement.
The parties may agreed on an award by consent which is
enforceable like any other award.
If mediation fails, arbitration will normally have to continue. All is

not lost however since the mediation may have produced
clarification on certain points which may be used in arbitration and
the task of the tribunal may be reduced to a choice between the last
two offers made in mediation. It should also be decided if a new
argument or evidence may be presented or if the tribunal must
decide the case as it stands at the end of the settlement attempt.
Why choose Med-Arb?
In essence, Med-Arb harnesses the benefits of mediation with the comfort of

knowing that should agreement fail to be reached, the parties can continue
to arbitration. The table below examines the rôles of mediation and
arbitration and how Med-Arb is formed.
Mediation Arbitration Med-Arb

The traditional role of The traditional The scope of the
the mediator is that of western form of the dispute before the
a person engaged to arbitration process is a arbitrator places
assist the parties in two-staged process constraints on the
reaching settlement whereby the parties mediator’s efforts. As
without conferring present their case, a result, settlement
decision making bringing evidence and efforts by the court or
powers on him. The argument they believe arbitral tribunal
starting point of is needed to support differs in scope from
mediation is a it. The tribunal then the mediator’s acting
dispute. In mediation decides the dispute. in a manner unrelated
taking place outside The third party to pending court or
of or pending intervening to bring arbitration
litigation or about settlement is proceedings
arbitration the expected to be a
mediator looks for professional and
elements beyond the unrelated either to the
dispute to enlarge the parties or the dispute.
scope of a possible
settlement and create
grounds for the
outcome to satisfy all
parties.
Figure 4: Differences between mediation, arbitration and Med-Arb

Mediation Arbitration Med -arb

Settle and
issue non -
binding
agreement
Unable to
reach
settlement
Figure 5: The Med-Arb process
Pros and cons of Med-Arb
Pros
Cost Arbitration, especially international arbitration, is
expensive and complex, but Med-Arb allows the
parties to achieve early case resolution with huge
cost savings
Creative solutions Med-Arb less biased and ritualistic than
arbitration and covers more human elements such
as politics, cultural differences, effective
communication, as opposed to litigation-relevant
selection of facts
Building trust Effective mediators help to structure negotiating
teams and negotiations, provide creative solutions
and can give a reality-check to the parties
Style Arbitrators can be too passive or make procedural
orders by rote with little or no regard to cost to the
parties of compliance
Cons
Confidentiality The parties fear abuse of documentary disclosure
especially if the dispute proceeds to arbitration
and confidential information has been given to the
mediator
Separate party The largest barrier to adopting Med-Arb as one
meetings party may fear confidential information may be
released to the other party during settlement
discussions. The solution here may be to suggest
that the mediator should forget what he has heard
in the confidential meetings or that the mediator
should decide whether information obtained
during settlement discussions prevents him from
continuing as arbitrator
discussions. The solution here may be to suggest

that the mediator should forget what he has heard
in the confidential meetings or that the mediator
should decide whether information obtained
during settlement discussions prevents him from
continuing as arbitrator
Some recorded examples
The title to this paper obviously raises a number of sub-issues, namely:
• A solution to what?
• Is there only one form of this hybrid?
• When, why and in what solution viable?
In this regard, we should also bear in mind that, less than ten years ago,
Professor van den Berg (for one) strongly disapproved of the process and
memorably described it as “talking with two tongues in cross-cultural
confusion”.
A solution to what?
The first sub-question seems to the author to be the most important and,
perhaps, also the easiest and quickest to answer. This paper proceeds upon
the basis that we are here concerned with the satisfactory resolution of
substantial commercial disputes in the most speedy and cost-effective
manner.
In other words, the following arenas, in particular, are ignored for the
purposes of the present discussion:
• Consumer affairs: see, for example, the Association of British

Travel Agents/ Chartered Institute of Arbitrators Med-Arb
scheme for tour operators and travel agents;1
• Employment and labour relations: see, for example, the Labour
Relations Code of British Columbia;2
• Matrimonial differences: see, for example, the Institute of Family
Mediation and Arbitration in the United Kingdom.3
1
Launched in May 2003: see the website of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (www.arbitrators.org).
2
Described in Med-arb: Fraught with danger or ripe with opportunity?, by David Elliott (1996)
Arbitration 175.
3
Please see page 231 of ADR Principles and Practice (second edition), by Henry Brown and Arthur
Marriott QC.
Is there only one hybrid?

There are many variations on the theme. As David Elliott stated in an article
published some eight years ago:4
“An increasing number of variations on the med/arb process are emerging:
• mediate first and, if mediation fails, arbitrate;

start arbitration proceedings and allow for mediation at some
point during the arbitration;
• mediate some issues and arbitrate others;
• mediate, then arbitrate some unresolved issues, then return to
mediation;
• mediate, if unsuccessful ask for an “advisory opinion” by the
mediator, which is binding as an award, unless either party
vetoes the opinion within a limited period of time.
• Another med/arb variation growing in popularity is
mediation, if unsuccessful, followed by a final offer by each
side, coupled with limited argument, following which the
mediator turned arbitrator must choose one or other of the
offers.”
A further variant, sometimes called “co-Med-Arb", addresses the problems

of confidential (and unfavourable) information by having two different
people perform the rôles of mediator and arbitrator. Jointly, they preside
over an information exchange as between the parties, after which the
mediator works with the parties in the absence of the arbitrator. If mediation
fails to achieve a settlement, the case (or any unresolved issues therein) can
then be submitted to the arbitrator for a binding decision.
As with all modern forms of dispute resolution, it is therefore always

necessary to consider the method appropriate for any given set of
circumstances. This particular paper concentrates primarily upon the second
of the above alternatives (namely allowing for the use of mediation in the
course of ongoing arbitral proceedings) and that is what it will do. Professor
Pieter Sanders has charmingly described this “mediation window” As the
‘intermezzo’.5
What relevant laws, or rules, apply?
4
Please see footnote 2 above.
5
Please see page 174 of Cross-border arbitration- a view on the future, by Professor Pieter Sanders
(1996) Arbitration 168.
Around the world, various statutory provisions permit the same individual
to combine the rôles of mediator (or conciliator) and arbitrator. These
include the following examples:
• The Bermuda Conciliation and Arbitration Act;
• Section 2B of the Hong Kong Arbitration Ordnance 1990’

• Article 38(4) of the Japanese Arbitration Act;
• Section 27 of the New South Wales Commercial Arbitration
Act 1990 Amendment;
• Article 1043 of The Netherlands Arbitration Act 1996;
• Section 17 of the Singapore International Arbitration Act 1994.
In addition, the following exemplify particular rules which specifically

permit similar provision:
• Rule 11(5) of the Rules for International Commercial

Arbitration and Conciliation Proceedings of the British
Columbia International Commercial Arbitration Centre;
• Article 13 of the WIPO Mediation Rules.
When, why and in what circumstances is the solution viable?
A review of the available literature reveals a limited number of specific

examples from different jurisdictions of the practical application of Med-
Arb, each of which is cited at some length below. Other helpful examples
were also gathered together in the extremely comprehensive paper delivered
by Michael Schneider to the ICCA Congress in Seoul in 1996 .6
The Canadian experience
Haig Oghigian reported in an article published in 2002,7 as follows:
…..in the three instances where I have employed this concept, the
parties, though in significant commercial dispute, expressly stated
their intent to continue their business relationship and……they
had no intention of terminating their relationship……..in all three
cases, one party was Japanese and the other American…….
6
Combining arbitration with conciliation, by Michael E Schneider (1996) ICCA Congress Series no. 8, at
pages 9 to 11 inclusive.
7
arbitrators acting as mediators, by Haig Oghigian (2002) Arbitration 42, at pages 44 to 45.
It dawned on me that the most effective way to disarm a possible

challenge to my ability to maintain my impartiality in both roles, as
arbitrator as well as mediator, was to switch the order of my functions;
arb/med rather than med/arb….the meetings began much in the same
way as a full blown arbitration hearing begins, with briefs prepared in
advance of the hearing date and full formal presentations by the parties
to the single arbitrator.
After free and full questions, answers and dialogue followed (the
shortest period was one day, the longest three) in the context of a
hearing. In all cases, I adjourned and went off to prepare a formal
arbitral award, advising the parties that I wished to meet them the next
morning (or in one instance the following) to provide them with my
award. At that meeting I placed an envelope on the table which
contained two copies of my full arbitral award, signed and sealed. I
informed the parties that I was now fully discharged, and vacated, of
my duties and office as an arbitrator. I then suggested that if they both
wished and both agreed, I would be prepared to attempt to mediate the
dispute between them. The rules were that they had to agree to this in
writing and all of us (each party as well as myself) would, at any time,
be free to stop the proceedings and call for a termination of the process.
In all three cases, the parties eagerly accepted the suggestion for
mediation because neither party wanted to see what the envelope
contained. Of course, the envelope, to one degree or another,
proclaimed a winner and a loser. Particularly where the parties
apparently expected to continue a business relationship, this all or
nothing solution was judged to be better avoided if possible. In all three
cases the matter was successfully mediated and settled.
I might say that the parties were much more focused during the
mediation part of the process; First, because they felt that they had been
given a full chance, in the adversarial sense, to put their case in its best
possible light. During the post-arbitral mediation, this resulted in less
grandstanding and belligerency. There was a clear atmosphere,
motivated much more purely to avoid a win/lose situation and to focus
on compromise to achieve settlement. At the same time, my rôle as a
mediator became liberated and empowered. Liberated because I could
be assertive (in a positive sense) and somewhat opinionated, without
ruffling feathers or risking the possibility that someone could claim bias.
My arbitral award was already on the table and, after all, at any point
either party could end the mediation. Empowered, because I now knew
the soft spots of each party’s case and could move them towards seeing
a possible compromise solution with a free hand and foreknowledge. In

essence I was able to avoid the risk of bias.
In short, I was able to play a much more effective rôle as a mediator

where I was vacated of my responsibilities and duties as an arbitrator
and could, by agreement and voluntarily, bring out the interests and
weaknesses of the parties in order to expand the dialogue and achieve
settlement.
A final advantage of this modus operandi is that it avoids another

common problem of Med-Arb: if it is understood that the mediator will
become the arbitrator in due course, the parties may well use the process
to present their position not with a genuine view to achieving a
settlement but rather, tactically, to lay the groundwork for the
subsequent adjudicatory phase of the process.”
In this Canadian example of Med-Arb, the time and cost of arbitration is

not therefore avoided; on the contrary, success is almost dependent
upon it. The real driver here appears to have been the ultimate wish of
the parties to continue their commercial relationship.
The Hong Kong experience
Michael Thomas CMG QC has recorded, in an article,8 his following

experience in 1992:
An overseas party claimed liquidated and unliquidated

damages from a Chinese party for a delay in completing a
building project. The pleadings showed disputes about the date
for completion, why time slipped, possible extensions, and
waiver and so on. The sum claimed approached US $1m and
there were counterclaims.
Each party had appointed an arbitrator, and they in turn had appointed
me as the third. After directing pleadings, we decided to convene a
meeting for directions with an agenda. Among the topics we raised in
advance was ‘whether there should be any formal or informal process of
mediation or conciliation prior to the hearing of the arbitration, and if
so, when and by whom it should be undertaken?’
8
Mediation at work in Hong Kong, by Michael Thomas CMG QC (1992) Arbitration 29.
At the hearing, both parties asked if I would be willing to mediate. I

said I would if we could agree a procedure. The minute of the agreed
outcome of discussions provided for a ‘standstill’ in the arbitration for
two months pending my efforts to conciliate, that I could contact or meet
with the parties separately or together (and without lawyers) at my
choice, that everything said or done for the purpose of conciliation could
not be referred to at the arbitration, and that my fees (on hourly rates
quoted) would be costs in the arbitration, and that I should continue to
act as the third arbitrator if mediation failed.
I thereafter spent some hours in conversation with the parties separately

trying to convey to each of them where I saw the strengths and the
weaknesses of their case, and drawing attention to the wider commercial
interests that made a settlement desirable. Finally, I saw them together
before sending them off to discuss the matter between themselves. After
some hours while I remained ‘in waiting’ and they separately reported
progress to me by telephone, a settlement was concluded. It happened
to be at the figure which beforehand I had privately indicated to the
paying party as my best guess of the lowest figure that the other party
would be likely to accept in settlement.”
The learned author notes, however, that the following factors almost
certainly assisted his task in this particular case:
The dispute was not overly complicated. The Chinese party was
unfamiliar with Hong Kong arbitral procedures, and was not at first
represented by a local lawyer. A good deal of my input was to
counsel them frankly on their case, and where it might come
unstuck. The other party may have benefited from hearing a little
world-weary advice to contrast with its own lawyers’ ebullience.
The paying party may have been assisted in obtaining clearance
from higher authority to settle because it had my approval as a
reasonable outcome.
This, perhaps, is an example of a relatively inexperienced Oriental party

being guided to a mutually satisfactory solution, rather than a case of
any more general application.
The Singapore experience
Michael Hwang SC reported to the 2004 ICCA Congress,9 as follows:

9
The rôle of arbitrators as settlement facilitators, by Michael Hwang SC (ICCA paper, 2004), at page 12.
The only known case of Arb-Med in Singapore took place at the

SIAC and involved a Chinese party and a German party. The
tribunal was made up of three arbitrators, a German, a Chinese and
a Singaporean, and it had to decide:
(a) whether or not there was a breach of contract by the

German party;
(b) if so, the quantum of the loss suffered by the Chinese party; and
whether or not the Germans were entitled to rely on a contractual
provision which limited their liability.
At the start of the hearing, the German arbitrator suggested that the
parties should settle and asked whether there was anything that the
tribunal could do to assist the parties to reach a settlement.
Subsequently, it was decided that the tribunal would give the parties a
preliminary indication of the merits of the case at the end of the Chinese
Claimant’s case. The tribunal was careful to make it clear that the
preliminary indication was not conclusive and was merely based on the
evidence and arguments that had been given at that stage.
The tribunal eventually indicated that is thought that the Chinese party
had a 60% chance of succeeding on its claim for breach of contract. The
tribunal also gave an indication of what it thought was the loss suffered
by the Chinese party. Lastly, the tribunal considered that the Chinese
party had only a 40% chance of succeeding on the issue of whether the
Germans were entitled to rely on the contractual provision limiting their
liability.
The German arbitrator then proposed a settlement on the basis that the
Chinese party should recover 60% of that part of the loss within the
purported limit and 40% of 60% (i.e. 24%) of that part of the loss
exceeding the purported limit.
The settlement figure proposed by the German arbitrator was then used
as a starting point for further negotiations and, eventually, a settlement
was reached which did not deviate too far from the starting point.”
This is therefore an example of parties being helped to find the “zone of

possible agreement” (ZOPA),10 by a careful sub-division of the issues
and a detailed consideration of the risks affecting each.
The Swiss experience
Professor Pierre Lalive observed to the same audience,11 as follows:
My own experience of such a situation is very limited, I must confess,

and it clearly does not allow general conclusion. One special and
perhaps unique example comes to my mind, of a rather complex case
in which the parties and the Tribunal finally agreed on the following
‘quasi-conciliation procedure’ during the arbitration- only the broad
lines of which need be described here. After the 3 member-panel had
read the memorials and heard oral arguments, they had a preliminary
discussion of the merits, and formed a certain idea of the respective
weaknesses in each side’s argument, then it was decided: (a) that each
Party would confer separately with the Arbitrator it had nominated;
(b) following which the two Arbitrators would report to the Chairman
and confer on the possibility of concessions on each side; (c) then, in a
second stage of separate discussions, each Party would confer
separately with the Arbitrator nominated by the opposite party; (d)
following which the full Tribunal would meet again and examine the
situation; (e) then the Chairman would meet, alone, with each Party
separately, and report to his fellow-Arbitrators; (f) following which
the whole Tribunal would meet with the Parties and later, in case no
agreement was then reached, would deliver an award. In the (unique)
case I have in mind, the Parties settled directly, between stage (e) and
(f) and if I remember correctly, they asked the Tribunal to issue a
consent award (‘Sentence d’accord parties’).
The learned author notes, however, as follows:
• Whilst the circumstances of the case might have justified this complex
procedure, it cannot be proposed as a model;
It is nevertheless an interesting illustration of the various possibilities

offered of the arbitrator in his rôle as settlement facilitator, as well as of
the inevitable risks involved in such a rôle.
10
Described by Joerg Risse at the Heidelberg meeting of the European Branch of the Chartered Institute
of Arbitrators, in May 2004.
11
The rôle of arbitrators as settlement negotiators, by Professor Pierre Lalive (ICCA paper, 2004), at
page 12.
Some personal observations
Particularly when sitting as adjudicator under the Housing Grants,

Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA) (a rôle which results
in a binding and generally enforceable decision in construction disputes,
subject to any subsequent arbitration, or litigation), the author
frequently feels the urge (which is invariably repressed!) to explore with
the parties the ZOPA,12 having first explored the underlying contractual
and factual background. There is little doubt in my mind that, were
appropriate agreements between the parties to be put in place (which is
difficult, if not impossible, in the particular fast track statutory
circumstances under the MGCRA), a mutually satisfactory resolution
could almost be achieved without the necessity for a formal decision
(and, perhaps, the necessity to enforce the same). This impression is
reinforced by the author’s experience in teaching courses on dispute
resolution, particularly with regard to consumer disputes and utilities
issues.13
Conclusions
In 2001, the English adjudicator whose conduct and decision was the
subject-matter of the decision in Glencot Development and Design Company
Limited v Ben Barrett and Son Limited,14 posed the question “Should an
arbitrator or adjudicator act as a mediator in the same dispute”. His article,15
concluded as follows:
“With (adequate) safeguards in mind, the short answer to the question

posed in the title of this paper is yes, subject to the fulfillment of the key
criteria. On the assumption of the appropriateness of the approach in
question for all or part of the dispute:
• when shifting from one process and one rôle to another the
parties should be fully aware of the implications;
• parties should be required to enter a written agreement which
identifies the ground rules and the rights, or limitations on
them, of the parties;
• the arbitrator or adjudicator must be appropriately ‘qualified’
for the task; and
12
Please see footnote 10 above
13
Summer 2004, in Vilnius, Lithuania
14
[2001] BLR 207. See, also, the helpful list at pages 11 and 12 of the paper by Michael Schneider
(footnote 6 above).
15
(2001) Arbitration 221.
• the arbitrator or adjudicator must ensure that there is clarity

as to the direction of the process.”
The various International experiences which have already been recited,

together with my own personal observations, suggest that this conclusion is
correct, again subject to the various criteria suggested above. I close,
however, with the following words written by Michael Schneider in 1996,16
which still remain apposite:
….major effects must be made to familiarize (international)

arbitrators with the particularities of proceedings which incorporate
elements of conciliation…….much remains to be done for the
accomplishment of this challenging task.
As we say in England: “Plus ça change, plus c’est la meme chose”!
16
Please see footnote 6 above, at page 15.
* Originally delivered as a paper at the colloquium entitled “Les Arbitres Internationaux” and organised in
Paris in February 2005 by the Centre Français de Driot Comparé. The author is extremely grateful to
Alison Pannell of Leeds for her invaluable assistance in the preparation of this article.
***
! "#$ " $ % & '" ( ) " *(+
( " ,)( + + - " . ! )+ $(' # ( ! - " + ( + (
- /# - $" + " 0* , , * $ " + 1
$ # " $ "2 # ($ ' $ # + + "" 2 ' !

$ - 3 ! $" !" - # 4(" ( ( , 1 ( '
*, ,2 ' + " + # !" 3 $ # !
. + )( ( -. ' $ 5 05( $ + ' -" 0- "#$ " +
# + ) . ' ' ( "$+ " ( 1 ( )2 0 (" ' ! * + -
* '+ - - " ' 0 - 0(! -( + + ( + "1
'" # # " " . ' ! ! . 0 ' -" 0 . - *) $ #

" $ " ,$ , - ($ , , ' - # 0 $ 5 05( $
+ (' "+ " 0 " , - "#$ " *)0 ($" , ' +# ""$+ -
*) ( "$+ - "#$ "1 ' # # . ' /# ' - 00 ## (' "
( - ' # ! - "#$ " $ 0 # 6776
*0 + ! , + - - /+ 0 ' # !" " ( -
' ( # " 0 (! + - (! - ( ++ (
+ " " - # - *) ' $ # + + "" 66 ( * 67781
' " $-) . "' . ' ' # # " - (! # " " * ' '
( ($" 0 ' # ( "" ' * , . ' ' # 06776 " . "
' " ,# 0 . #' " ' - ( ) ! ! " ' +* "
' - ! #+ 0+ - + - ( )1 ' # # "$,, " " ' '
# # " - ( ! ( $- - ( ! 0' + 9 0 ' ."
0 +* "2 *$ " - 0 " " , 0( $+ * 0 ""$ " ' ' !
* 0 ' - "( ! " 0 +* "1
)2 . "-! #- - ' # ( "$+ " (' " $ "

' - )4
$- ( # ( - ," . * ,$ 1 ( ' )
†† Doctorate in Jurisprudence (Italy), Practicing Attorney with Macchi-Gangemi Italian Law Firm
:7"2 ' $ # " $ "2 # ($ ' $ # + + "" 2 ' !

""$ - $+ $" + "$ " ( ( , ' $ 5 05( $ " $ 0
- "#$ " ' ( "$+ 0 -1 . , ' "$,, " " 0' #
;::<; ( ( , ' (( "" 04 $" ( ( "$+ " - ' " + 0
( "$+ - "#$ " ' " , + 3 2 ' $ # + + "" ""$ -
( ++ - <7 (' ;::=6 $ , ' # (# " ' ## -
' * - " "# " * 0 $ 5 05( $ < " + 0 ( "$+ - "#$ "1
'" ( ++ - . " + - # ( -$ " .' - "#$ . "
" - ' $,' ' ! -# # " " 0 - # - ' -# "1
$(' - (" " ( $ - ' * * - , $# ' # " ( " $ +
( ++ - ' # " ( $ - (' " .' ' (( # 1
$ ' + 2 ' ( ++ - - ( - . # (# " ' "' $ - *
- # - *) - (" 5+ 3 , * - " ! !- $ 5 05( $ - "#$ "2
($- , ' # (# " 0 - # - ( 2 "# ()2 00 ( ! ""2
, )2 * )2 # " 2 - ' -! " # (# 1
677;2 3 # , . ' ' + 0 ( "$+ - "#$ "2 ' $ #

+ + "" 2 , ' " + $ 5 05( $ # ( -$ " 0 $ " - ' "( #
0 ' ( ++ - 0 ;::=2 - # - ' ( ++ - 8
-$( ' # (# " 0 $ 5 05( $ * - " ! ! - ' ( " "$

" $ 0 ( "$+ - "#$ "1 ( " ' , 2 '
( ++ - # ! - - 0 # ( -$ " .' ' ! 0' -
# ". " + - . - (' ! , 0 + - (" 2 . " + -
* , , ' # " , ' +# ( ! ( '+ 0 -
" $ *) ( + + ( " 1 ' >$ + "" $ . + 0 /*
' '" ( ++ - - ;::= ? 1 ' ) ($- - ' # (# 0
+# )2 "# ()2 00 ( ! "" - 0 ""@1
' $ # " $ A" " ( "$+ - "#$ " # " - )

' " , # 0 ' -* ( ( , $ 5 05( $ # ( -$ " 0
1
COM (93) 576 final of 16 November 1993.
2
OJ L 115, 17.4.1998, p. 0031-0034.
3
It is worth noting that this Recommendation yses the term “out-of-court” instead of “ADR”.
4
OJ L 109, 19.4.2001, p. 0056-0061.
5
It should be noted that the principles set out in the Commission Recommendation of 2001 do not affect
the principles laid down in the Commission Recommendation of 1998. The application of the different
principles depends on the out-of-court procedures adopted.
6
In this way, the European Commission seems to take account of those principles that most closely
represent the nature of the out-of-court procedures (such as mediation). Indeed in the absence of debate
between parties and where the procedure does not terminate with a decision, the adversarial principle
loses its scope.
677?B ! , /* $" ( ?;
- "#$ " + 1 ' * 0" C " , 0 + ' - # 0 "$('

# ( -$ " ! 3 - , . , " $ # ! 1 ;::: '
$ # $ ( =2 # , $ ' +# ( 0 ! + " 0
" , - "#$ "2 "$,, " - ' +* " ( !2
/ 4$- ( # ( -$ " 0 .- (( "" 4
$" ( 1 (( - ,)2 67762
' $ # + + "" #$* "' - # ! - "#$
" $ (! -( ++ ( . :1
' # "$+ + " - ' " $ 0 $ # - $ (' - * -

( "$ " ' + "$ " * 3 ;71 ' # # " -
$ ,# ' ( 0 / 4 $- ( ! + ' -" 0- "#$
" + 2 - ' # # " -+ - ( ! - # - *) ' $ #
+ + "" 6778;; 0 ( - ' " -1 ' 0" + 2 0 ( . "
+ - # ( -$ " - ' "#' 0 ## ( . " ,-
($- (! - ( ++ ( + "2 ($- , + # )+ - ( "$+
.1
.- , 0 ! + ' -" 0- "#$ " $ . / + -2

- " ,$ "' , * . D ' ( / 04 $- ( # ( - ,"A -
D( ! A1 ' 0 + ( * ( -$( - *) ( $ $" - *)
' ($ ' - # )1 " ' ( / 04 $- ( # ( - ," (($
.' 4
$-, " ! ! - . ' ( ( 1 ' " # ( -$ #' " ( *
( + #$ " )2 *$ ' 4 $-, A" ( " * + - ! -
(' " + * . ' # "1 " $" - *) ' ( $
' - # ) ( ""$+ - 00 0 +" ' +* "1
"# (0( )2 ' # ( -$ " ( * "$*4( , ,$ " ( *
( " $ - *) ' ($" 1 # - , ' , ")" +
( " - -2 ' ($" *) # " ( * +# " - ( $ , -1
E ' 0 ( ( ! 2 ' " , ,$ - "
7
The main advantages leading the development of ADR are summarised in the Green Paper of 2002 and
include: wide access to justice, flexibility of the procedure, low costs sustained by the parties,
confidentiality.
8
See Presidency Conclusions of the European Council meeting held on 15 and 16 October 1999 in
Tampere, where it is stated that: “The European Council invites the Council, on the basis of proposals by
the Commission, to establish minimum standards ensuring an adequate level of legal aid in cross-border
cases throughout the Union as well as special common procedural rules for simplified and accelerated
cross-border litigation on small consumer and commercial claims, as well as maintenance claims, and on
uncontested claims. Alternative, extra-judicial procedures should also be created by Member States”. The
conclusions are available at
http://ue.eu.int/en/Info/eurocouncil/index.htm
9
COM (2002) 196 final of 19 April 2002.
10
The Green Paper is not a particular type of recommendation, but shows how the European Commission
seeks to take stock of the status of ADR in Europe, by encouraging Member States to collaborate in this
respect and by verifying the most important aspects of the issue.
11
2004/0251(COD).
## ( " "$*4( ' , # ! " " 0( ( . - '

"# (0( $ " ,$ , ' " ( , + "1 ' # ( -$ "
*" - + + ,$ " - ' ## ( * # (# " 0 ( (
.2 ' . 0(! # ( -$ -# ! .1
' $" 0 " "( ( " # ( 2" ( 2 - ( + ( ! "1

' ! ! . - "( * - ' # !- ( - ' ( "" ) - (-
' . ) .' (' $ # " $ " "' $ - ## (' -
"$ >$ ) - 0 / * ) ' # ( -$ "1
' D $+ + ) 0 "# " " ' # ! - "#$

" $ (! - ( ++ ( .A;6 " ( ! '
,$ 0' + . "( ) 0$" - *) ' " ( A" # "1 $('
! . $- ( "" - - ,$ " (! , '
# ( -$ $ " 0+ - 1 (( - ,)2 ' - ($+ !- ( - '
## $ ) 0# + , *),$ ,# (# "1
. , ' ( " ' # 0 67762 ' $ #

+ + "" ""$ - # " 0 (! ( "# ( " 0+ -
(! - ( ++ ( + "1 ' $ # " $ "2 *) - # , '
- (! " , " $+ D ,$ A ' + 2 # - . #' "
' ,$ 0 2 # !- , 0 ' - ( ! ! + 0 +*
" . #$ ' # + 0+ - 1
' + - ! 0' # # " - (! " ,$ ' 0$ - +

,' 0 (( "" 4
$" ( " " * "' - ( @ 0 ' $ #
! 0 ' ( 0F$+ ,' " - $ - + - + "1
' " + + 2 ' + + "" " $,' "$ ' "# ( 0 ' ,'
0 " (, 9- ( 8C 0 ' ' ;< 1 (( "" 4$" ( "
0( - *) # + , + - 1 - " ( "- - ! -
! 0 # " . ' " " ! , - "#$ " . ' $ '
- ( ! !+ 0 4 $-, ;81 - " ( , 9 - " DG111B >$ (3 2
" +# -+ ( " 5 00( . ) " ! - "#$ "2 .' (' ." 0
3 , (( $ .- , 0 "" 0' # "2 . ' ,
12
The summary of the comments to Green Paper is contained in the “Summary of responses to the Green
Paper on alternative dispute resolution in civil and commercial law”, available at
http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home /news/consulting_public/adr/resume_comments_en.pdf
13
Recital 15 of the proposed Directive.
14
Article 1 of the proposed Directive.
677?B ! , /* $" ( ?<
(' ( 0 (' , , + .' (' . * ! $ ) "# ( -2 -

.' ('# " ! " + (* - "$" * "' # * . ' + A;?1
' ! 0' $ # + + "" ( + # " . ' "$*" - ) -

# # ) # (# "1 # ($ 2 ( - # -( * ,
0 + . 3 " ( "" )2 ,! ' # "" * ) 0" $ " ! ! ,5
5 ( ""5* - + "1 ' - (" .' ' - # + -
"' $ - 3 (( $ ' )# 0- "#$ 2 ' ( " " - ' ,' 0 '
# ( -$ - ' # "# ( ! " 0"$(( ""1 $ ' + 2 "' $ - * - 0
' ## ( 0 , 0 + . 3. " + - ( ""5* - - "#$ "2
) + ,- "#$ " . $ - * "$*4( - 00 $ " - '" . $-*
( ) ' , # (# " 0 ' $ # # ! " "1 ) "# ( ,
' # (# 0# # )2 ' $ # + + "" + - "
! 2 ,$ , ' "' # * . + - - 4
$- (
# ( - ," - " " * "' , + + $+ ( + + $ " (! (
3 ) "# ( " 0 (! # ( -$ 1 (( - ,)2 ' + - # ( ""2 '
## + - ' (( - 0' + - ( ! - *) '
# # " - (!1
- - )" " 0 ' # ! " " ( - ' ( ! ! " .'

## * ! ) , -0 " 0 D+ - A - D+ - A1
(( - , ( 6 1 &+ - ($- " DG111B ) # ( ""2 ' . !
+ - 0 - 2 .' . + # " - "#$ "" " - *)
' -# ) (' , + ' " + 0 ' - "#$ 2 -
, - "" 0 .' ' ' # ( "" " - *) ' # "2 "$,, " -
- - *) ( $ # "( * - *) ' . 0 +* A1
$ ' + 2 * 2 + *$-"+ "(' + "2 ( "$+ ( +#
"(' + "2 /# - + 2 # ( "" " -+ " - *) * - " ""$ ,
0 + ( ++ - ($- - ' # ! " " ;@ 1 '
+ - ( * ( -$( - *) ' - # )1 ' 0+ - ( *
""$+ - - # - )0 + ' - + # 0 "" 3 '
+* "1
' $,' ( 6 1 &# ! - " 0 ' /($" 2 . ' ' "( # 0 '
- ( !2 0' (! ! 0' 4 $-, ' ($" 0' 4 $- (
# ( - ," - " ' - "#$ 2 ' 4
$-, " $" - . '
! "3"1 + )2 ' ( $ " ! !-. ' ' ! $ 0'
## $ " # ' # " - ' "$ (' - *) ' + 1
15
Point 1.1.3 of the explanatory Memorandum of the proposed Directive.
16
Recital 8 of the proposed Directive.
$ "$ ( <1;2 ' +* " "' $ - # + ( $ "2 .'

## " * ## $ - ' ! ,,! , - ' ( ($+ " ( " 0 '
(" 2 ! # " $" + - - " ! ' - "#$ 1
-- 2 ' 4 $-, * 0 .' (' ' ( '" * * $,' ( >$
# " # (# 0 + ! + , ' $" 0+ - 1 "
. ' , ' ," - ' + # + + "$ " - # - *)
+* "2 . * 0$ - + ' ' 4 $-, " ## ) , "$('
# !" " "' $ - * . - . ' ' ( "" ) # 0 "" -
# " "3 " - ( + # ) . ' ' "( # 0 ' (!1 "$('
( " "2 " ( ' ! - # + - (+ "0 + ' ($ ' ' "
-) / + - ' - "#$ 2 # " . 3 )* -$( - - # '
! + ' -" 0- "#$ " $ + 0 ! $ *)1
' # 06776 + - ( ' 2 .' ' , ")" + " 0" +

+* " -) # !- 0 + - ) ($" *0 '
( " " * $,' * 0 ($ 2 ' +* " ' - # 0
! + ' -" " ( " - - 0 ($ ! * . # "1
' . 3" ' 0 . - ' #$* ( 0' # 2 . "# -

$ ' ' ## ( 0 "' $ - * ( " - - DG111B 0 ( # "$ " !
' ' + - )2 " ( ! .' ($" " *, )2 '
# ( "" " 0 + "! $ )2 - ' # "( )# -
' , " - $ 4
$-, * ;C A
1 ' $ #
+ + "" (+ ( +# + " . ' ' # # " - (!1 " "$ 2
( <16 " " ' 2. '$ # 4 $- ( $ " # ! - , 0 D'
$" 0+ - ( + #$ " ) "$*4( " ( " ( ! "A -
D.' ' * 0 0 4 $- ( # ( - ," ' ! " -A ' ,' 0 (( ""
4
$" ( "' $ - * + -1
( 8 0' # # " - (! " * . (+ - " + 3" (

" + "$ , ' >$ ) 0+ - 1 ' # # " ($ ," '
- ! #+ 0( - " 0( -$( .' (' * "# ( - *)+ - " -
, 9 " # !- , + - " ! ( "1 , $ " "$
+ + $+ >$ )" - -" - # ( -$ ,$ " " ( (# ' . "
$ (' - ' # 067761 ( , " , ' ! ( 0 ' ""$
-. , # " ! * ' ' 0 /* ) 0 ' + - # ( "" - '
# ! $ + ) 0 ' # )2 ' $ # + + "" # "" - ,$
0' + +* "$ - # # )# (# ;=1 $)
67782 " 3 , "$## " 05 ,$ ) ! "2 ' $ #
17
See point 3.2.1.1 of the Green Paper of 2002 and the “Summary of responses to the Green Paper on
alternative dispute resolution in civil and commercial law”.
18
See recitals 12 and 13 of the proposed Directive.
677?B ! , /* $" ( ??
+ + "" 2 ""$ - ' $ # ( - 0( -$( 0 + - ";:1 ' ( -

" " $ $+ * 0 # (# " .' (' - ! -$ + - " (
! $ )- (- ( + + 1 " ## ( * 3 -" 0+ - (!
- ( ++ ( + "1 "# ( " ( ! - ' (- ($- ( + # (
- ## + 0+ - "2 # (# " 0 - # - ( 2 + # ) -
( 0- ) ". " ' + - , + 2 # ( ""2 " + -
0 "1
"$ , " $ - "' # * . + - -4$- ( # ( - ,"2

' # # " # !- " "$"# " 0 ) # - 0 # "( #
+ + " .' ($" + - '" * - (- -2
.' ' $" 0+ - " - - *) ( $ 2 .' ' *,
- # + - " >$ - *) ' ## ( 0' 1 (( - ,
( C16 ' # - "$+ " 0 + ' # .' (' ' + - --
. '$ " + , + 671
-- 2 ' # # " + " "# ( 0$ (, 0

( 0- )2 .' (' ( " $ " "" + + - 1 '"
#$ # " 2 ( @ ,$ " ' -+ "" * ) 0 ! - ( (! 4 $- (
# ( - ,"1 # ($ 2 " + ) !- ( ( * ,! *)
+ - " ' 4$- ( # ( - ,"2 .' ' ' - "#$ ( ( -
" ' "$*4( + 0' + - 1 ' " ( " ,! , ! - (
($- ' " 0# " ($" + - 2 ' # /# "" -
- ' -+ "" " + - *)# " ' ( $ " 0+ - 2 ' # # " "
+ - *)+ - 0 " , ' - "#$ - ' . , "" (( # *)
# "1
( ! " 2 ' " + ) 0' + - - ' !- ( ' *!

+ - ( ($+ " ( " ( * >$ - *) ( $ ' ($" 0
4$- ( # ( - ,"1 ' 0 + !- ( ( ! - *) 0 , ,
"$(' # !" ( "- - -+ "" * 1 ' *! + -
" ( " "$*4( " + /( # "2 ' + " + # 0 .' ('
( ( " ' ( "" ) +# + 0 ( " + , +
(' - *)# " ' ( $ " 0' + - 6;1
19
http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/ejn/adr/adr_ec_code_conduct_en.pdf.
20
Article 7.2 provides that “Where the mediation has ended without a settlement agreement, the period
resumes running from the time the mediation ended without a settlement agreement, counting from the
date when one or both of the parties or the mediator declares that the mediation is terminated or
effectively withdraws from it. The period shall in any event extend for at least one month from the date
when it resumes running, except when it concerns a period within which an action must be brought to
prevent that a provisional or similar measure ceases to have effect or is revoked.”
21
Pursuant to Article 6 “1. Mediators, as well as any person involved in the administration of mediation
services, shall not in civil judicial proceedings give testimony or evidence regarding any of the following:
(a) An invitation by a party to engage in mediation or the fact that a party was willing to participate in
- ! - ' + - ( $-* , - - " # !

4
$- ( # ( - ,"2 - ' +# 0 "$ , ( ) -
# - ( * ) 0 ' , 0 + . 3 # # " -2 ' $ # + + ""
( "- - ( "" ) -$( # ( -$ ' +* " ( $-
- # 0 ( " + , + 1 (( - ,)2 #$ "$ ( ?2
' " + , + (' - *)# " ' - 0' + - (
* ( 0+ - 4$-, + 2 - (" 2 $ ' ( " $+ ) '
0 + *) ( $ #$* ( $ ' ) ' - " ' , + 0 ( * 1
' 0 (+ . * # ! - - *) ' 4 $-, 0 . , 0 + ! $
0' , + (' - * . ' # "1
' ! " - # - *) ' $ # " $ " . ' , -

! + ' -" 0 - "#$ " $ ' ! ' - . - "# - 0$ (
$# ' ," 0 +* "1 + " '$+ * * , ,"
( "$+ - "#$ "2 '"-! #- - ' . # # " "0 "
.- ## ( 2 ($- , (! - ( ++ ( + "1 ' .
## ('2 -$( - *) ' # 06776 ' " * +# + - *)
' # # " - ( ! 067781 F ! , / + - ' # ( "" " ' -
' (! - ' # !" " - # - ,$ ' + 2 ## "
' ' " " ,' ' $" 0+ - 1 (( - ,)2 '
+ >$ + " 0 '" ! (' >$ 0 - "#$ " + H
! $ ) ( $ " 2 ( 0- ) ' # ( -$ - >$ ) "" " (
*)+ - "2 ' ! ( ! - . ( + (, *) ' $ # ," 1
' # # " - (! - "' . ! 0 (! " + 0' + !

"# ( " 0 1 ' $ # ," '"# 0 - ! - "(
mediation; (b) Views expressed or suggestions made by a party in a mediation in respect of a possible
settlement of the dispute; (c) Statements or admissions made by a party in the course of the mediation; (d)
Proposals made by the mediator; (e) The fact that a party had indicated its willingness to accept a
proposal for a settlement made by the mediator; (f) A document prepared solely for purposes of the
mediation. 2. Paragraph 1 shall apply irrespective of the form of the information or evidence referred to
therein. 3. The disclosure of the information referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be ordered by a court or
other judicial authority in civil judicial proceedings and, if such information is offered as evidence in
contravention of paragraph 1, that evidence shall be treated as inadmissible. Nevertheless, such
information may be disclosed or admitted in evidence (a) to the extent required for the purposes of
implementation or enforcement of a settlement agreement reached as a direct result of the mediation, (b)
for overriding considerations of public policy, in particular when required to ensure the protection of
children or to prevent harm to the physical or psychological integrity of a person, or (c) if the mediator
and the parties agree thereto. 4. The provisions of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall apply whether or not the
judicial proceedings relate to the dispute that is or was the subject matter of the mediation. 5. Subject to
paragraph 1, evidence that is otherwise admissible in judicial proceedings does not become inadmissible
as a consequence of having been used in a mediation”.
677?B ! , /* $" ( ?C
' ,$ 0 +* "1 ' - ' " (' ( ' "

,$ -+ 0 /* ) ' $" 0+ - H ' ' ' - '"
"$* - - ' 0$ $ - ! #+ 0 ' + ' -" ! ! -2 $" ,
'+ ' ! " -( # ( " 0 +* "1
***
! " # ""$ $" % &' ( &) &" " * +! &
, "% %) $ ( ! $" & % -% ! . / (
&0& % ' , "% - & - 0 )") % & "$) "( - &&
" /& ' ! & 0 - % )" % " !"& !"% " 0 1
! % & $" $" % - " 2 0 && " , % " $ 3, !
! / 0 )) " !4 & & ) &% 0 " "& & &"(
! && ! 5 1 % $ % ' " - $" %" ) " (
& % ! " -! )) $" )"&& , " " !" 0 &
)" ! ! &) -) & (" 0 "( "- ! !
! ) 0 " " &"( " "( &0 $" % &
0 $"% ! " )) " ! "$ - " ! %" "% % "
% !" & "$ % " , " ' , " ! % !" & % 0
!0, "$% 6 , "' 0 ( "' $ $ -'
" " ' "% , &% 7 7 ! & "$ " "
& " " ! .' , & " ( 0 " - & ) % 0& )
&"( - &) & % "& & & &) 0 (" 0' ! " & "
!" ( ! ( - "$ $ "% % - & % -%
% & , " ! "% ) && & , " "$ ( & ") &' ! &'
! ) % 0 $" & "$ ! & && 0 0& ! $$ 0 5 0 "$
! " -! " , " # ! ! " -" !
% " , "% - )") ( " ! $" % / ( &0& % '
% , "$ " &!( & ," ! 5 0 $$ 0 "$
"% ) " ! $" % - &0& % ' 5 & " - ! ! & " ! -% "
! & " && - &0& % ") - ! &! " & "$ !
"% , & - ! % )! & & )" ! 5 0 "$ & & &"(

1& ! 5 0"$ ! $" % / & &0& % ' 1 - 0 ! -! "$ &&
" ! " ! - &! ( " &* +
† Birkbeck College, University of London.

60 LONDON LAW REVIEW [VOL. 1: 59
) 8999' & ! "& , "$ / -% & - !

( &) &" " * +! ( , & -
! : % 1 "$ )" &' ) ! )& ! 1 0 "

! $$ ( && ( & &' & ! !0
) " && & (" 0 " ,0 ! ) & &)
!" "% &' $ ! ) & &" &!' ! ! " 6, -
"& 5 0 ! " " ! & ! % !" & ,
& , % 0% 0 " - $ ;
( " &
! "( -",/ (
<88 *8+= ! & & )" " ! ! "( -

",/ ( "$ , - ! " " ! & & /& 0
<8> *8+= ! " % & $ ! ! "( - ",/ ( ,0 ( 0
% - - & &
<8> *; += - ) "% ) 0 ! ! && & $ (& - "
&)"& -& % % 0"$ ! " ! &
<8> *; += " - - ! ) & " & )" 77
% , "$ &% & ! ( & & & " ' %" - ! %

! )" "$ ! " & "" ) 0 "! ( ! &) % "
" ! " "$ )) & $ -
% "& " & " & ! -! "" % "
! - ! ,"( & ' ! " "$ )) ! & $" ! !

" "& " !( ! !" 0 " " ) 0 " "% "'
$ - ! % " 0 $" % "$ & ( " " "$ ? "$
! ") "( " " : % -! & :" ( ' ! 0 !
" & % 0 & " -0 "% % ! ) & " & 1 ! !
"& 5 ! $ ! "% % " & -" ' ! ! ) 0 "
- "& 1 $ && ( "& & " & 5 &" ! / -% &
' & , " 4@
! " " ) ( & &&$ ) & "$&"% "

"$ ! "& & " ! -" & ! ! 0! ( $& "
2
Volume 1 of the White Book (2003)
3
DCA department for Constitutional Affairs, see
http://www.dca.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/parts/part01.htm
4
Halsey v. Milton Keynes General NHS Trust [2004] EWCA 576
5
Ibid
2005] ADR: Second Class Justice? 61
- " ' , % & , ," % ! & !

" & 3 ) " " ! - ! "& & &!"
$" " ! ( ! , " / & $0 ) $"% !
- & " ! & &&$ ) 0 " &!" ! !
& &&$ ) 0 &" ,0 $& - " - "
?
/ -% & & ! &4 ' ! ! & ) " " ! ,"(

& ' &!" ! " & ! ( " " $" ) & "% ( $! 0
$ !0! A -! B & ' "( !0 " C
-& !( $ 3 ! !" 0 & ( & ! & & ,0 " -

) & "% " ! )" )" 0 ! ! % " , ,
& % " " , "' ( - & ! ) & 3) && & &
#! ! & "$ 9 ( & !&
$ " & "$ " - % "4 ! " & & , " &
" ( % & & & ! & "& & ) 0" $ & "$ ( $ &
$" ! ) 0 $& "%
" # ""$D& - ! "& ) $" ! " & !

- !" " ) & ) & !" / % " !" & $$
& 8E , " 4
! " & &!" % 1 )) ") & "$ ! %)

)" & " & ! ! ) & 0 " &"(
! &) ! ! % % % ("( % "$ !
" &7 " ! ( ! & ",/ ( ! " % 0! ( "!"
" & " ( ! - ! ! ! ) &
3) ! & )& ! 0! 1 " &"( ! &) 88
! / -% : & 0 1" - ! " & & & , $"

% "' ! ! & % % & ) - ! ! " &!( "(
0 " & % -% & -) & & % & "$ !
)) ") ! ",/ ( & & % & ) "- ( "$ ! " &
- )" ! % & "$ ! $ & " & ! & %) $ ! !
) & & ! ! / - % 0 " - "& & % 0 , $$ (
" - !% "% "
6
Ibid
7
Dunnet v. Railtrack [20012] 2 All ER 850
8
Ibid
9
[2004] EWCA 576
10
Cowl v. Plymouth City Council [2001] EWCA Civ 1933 Kb
11
Ibid
*>>F*;++ & & " ! - ! ! & &&$ ) 0

&!" ) 0 ! "& " ! & &&$ ) 0 >>F*@+' " & "& &
", ( ,0 ! " ' 1 - " " ! , ! ( " "$ !
) & ," ! , $" - ! )" -&' - !
% ) & " &"( ! &) 8;
! " & % " & " , ! !" 0 "$ !

" & " " - ) & " & % " ! )" "$ ! " & "
$" ) & "% - & ! 8F ", - ! !& &
& ) ! -! "' , " - ! ! - & $ &
! - 0 & & 0&" ! " , ",& "
"$ ! ) &D -! "$ && " ! " & $!0 " , $" " &
% !" &
"$ ! &0& % & " ! 1 0 && )" ! ! - "$

&% & $" & ! ) % $" " & " $$ & * +
1" -& ! " $ ! 5 0"$ ! ) " && & && 0'
% 0 && & && 5 3) & - ! -! 0
( ") ) &" &1 & " " , - ! ) & " &
&"( - ! &) :" ( ' -) % & & & -
)) " ! & -' -( - & " " "( ! 5 0"$% "
& ( 0 ) " && ! & 3) - "% ! & "$

&" 0' (" & % & $$ &1 " % ! )) ")
$" % "$ - " !" % - & )" ! "! ! & "$
% " , ( ! 1 "$ & & " - ," 0 -"( -
! ) " && " , , ")" ! -! & "$ ! ) ")
&)" & " !& % ! ! $ 6$ -) " "
% ! & )& % 0, && 0 - - ! &0& %
"$ &&" "&& & " * + & ))" " ! 5 0 ! -

! ""1 - ! ) ", % & & " - && " / & ) "( -
)"&& , &" " & 8> " " "% ) &! ! & - &1 ! ))"
% ( &" & $"% " ! " " "( ," - "$ ") &4
& ! &' ) " & G " "&' & ' &" & * ' ) , $ -'
% "& H , " &+ 7 # ! ! 0 $" & ( 0 "$
% !" & ! ! 1 " $" % 0 " " ! 5 0 & ,% !
12
DCA department for Constitutional Affairs,
13
Halsey v. Milton Keynes General NHS Trust [2004] EWCA 576
14
http://www.dca.gov.uk/civil/interim/annex2.htm (DCA)
)" "- ! %, "$ & -- & " & ! ! !0, ( "

&"( % 0"$ ! " &
! & "$ - ! 1"$ " " -"( - !& &0& % &

$ % 0$ & ") & ! I&! " & "$ ! D8@ !0
- & $" $" % ! !0"$ ! - &0& % ' & & - ! $" %
&0& % ! " -! - " ) "( & ! "$ ,& )"
)" " $" % 0 ( ! & , ( !& ) !
&0& % ' , &!" " , "& & ,& " ) ") D& -! & "
" /& 0 ! - && " & ) ! % & "$/ &
%" & ! %" ' &!" , & )) % " !
3& - " &0& % ' "$$ - ' - / -%
#! ! & $ "& & ! " , !& %) "

&& ! & && &' - $" -", & & " "$ ! "(
) " && ! ") "% % && " - 0& & - ! ) " &&
"&& % % , & &' ! - - ! $ % & "$ ? "$ !
: % -! & "! ! ! & "$ " "- J &
! % 0) ") $ &" " & $ !& ! ! " &0& %
& $ ! - && &$ " ! $" % / ( &0& %
! !! & % 0 ) ") " % , % " " ! $" % & "$
0 ) ") " , " $$ ( 0 && ! $" % / (
&0& % $ & ""- 1 ) - ! ! - -&" ( &
. - "0 - & & , " &" " 1 % !% 0"!

' ) & ' ") % %, & & " %) & & - !
"( ) " &&
• 2 " "$ !
• ! & "$ , "&
#! % " , "' & % & "$ ( &)

&" " & $" % "$ $ 0' ! 0 $$" , ' - 0 , '
5 1 % "& % )" 0 % & "$ % )" - ! ( "
&"( &) &' - ( - ! )" "$& $ - " , 1 " ! ) & $"
&"( - &) " $" & & " ! &! & "$ ) & "
&"( ! &) " " 0 $ &! " " $" % % ' !
" & " "& & !& & &! ) " & " ! $" % / (
&0& % ! ! & )" & & )" &' & & ",
15
R Mnookin, Kornhauser Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law (1979 Yale Law Journal) 950
& ,/ - " "$ ! 1 ) 0' !" "$ " -! "& " !( !

$ " - % & " $$ ( 0 &"( ! &)
2 &
& !( , % ! & $ & " && !
5 & "$ ! - &0& % ( -! & && & ! ( , &&
" 0%" " ,0 ," ! ! - &! % ! -
&0& % # "% D& -! & ! ( % % , "$ % ) "( % & !
&" 6 " "% &0& % ' - -- $ "% )" " !
& & :" ( ' % & & & ! & " "% 0 ( ( ""&
& ! & % " & " ) , "$ && - % , & "$ )"
, ! ) & * -' '- + ! & ) &) ( && & ! 1
"$ & $ - & % " $" "% %, & 3& -
! % "% &" & ! %" ' & & & )"" 0
5 & ,& " $" ! - -! & "$ "% ' ) % 0 "
$" "% (" % " 8?
&
&& ! & && &' % - ! % " & /& " ! $" % "$
&" " " & ) ,0 ! % )" ! % &" 0 " & ) 0
$ % -! & "$ ) " && !0$ ! % " "& "
&& ! " - ! , & $" -! $" ! ,"( -! &' " " & "$$
5 )" " - & 5 0 "$ &&" && ) , &! !
I- & % D' *89C>+ 9F " 8EKF %&
% " &4
! ( "- ") , - -' " & & " ' !

, - % 0, & 1 ,0 &"% " !" !" 0' !
,& "$ / -% & & ,& 5 /
("( % " , &"% ' !" -! " 1 & % 0 ,
% % ' /& % 0 " , " 1 ) , - -'
& % & ) " " ! " " & "$% && &" 0
&!" ", " - " ) & 8K
:" ( ' ! & $ "& ! )" " ( , 0 " &"(

&) & ! " -! % " "! $" % & "$ ( &)
&" " ! 5 & ! ! "$$ " ! % && & &' , " &
& " -0-"( ,0 ! & & !& - % " -"!
"$ ! ) & ! ( ! -! " & , " &" " " &
$" / ( " - " & - & " 0' % "
& " & % 0 &" & 1 / ( - & &" & ! ! !
16
A Bottomley What is happening to Family Law 1985, (Routledge & Keagan Paul) pp. 73-110
17
O Fiss Against Settlement (1984) (93 Yale Law Journal 1073)
$" 4 ( "$ $ ' $ ) && ' ) 0 && &

& " & "$% 5 0 ! , - -)" "$ ! ) & 8C
" ! && & - & ! % 0 $ ! ! & "$

% " "$ & ", &"( ! / ( &0& % !& ! 0
, ( & % " ! ) & !" % 0, , " " & & &
! % " & " "! ( ! & ! , $" ! " & &"' $
) & , " &"( & & ! " -! % " " " ! $" % & "$
! !0 " " ! -& -! ! % 1& "
&"( ! &) & ! - !& " , & & & - $ " ,0
&"% ) & " & ! & & $$ % $ ! ! % "
) " " &"( ! & " - " "% % && " )" ' ! & % 0
, $" "$ ? *8+ "( " " : % -! & >K "$
! ! "$ % -! & "$ ! 89
>K*8+ ( 0" !"& -! & $ "% & - ,0 ! "$

! " ! (" !& -! " $$ ( % 0, $"
, "% ) ! ! " "& " !& ;E
! & "$ " $ - % "& " , $" &"( - &6

" " " &) &' && & ( 0, " " 0 "
! "! ' / -% & % 0 " , , - !& ( " &
/ & " & #! ! & $ " & & ! ! ) & , "
!""& ! ! $" % "$ !0 & ! !/ & " & % 0
"% % & & ! " & ) & ) ! ! " 0 !&
/ & " ' !" ( ! & % 0 " 0& , ! & 0 " ,
& ( &) &
& ! & -! 0)" " I % " &D ( " ! !% & ,

&&
& % 0 /& $ ,0 & !% ", !
")
"% % && " ! & % , "$- )" & & && - ! &
% !( "% % %, &$ J & &) & " "$) " &
"$ % " - ) " & "$ &) &" " ' " " &&
&"( ! & && &
18
http://www.cfcj-fcjc.org/full-text/2001_dra/gary_wong.html
19
http://www.europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc
20
http://www.europarl.eu.int/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf
" #
1 0 )" "$ & & $ 3 , 0' !" ( % & , - !

% % % & "$ 5 0% & , % & - ! .
& %& " , ) % 0& $ - - & & ) ! ! -"(
) & 0' , - 1 "$ " $" % 0 "&& &
," & & % & " 3& ! & $ !& ! %$ & &
( % ! & & "$5 0 )" " ! 0 -! 0 )" "
! % " % 0 $ ! % ! "( , 0"$ ! " & " %
& & & "$ ! " -! 1"$) & ) 0
3) - ) & ' ! ! ! & $" % 0 &" " $ % & - 0
3) - " " )" ! ! ) & ! " 0
- & !& ' , "- & " & &) - - ) 0' % 0 "$ ! !
& % ", " ! -% " ! $0,0 -! "% ) &
!& - % ,0 ! & &( , ', $ & " & ! 5 0 &

%" " ! " -! ! / ( ) " && ) &' $ ! 0 ) "(
! & & )"" 0 % - " 0 $ % 0 5 & ! "
"$ )) & " ! ! & #! !& " & " && ! && !
"& ' " & ) "( "$ ! "( &0& % ! %" ' & !
& "$ - " &' ) "( & ! ! ) ") ! % & ( & & &$ ! !
"( $ 3 , 0 "$ ! &0& % "% ) " ! ! !" "$
- "
0' - & &!( , % & - ! " -! && " / &

! ) && 1 - ( &) &" " & % 0 & 1 - &
"$ ( % )" ! ) & - !& , 0 " & 1$
& ))" $"% ! & " " & ! 0! ( 5 && " !
&0& % ! "% % 0 - ( & *) ( " & 01 " & - +
5 " "1 ! " !" & " " & ! ( , 0 "$
$ & ;8 ! & & 05 ' , " & &!" ! (" "
% " ) "( - && "/ &
! - % & - & ( &) &" " ! ( &!"

- 1 && ! ! - " ! - &! / ( &0& %
!0 !( ( & % ! "$ ! &0& % ' , $ "
& !" ! & & " - && " / & " !"& $" % 0
21
http://www.dca.gov.uk/consult/civ-just/adr/section 1fr.htm section 1.5
!" " & ) &" 0 , ( & &" & ) ! -!

" % 0 & &' , " - !&"% & !" " 0 ,"
)" %, & ( &) &" " ! " -! % " % 0
& & * - (" +) "( " , & ' 0 ! ( , 0 "$ !
&0& % & % )" & ) ! -$ "% "$ !" , 1 " !
"% % " )") "
0% " & ! ! " & , " & ! $ "( !

) & " " - ( ) ) " "$ & %)0 " ! " & "$
! (0 & " & ) " " ! - ! % " $" % &0& % "$ / "
& %0 , $ &!" , 8EEL (" 0' ) & &!" " ,
) & $" & - " &0& % "( ! " ! ' & ," ! ) "$ ! & %
&0& % ' ") - ! & % & "$
#! && & "$ % "&& ) - ! &0& % ' $ ) & &!" &

%) "% ! &) &4!" ( ' & $ - & &!" , ) "
) " & !& " & " ! % ! , 0 $" $" % / "
&!" ! % " $ & %) % & "$ ! & " , % )" 0
& &) & " "$ ! & "$ % "& - ! " -" !
"$ ( &) &" " ! & " " ! ) ( & " "$" -
&0& % & &"% ! ( $ ' , ! & -( , 1 " ! ) ") $" % "$
"$ ! &0& % ! ) ") - && "$- " ,
$$" ! 0 "
***
! "# $ ! % $ &'( ! )!
$ & & & $ & * &+ # $ ! )
+ , ) &- ! &) ! && ) # $ ! . * &+
& ,) - ++ ! , &% ! & , ! -
& !/ * &+ % + $
& & * & $ ! & , ** & !
++ * * &+ . ) * ) * * &+
+ !& , ) ! -, & * + 0 * &+ ,12
$ ) $ &! * * &+ ! !, * *
* &+ *)& & +% & .
! %& & + ) - , * * &+

! &+ ) *$ & ,$ ) , +% )
+ !& ! &,. + ! * & & ) &, ! ** & +
$, & ! 3 ! &, $ %& + # ! +,
. $ %%& ! & * &+ + ! + #
& !& % % & & & & + - & &
& 4-& * , * &+ 56 ! % + & ,
"! + - ! $ ' ! %& &*7 $ ) * -& ,
% ! & &+ . , & &+ )
* - $ %& ! + + & &
& & %& & !+ & &% . , &
$ & & + * + - !+ & &
† Address for correspondence : School of Law & Social Sciences, Brunel University, Uxbridge,
Middlesex UB8 3PH, UK. Email : Paul.dougan@brunel.ac.uk. The author would like to thank Dr Claire
Valier of the University of London for supplying the author with some material included within this piece
and for her invaluable support. Some of the material on the Maxine Carr case is published in the July
2005 edition of the Entertainment Law Review.
1
Foucault, M. Discipline and Punish (1975)
2
The author recommends the seminal article by John Cahir : 'Understanding Information Laws: A
Sociological Approach', The Journal of Information, Law and Technology (JILT) 2002 (3)
3
Lash, S. (2000) Critique of Information. London: Sage, at 73
%& % ) %% *& 8 & ' &! & & ,& ! ,

%& ) 7 - * & &) ,' &) & % * &$
$ %% & "$ * ' &**.9 $ )& &
-& ! ! + $ " & *! : ,.'
+ : % % ) ! * &+ )
* &-& * *! . * - ! -, !
& ++ & !) .
& , & * 3 8 *
7 &&; & %& + *&
- $ 8 + ! ! ) ! &+ # %& &
"& % ' & $ ! . * % -& !
& & ! & ! %% & * " 3
$ &!' ! + , , %& ) - - + &# * & -&
- *& & . + $ %
$& -, !) * * &+ ,.
!) ++ ! &, & -,
$ # ! ** , * 3 - &+ .
$ )& $ - !!& ! + & ! & % % &.
& ! - & *3 & ! -& ! & &

+ & & $ , ) - , + % . +% *
& (< * &% ) + !
3 & %& ! * &% & &! ) & & %&
*& ! + . ) * 3! ! 8 + ! &
$ + * % +% &!$ $ , ! &!
! ,& & ) - # & ! & & *
(==<'. - &) & ) !, & + * &
! ! "# $ $ ) !+ & ! - & >+ ! !
* & 3 ! &, ! & & >* * & *
+ ! $ , & &% & $ , + - % - & .
+ ! - + & & &$ &
* * & *& ! + * 7%& ! ! !
& && % * & & * + ! *& !! + & ,.
4
Young A 1996 Imagining Crime: Textual Outlaws and Criminal Conversations London: Sage, Chapter
5
5
Carr v News Group Newspapers Ltd, (QBD) Queen's Bench Division, 24 February 2005, unreported.
6
Reynolds v. Times Newspapers Ltd [2001] 2 A.C. 127; (1999) 3 W.L.R. 1010; [1999] 4 All E.R. 609.
7
Goodwin v U.K. (1996) 22 E.H.R.R. 123
8
A v. B Plc and Another [2003] Q.B. 195
2005] Injunctions Contra Mundum 71
& & &% & * ?$ + ! !

- & ! -, * ! %& * &+ ! ) $
! & &, % $ & . *+ $ % & * & $ -& *
*! ! - : , ** & , ! +% $ &
! &) ! *& + % * $ - % + ! ! - $ &
&+ ++ $. $ &+ ! !& + ) -
- + ! & & %& % * &% )
+ & (< % $ & *"*& ! + * 7%& '% & &,
*& ) ' &% & 8 $ +
(==@ A4 5B.= ) - * & + ! $ + %& ) .
(=C= %%& * ) * ! + ! $
! + ! -, &% & (< ! (==; &% &
+ )! %& ! & *3 & & (( & &, !
# & & *? &! .
& % + &%! & * ! ) %+ - % & *

: - &+ ! + , & * 3
! * &-& * *! . ! )! ! &! ,-
- %& &"%&) ,' & *-& * *! -
&: &! + ! * ! -, &&, (=D=.(/ * % &,
- ! - * & -& * *! + - $ 2 A(B
+ & ++ ! + ! &,: , * *! EA/B
$ ++ ! &- + # $ + & +
- * *! E ! A6B & $ & ! *
+ & .
- * *! , & $ & & $ &-

&! + & %- &3 ! !! +%, & %.
+ , !+ &# * " % &(6 ! , ? ! &
$ ! & 4&* & % * *! ,5 $
-& * *! %& %&) , - $ & !
9
1998 Chapter 42. Schedule 1. The Act entered into law on 21st October 2000.
10
Sunday Times v. United Kingdom (1979-80) 2 E.H.R.R. 245; it was held that contempt of court
restrictions on freedom of expression were allowable only if it answered a “pressing social need”.
11
Goodwin v UK (1996) 22 E.H.R.R. 123; 1 B.H.R.C. 81; The Times, March 28, 1996, ECHR; the court
ruled that the Article 10 guarantee required protection of journalistic sources, otherwise information
available to the press would dry up. The UK Government’s disclosure orders therefore breached the
journalist’s Article 10 rights.
12
Coco v A N Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1969] RPC 41 at 47 –48 per Megarry J
13
Douglas v Hello! Ltd [2001] Q.B. 967 [2001] 2 W.L.R. 992 [2001] 2 All E.R. 289 [2001] E.M.L.R. 9
[2001] 1 F.L.R. 982 [2002] 1 F.C.R. 289 [2001] H.R.L.R. 26 [2001] U.K.H.R.R. 223 9 B.H.R.C. 543
[2001] F.S.R. 40 Times, January 16, 2001 Daily Telegraph, January 9, 2001; the case made it clear that
freedom of expression would not be justified in all circumstances and must be “proportionate to the
legitimate aim pursued”.
%&) , *. $ %& % $ & + &# * & *) & *

& @ ! 3 $ , -& $ & && -
) &) + & !+ +- & * & , &) .
& , $ )& ! *, + * &) & ** &

*& + ? &! *1 3 ! + "# (9 % , *
+ * *& + ! *& & . & ! + &
% - * & ) & ,% &%&) ) % - ! +
F & !G , )H -3 & G-, ! HF.
!* *$ % - * & $ * &$ ! & + +- &
* + ! ! ) 7% ! ! ! %& - - ,$ ! & )
$ ! ) ! - $ ? &! *: $ %% &
%%& ) * &% & (; $ % - * & &
!* ! F $ % , & % - * $ & %
+, & % & % & & , &! + F.
&&+ & 3 -& & + ! & *+ !

. ' -& !& & *& + & +
(==C & & * && ! & *& % - ! -, -
+ $ ! ! ! ** & ! & ! 7 ,
& . & ! & $ & 4 ! &+ &
! & 5 & $ & 4 %%& ) ! & - 5. & + &# -
3! + !& $ %%& ! & * && ! +
"- # &#' & + % - ! 7& *& + & *&
&& % & *% ** & '& &+ &# ! ) % * !
%, & * * * ** & .
$ *-& * *! !+ & ! % , * $ *&

! ) %+ ! 7% !& +
3 & ! -, & %& $ ! *
# & * + I & *& && *& + !,(C. I &>
& ! ,$ & & %& ! -, &, % $ & (@
$ , - * ! *& + + & - & $ % - , *
&) # (= ! &*& ! -& * *! &
3 & & & , 3 !
+ % %& ! . &+ - $$ & $
14
A v. B Plc and Another [2003] Q.B. 195
15
paragraph 7 of the Council of Europe's resolution 1165 of 1998
16
Thomas v News group Newspapers Ltd, The Times, July 25, 2001, CA
17
Venables v. News Group Newspapers Ltd [2001] 1 All E.R. 908
18
Minors receive special protection against publicity backed by the laws of contempt of court.
19
The injunction was granted due to the effects of Article 2 (right to life), Article 3 (prohibition of
torture) and Article 8 (right to privacy).
- & $ ( ) % $ & - %% & ,+ ,-

. & ' %% /< * & 3 % - *
& !!& * ! 4 & * & * #& & & + 5$
** 3 * $ & # * /( & $ + & % *
)! * & + ! &* + , ! 3
$ ! , & !. $ , +% * +% !
J - 3! + & &! & % % &.
& , $ ) * ? &! 3 ! + +
+ %- .// C , /<<6 ,& ! $ %%& !
)!! + ! 1 %&) , $ % - ! &, ( -& &, /<<(
!- # &! * !! -, & ) &)
& ,+ ? ! 18 1 !. + 3& , & -,
% * $ &! &* ! + %- ! & !
& & %, $ ! %% & F -& ,> 7%
- !F. ? &! % * 3! !2F % $ +
- ) & *& ! + * 7%& %& ! *
% , & ** ) , $ ! ! & $ & *& + *
+ %- 1 & %&) , - 3 * !.F
& $ - ! % -, $, & ! &+ ! * &

& ! * "%&) , $'-, $ -& +
% - * * &+ $ + ! # $ - %&) &
*! + ! & + & + % ,+ & &! $ !
*& & + & %&) *. , & ,
%& ! & %& - $ %& *& ! + * & & $ + 3& ,
3! + ! % - * % &% * + %-
) & & ,+ + /6 $ ) * &%&) ,.
? ! ! & &$ & & +- ! * &+ & ! & *
, && &. & & ! % % & !- & %& &,
! !F + 2 + !& !! F. !2F ) &, ! ! ,* &
, !& > - %&+ ! $ $ ) & # $
+ ! ! & + , KK $ & &,
+% . * )& & $ ! &) *& & $
** ) , - # ! & %&) , $ $ !- + %- . I 1
$- K.F
20
Sir Paul Macartney’s wife; Heather Mills v. News Group Newspapers Ltd (2001) E.M.L.R. 957.
21
Beckham v MGN Ltd., unreported, June 28, 2001, per Eady J.
22
[2004] UKHL 22
23
on January 30, 2001
*? &! 3 ! + $ * , && &* -

+ !
- $ L;<<<<< ! L( + $ $
, . & & & & $ , & /9
+ %- $ * & ! !+ $ -7 !-
!& !! (==C ! ! &% *& &$ &+ .
+ %- ! *& >% & $ !! :
& ! -, & % & & % * $ & )& !! ! * &
* F #! &, - & , ! ! ) !F. 3! + *& +
& & !* ! + %- ! % &3 & ! & *-,
& + & , !+ % % (==C $
! &, - . ! * # ) &! * %
% . $ )& 3! & ! + ! 1 *) & !
$ &! ! & ! + *L6 ;<< , ! % & & # & &!
*>% - $ ! F + % *%&) ,F.
& * %% & )& & ! & /; , ,

&& & ! - & 7% + %- 1 ! ,. $ )&
- : && $ + 3 & ,& -, ? $ ? &! + ! & ,
- )! & & !$ && *& % * !
& !- -& * *! + ! .I&
* & 3! & *) & * + %- ! ) $
% ! & + &&! & * *? &! $ &
$ & * & & *+ ! & -& ,. !2F &! ,
-& , -& ,> 7% - ! $ % % &.
& + %& * ! *& + &. I & + ! - &$ > %
$ # $ & .F $ ) & 3! ! , && & !
*& ! & + $ , ! )! ! 7% &+
%&) . !2 F % &, & ) & *& + !& !! !
! &- !! ! ++ + $
& *& + *& + & ! +. I ! & $ + & &
# $ ! ! - *& + ,! & &+ .F
? $, & * & + ! ! & $ - $ F >

! *& ! + * %& F. 8 $ & %& ! &
M > ! & * A + BL9+ +
N+ K *& % - & ! % & * &
$ !! !2F* , $ ! &% &, * + ! -,
& *& ! + *% % & %, & ) & + , !
!*& + 7%& + ) % , ! *! $ * & *
+ ! & .F
24
[2002] EWHC 499
25
[2002] EWCA Civ 1373
*+ ! %&) , 7% & ) ! - $ & 3! +

!- &%& ! %&) , $ % && $ *
& ! $ $ + !. ! !# $, &$ & %& !
&! ! ? &! I& %&) , !2F ! ** *& ! +
* 7%& . & + $ - + *! ,
&& && ) !. + - ! $ %%& ) - &*
- $ * & , .F & $, & %& ! ! + $ !
! F% ) F + -, % - * & &, $& ! .
?+ + ! $, & * & $ *&+ & !2
F + %- - &, + # )& * * !+ !
$ & ! . % - * & $ - !
- ! ) & && ) . *% & ) )! +
! 3 & + * , ) , **$& - +
- % + & )& 7 & >! % % &.F
& *& " * +% ' , +

+ ,$ , % $ & +- 7 * + ! > + *
* &! ! 7 ) + ! *& ! + *& ! + ! &!
+ 3 & & ! *% ! ,% & , + !& !
: & , % -& ! & &+ . & ! ) 1/D
++ & !) 3 & $ $ % ,
! $ , # K * +% & : 2 4$ ,
- &! , + O5 + ! + % + * # ! + !
& *& ! , + * )& - $
* & > ! +%, ! -& , + !
! &+ , & *& + & . !* & *
* &+ ,+ ,- +% ! ! -, & !) + *
++ & ++ $ # % ++ !& ,
%& + ! & & & , & ! + .
8 $ & $ ) $ %& - - , + +% )
%& ! &, * &,' + ! . - &- !
+- & * &. &! $ % % & + &# !
%& &, $ - ! & % & ! *& , !) *
& + ! ! * & ! & % $ %& & ) ,
! &. !, & &, )& + -& ! ! &,
- %& & ) , & 7 !. & * (==6 &
26
Author of ‘The American Century’
&: &+ & + + + ) * && ** & %& & + +

++ & -& ! !- - ! !$ & &
$ & ! +% * & !) & &) . & -
& & $ + & >%& * - >& %& & + + ! +%
" &+ & > & -- + & '& & && ** &
& * ) ! ./C ) &,+ ** ! & !
%& + ! $ )& + $ & + ,
+ $!& *% $ $ & )
%& ! + & & && ) &! &) . & -
7 &- & *$ &+ ! " * + ' & "+
3 & + '. -& ! + & +% ) ! & !
)& + !!& , & & & %&
* $ ! + & " K,' % *% %& &.
* & + ! )
$ , - *& , ! & &,. ? &&,
- + & & ! ) ! ! % >$ & + & 3 & +
% - + && & ! 8. *& ! *- %
*& + (=9< + !! * (=D< & *" %! 3 & +'
& $ %& $ & &) + # ,+ * & : *
& )&+ . ! % $ ! &- ! $ !
3 & + $ ! * ) ) 3 & + !3 & $
&+ ! -, # * !$ &! ! I & . &! % *& +
+ !! * (=C< $ &! - & *& "3 #, &! !
3 & + '. $ &! 2
- +% $ : + !& + &
% 2 $ + ! %& ! -& ! *& $ !!
% # &# * ! *& K,... - ** !+ ,
& - &) & 3 & & ! && ! , )
7 & & + + ! & ) ,.
/<<< - # + - * $ ) &, + & + !

!+ & $ *$ * > ! 7% * ! **
, - & &! ! "% - & ) '/@ %% !
& +% & & &) $ * & . +
: + % , ! -, 3 & - + * )&! ! *
% '+ ) ! ! *& + * %
+ + ) . & ! &! - !&) -, % &* ,
27
Such as This Week and World in Action on ITV and First Tuesday on Channel 4.
28
Larry J. Sabato, Feeding Frenzy: How Attack Journalism has Transformed American Politics, New
York, Free Press, 1991, p.1; Larry J. Sabato, Mark Stencel and S. Robert Lichter, Peepshow: Media and
Politics in the Age of Scanda, Oxford, Rowman & Littlefield, 2000.
& - ! &+ & & & !% ! - &#

$ + * ! * !% ! - &! ,
+ + &% ! & , ) %%& - % !
% %& *. : $ - #! $ &
+ ! & ! !+ & ! ! % + ! , + !
% ! K *& !& ! &! . + ! !
%& + ! %& & & +% * -3 * & &
! %% & & , $ +% ,. %& + ! #
-& ! & & !& &, - - +% & !& &,
% ++ )& ! *+ &,. 7 +% && ! (===
$ ,I & & ! "# %& 1 * & % & &,)
% ! * ! >+ & - ! ! !& % ! !
! & /=
+ ,% & ! &! ! % !: $ +%
$ %&) ) + # &! &,% % ' + &. ,
& * ! ** . &I & , & # ** & $ .
+ +- & $ % # * &+ *I& $ ) & )
* * + &. % #* & % % $ % , !
, &* & *& ! % $ &.
!& $ && II ' % ! &! &- ! $ $

" & *- ' , 2
!. $ , * & *% -
! & - & -- %! ! ) + &
* . ! & % & ! + & ,. &
$ ! & - ! + & ,...I $ ! + $
&$ - # % % ) > !! & + $ .6<
+ &, ! & /<<( & +%

! !3 & ? ,! + + ! - * ,
# $ ! + % + - *& *& !2
G &
H! ! &... & , &!
% & & ! &, + * ) ,E
, & %& & & ! ! )! + *
+ ! ! + E ,! * !& & % % -
% & .6(
29
February 1, 1999.
30
Andrew Marr, ‘The Lying Game’, Observer, 24 October 1999, p.30.
31
John Lloyd, ‘The Scorn of the Literati’, New Statesman, 4 June 2001, pp. 21-2.
! % & ! &- ! )! ! &

+ + %& ) * &,' K ! + &
! ,' + ! + . + & +%, %%
+ 3 & , *3 & . , & ! & &> & * II
I& + ! % $ + ! - - $
&* !! % + ! ' )& *% + , )
+ )! *& $& !& . % # * $ + ! "& !
&+ , * +% ! + ! * && ' ! #
!& $ &&* &, & & $ & ! - & +%
&) ! "* &, ! ,% &- '$ ) % *2
) & + % # *& % %
3 & . I + 3 & + + *& . % & &
$ %& ! $ & ! &+ ! & -) E ) &,
$ &! - + +% * E ) &- &
&) $ & $ &! ! * , & &) $ ... 7 -
! $ & & ) 3 & ! && ,
%%& %& .6/
I& &*& & &$ )! $ )

$ &! $ 3 & & & - ! &,
*& + * &+ ! ! & + # ! * &+ !
&! ! %% & +P * + & ! !
& &7 & * ** ) .
& $ ! & * & %% & - + ) * & ! )!

- + % $ $ + ) & & !! &
*& + + ! . +% &! * & $ &! ! * -& ,
* & & 3 & + $ $ - %% * + &, LD<<<<
% &, & ! * + *+ & !) * % - &) O
, % , + -& & , ! !
& + *& + + ! . + ! ! ! ! * &+ ,
* ) % ,! & & % % % ' ! $ &! &+
! &+ . Q - * $ * + ! % ! % % &
32
John Birt, ‘For Good or Ill? The Role of the Modern Media’, Independent Newspapers Annual Lecture,
Trinity college Dublin, 3 February 1995.
& * ! ! )! -3 ) + % 7$ , .
+ & *& %& * *+ ** ! & +% &
% * * $ &! ) * % + ! + ) % ,!
% $ &* % & + * &+ $ + - ! "% )
*'. $ # $ & ** ! & ++ , ,* !
+ ) & * - )& % - '& # $
* &+ ,. & &+ & , % $ &
& * & $ + & + * ! & - +
& ) ++ ! . + & & ) * &, + *
&+ - + - ++ ! , %& * - & ! * & % $ &*
+ ! ! &,. + &% & ) & %&
* & & $ % - % & ,& * & ! !
- &**> . ! %& $ % , # ! )
+ &! & ) + & &+ ! & ! - $
& &- !&) & - & !& $ . " *%& % & ,
- + +% & ) ! - ! )! ** ! & !
& * $ *2 *& &- ** $ " % - '$ 7
&) .
& & ! * % *+ &

% !% % % ) .6C & !: , !!&
!, + + * ++ !* * ) &,! , * !! *& + +
* ) ,! ** & + ! )& + . + & 7% !
%& % % ) + + ! !% & & !
+% , &* % - % ! *& & ! % 7% ! ,
&- * &. &+ * - + ) - + &
& + ++ ! , - 3, ! ! + ! ! , &
+ !& + ! ! ++ %& '6@. ++ !*
33
Urry (2000)
34
There have been campaigns and provisions to make the identity and whereabouts of obscure criminals
who are released after serving sentences for serious sex offences a matter of public knowledge (Megan’s
Laws, Sarah’s Law campaign). There is also a campaign for the Voto-Tedesco Community Notification
Law in New Jersey, which would establish notification measures when murderers are released.
35
In the UK, the ‘tariff’ is the minimum terms of imprisonment before murderers are eligible for parole.
36
Sarat, A. ‘Vengeance, Victims and the Identities of Law’ Social & Legal Studies 6 (2): 163-189
37
See Cohen, S. (1973) Folk Devils and Moral Panics St Albans: Paladin; Hall, S., Critcher, C.,
Jefferson, T., Clarke, T., and Roberts, J., (1978) Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State and Law and
Order London: Macmillan; Bottoms, A. (1995) ‘The philosophy and politics of punishment and
sentencing’, in Clarkson, C. and Morgan, R. (eds.), The Politics of Sentencing Reform Oxford: Clarendon;
Windlesham, Lord 1998 Politics, Punishment, and Populism Oxford & New York: Oxford University
Press.
38
Presdee, M. (2000) Cultural Criminology and the Carnival of Crime London: Routledge at p.11
%& & $ & & * &+ ! & * ++ &

- - ! ! * &%& * -,+ 7 + &7 ) .6=
& &+ ) &*& ! $ - $ +

+ ! & & !!* ! & + !+ - &
&% ! & * ! + -. 7 & *
! & & %& - + * . *+ 8
" & + &! & & ' I& !, ! ,& ! , !- -3 *
% - * ! & + * & & & ! !
& & - & +% ++ 9< ! & &
*%& *& + !! + & %& * +.
, (==; % * I& !, "+ & + &! & &'$ # *& +

! % & ! $ % $ +
$ ! $ * $ & + 7+ + &, % . !
% *I& !, %% & ! 7 & ! !" >* ! * * )
! + &! & &I& !,.' & ! &- ! I& !, "- ! -, * )
, %& .' & ! % &% ! % &% & ! ,
7& ! $ & + &! & & $ & ! !- +
: ++ % .9( I& !, - : , +% ! & +%
++ A B$ &3 ! +% . I& !,$ & ! !
* &3 ! &) $ * ! ! & % & % & !9/ I& !,
$ " & R & , ! %&) ! + * &
%&) ,5. ++ ** ) , % ! $ % % &' ! *
I& !, ! * &* ! & %&) , - * &+ !
& - : , & !.96
& , & &99 $, & * & I& !, +% ! % &%

% - ! ," - ! & %& !
" 3 *! & %&) ,'. % $ & # I& !,
$ !&) ! &% &! * & % ! & %& ! *
& &# . ! & ! I& !, ! ) %
,& %&) , $ ++ ! &+ 7>% , & + ,
39
McRobbie, A. and Thornton, S. (1994) ‘Moral panic for multi-mediated worlds’ British Journal of
Sociology
40
The regulatory body for the media in the UK.
41
See for example, ‘Scandal as Myra Meets TV Bad Girl’ News of the World 1.7.2001, p.7. The article
reported that the actress who played unpopular warder ‘Bodybag’ in ITV’s show Bad Girls was filled
with revulsion after a brief and seemingly impromptu meeting with Myra Hindley in her cell at HMP
Highpoint.
42 th
4 January 1996
43
19 Nov 1996, CA judges upheld PCC decision. R v Press Complaints Commission, ex parte Stewart-
Brady [1997] E.M.L.R. 185
44
12th January 2000
& % - *& $ *& ! ! % - , -, & )

+ ! ! * +% &) + * ! . I& !,' + %
$ + , &3 ! ! !3 ! ! &
I& !, ! - % &% ! % - % !!& + & *
% - & ! I& !, ! + %& + ! & %&) ,
& ! & #% - ,*& . ! *&+ ,
" ! > $ + > *& & %&) ,
) &, + & $ && ! & &+ .'
I& !, $ & & &# $ & % +% ,

! ) % * *! + ! & &! *& + %
! - $ % - ! ) &- + 7 & *& + +.
& &! & ! ! ! , *
+% , ! & * && ! ) , * & .9; + &
& , && , %& + ! ,& ! ,$ &+ , !
! ! +% $ . I& !, # $ %%& &
+ + * ! $ & ! &-
! $ $ % &% & ! , ) ) !.9D $ *
- ! &! *+ %& !+ &
% - ! + * & ! - !!
% &,! + +.
- & & * % & & *) * &,

& %& * &+ ! % * *& : % -
& !* $ % &+ & & . + ! -,
# * & *& %& # &*, &+ . & (D *
! %& - ) ! &+ *& + %& * *& + & &+
! * && % & & ) & & + !
% &* * &+ .9C
+ , ) " * +' $ *& * -

! -, $ &# & (=CC %& - &
+ &! & & ) ! I &# $ K # $ * + *& + %& * *& +
* & - &+ . & - ! $ !
% - , ++ *& + &> * & &+ -,
45
Ashworth Hospital v MGN Ltd [2001] 1 All ER 991.
46
Stewart-Brady v Express Newspapers plc [1997] EMLR
47
In an adjudication which upheld a complaint about payments for a magazine article on the Krays, the
Commission said, ‘none of these articles attempted to portray the downsides of a life of crime, of the
impact on the victims of those convicted on them… On the contrary, they glorified the way in which
various crimes had been carried out and the people who did so’ (Complaint of ‘A man’, 1.1.99). Another
adjudication stated, ‘the glorification of the crime is more of an affront if it is done for gain’ (Complaints
concerning payments for stories from convicted criminals 1.7.98).
) ! ** ! & !! + % *) + . +
%& - $ *& + ** !+ +- & * %& * *& +
& ) % ,+ *& & .
+ &, $$ & ) % ,+ *&

%& )! * &+
- + & %& &+ %& ! .
+- & * ) - * ! ) - % ! *&
& -, $ % % & +- & * & &+ . (==D
+ &, %% ! & ) & !
%& > & %& )& ! %& 3 ! ! & ! %& !% !
$ *& & & $ ! & )! .9@ & &3 !
%% " *$ # ! % - !
& # $ - . $ !- ! & * &+ ! -
& !- , !- -3 7 ) % - ,.' $ ) & ,
! * && ) $ * : * % ,+ *$ -,
%& ! ! & ,Q & $ # + &.
& & '& ++ $ 3 & &! & 7%& &

) $ & + + ! & & , & + &- ! -,%&
& !& . ! )! %& & ) ! %% &
&! & - & * # !. 8 * % , *
+% - # - 3 & ) %& & , !
!& # ** ,$ ! % - , !
&) $ $ * ! - $* . 'I& ! ++ $ & - &)
* * & + &! & ! + ! , !- ) + *
+ && *3 . & * %% & ! ) ! %& &
! & ++ & ,$ + ! & 3 &
* + %& + + ! & % #
! %& && ) ) *& + , 7 % $, & & )
! *& ! . * ? &! ) & & ! !
- # - $ $* % , ! ! %&) %& & *
* !+ !- & #3 &+ * &) $ *
) & . $ )& *# ) - !
%& & ! 3, & & * *& ! + * 7%&
% - . &% & &3 ! & +
%& & ! - %& - ! *& + + ! % & ,
& ! && % ! $ ! ! & ) + &
&& ) . $ )& & * ! 7& ** ) &
) & ++ $ + ! -, % $ $* .
48
R v West (Rosemary Pauline) [1996] 2 Cr. App. R. 374
(==D *& $ * * & ! ' -& & +% !

- & $ ! ! & $ !! % &% !
+ %& ! . & !- % - ! $ # *
' ! ! & & * && % !& ! " & *
-& & &+ .' ! *& ! ' %&) , !
%& & ) ! *& ! . +% & !
!!) & ! - *& ! &+ #% !
- # $ *& , & ! !! !
%& &! & *& + % - ,. 7% ! + ,% %
$ ! - $ & * & $ *+ , !
! * ! & ! &* + , *& + & . ++ &3 !
+% " &$ % - & $ % % && % & *
+ % 7 % &, + ! % * + ,.' & ) + !
& % - & ! : $ $ )& &
% - , !3 ! # + # ** & ! + &
** ! & %& $ + $ , *& ! * ,.
$ , + ! ) - & ,%& ! -, &.
$ ) & !, & & + ! !% - &

+ # # $ ! * & &+ . * 7 &&
, & ! +% * !>+ &! & ,
3 & ! -, & 8 $ $ ! >&
! * $ ! %& ) + % & &, &! & , /<<9 $ & !
&&1 ! , !! - #% & *& & $ * ,* $ &
& %& - * & &) * * 9/>+ . %&
3 - % - * -& ! ! + , ! &&'
! * ! !$ %% , ) & ! &! & ! -,
- : & &! &. %& - ! * &+ 7 ! & $
+ !!& & ,! * &$ & - ,% & % &% &
* ,% ! & ,! * &% , & & && + .
& )& %% , ! - & % -
$ ! %& - , ! * & $ &#+ %& & !
- & *& + & ) &! ,. * &+ ! )
# : - ! ! % * &-& &! & &
! &- + , + %& + & : & * .9=
3 -, + $ % - :
+ - & *$ , . *& , %& ! ! *& && !
49
Contempt of Court Act 1981
** ! & ) ! * & &+ & ,- !$ # &.

!, 3! + +% ! +% & * &% & ) ! *&
%, $ & , ) 3 * ! &! ,
%% $ ! -, + ! .
$ + ! -, &&' & %& ) * %% $

& ! & $ & ! * & # * & 3 &, &! !
* & %& & *& + & #$ ! + -& *
&% ) + & / A%& *& * B.
)! !! ! %% & $ % & )2 %& & *& +
% * & ! * & + ! 7%& *
-, % - # &# && ! # + +- & *
% - -, ! ) ! $ &) + - & & + - &&.
$ !! , + ! & $ & &# & & !, *&
%, ! * & %& & &#$ !
+ -& * && !& & @ * ) .
+$ %% & ! -,+ ! )! .
- * 3 * $ & * &,
!) %! I &;< ! I ;( %& ! ! - ! %
* &, && $ ** . - & ! &&' & &! &
/<<9 $ + ! !& ! + $ * *! & & , *& >
! * A%&) , B- ! % & !&
&% ) + A B ! %&
**&+ ! &! &. ! *$ & & ) % )
- ;/ %& ! ) ! ' %&) , & %&) $
% &, $ ! &!* & & %% ;6 - - &
& * % - &, ! & DA6B * !
- ! + % -,$ ) & &! " &K ,'
* %&) $ ;9
& )& (/A6B>A9B * !& & +% & *

& (< A*& ! + * 7%& B$ &&) ! & &!
50
Venables and Thompson v. Newsgroup Newspapers and Associated Newspapers Ltd, [2001] W.L.R.
1038.
51
X (a woman formerly know as Mary Bell) and another v. O’Brien and others [2003] All ER (D) 282
(May).
52
Under Article 8 ECHR
53
The deliberations on this point in the leading case of A v B Plc [2002] EWCA Civ 337; [2003] Q.B.
195 (CA (Civ Div)) appear to be inconclusive and largely ignore European jurisprudence in the cases of
Spencer v UK (1998) 25 E.H.R.R. CD 105 (dealing with admissibility) and other authorities (Winer v UK
(1986) 48 I.R. 154 and Barclay v UK (1999) no.35712/97 (admissibility only)).
54
hence applying the jurisprudence of Glaser v UK [2000] 2 FCR 193 and the House of Lords decision in
Douglas v Hello! [2003] EWHC 786
& * 3 ) & * %% ! +- ! )&+ '

! & ,+ ! * & ) * & &! & + %
3 ;; $ ! - * %% + ! & !
% - ! *& && %&) , ! & & @.
&+ &* ! & & * !$ %&

!& ! ! $ & & 3 ) & *2-
+ ! ' *& ! + * 7%& ! % - ' & # $
+- & * && & ! $ . * "+ &
%&) ,' # , + ! $ 3 *, % - ;D -
$ & &/ ! &6 !& + - + %&

&+ ! $ - & !. & !& ,
&: & & )! * & " & * ! + -' I &
$ - )! * + ! $ & % % $& #
&) ! !' # & ! 4 * %& %% & !
* *& ) ! &! ! & * & % -
! , ,+ ,' # & 5.
! - !, * &+ ! % & * & - ! 3! +

. & $ + * ! & )! *% & & $ &!
&& + %& &*& + % & & ! &! -
4* & , $ & .5 & ! - ! ) ) % %
+ # *& &&$ !- - ! -,+ + - & * % -
!+ & & $ -& ! * & &- ) 3 . & ,
%& % &% ! ! &- +% % %, & '& % &
$ !! $ 3 &# &&' *&
+ $ & ) &, ! + $ & &
%% & ) * & * 3 .
+% * & : + ) * %& &

&& % - * & ;C. && - +% &!
$ ,& ! ,+ & + & *+ # &
! ! - & + &, . !+ ,+ % + *
55
American Cyanamid Company v Ethicon Limited [1975] AC 396. Traditionally, the Court must be
satisfied that the claim "is not frivolous or vexatious; in other words, that there is a serious question to be
tried"
56
see A v. B Plc and Another [2003] Q.B. 195; During the Thompson and Venables trial, Butler-Sloss, P.,
said that she was uncertain whether it would be appropriate to grant injunctions where only breach of
Article 8 was threatened.
57
The Mirror appears to enjoy printing some of the most violent and brutal hate messages found on the
Internet discussion rooms. They included: “I do hope she gets what’s coming to her”, “I would kill the
evil bitch” and “This bitch should be dead and I believe she will be, if there is any justice in this life, by
the end of the year”.
%& 3 ! ) ! $ + ! $ ) ;@ & ,
$ + ! 3 & $ & * &+ ) * + - ) &
&+ $ ++ ! $ + %- * & & ,
$ &! !& %& &. : & $ &
& + -, + ! + , + + &! !
) %& + % !- $ & + ! + ) !-
% - *& & * & & ! &. % ! & ! -,
& ) & ) ,* $ + .
& & %& - + 7 $ )&$ & ! % *

3! + *. &# & ! ** & - $
&: &+ *& & * *& 3 !
$ !+ * &>& & * 3 .
&: &+ *& & * 3 * # !$ & !! $ + &
9 , & +% !J - .;= + *
,+ , $ & ! $ !># & % & + &, !
& $ + % 2 ,$ & *& ) %& 3) !
&+ ) &! & $ ,& ! (@ $ ! ) - 7% +
!! , & &+ ! ! &, - * * && -
$ & & !. & &+ & +% ! J - ' ** $
%& - -, + &+ $ &&' -,
+% & $ + &.D<
+ * & &+ -& +% ! J - $ &

! &- ! -, 8+ + ! "+ &# ! + ' ! " & '$ &
"! ! + $ # .'D( ,$ & ! &! &+ - ,
$ & - )! - & ) & # *) #. & % &% *
%& & + ! * + ,+ , &! & &
3 $ %& - ! , !& 3& ! * $
*& + ! &% - * &+ $ + + # & $
! % - # $ ! . & *+ - + ! $ * !
% * $ # ! $ %%& . / 0 *& >%
! !& + , ! "I &8 & ! & #2
58
See the excellent article by Jo Knowles, ‘Crime and Punishment: Maxine Carr and other 'evil women'’
59
See the note by Rico Calleja, ‘Confidentiality and Freedom of Expression.’ Ent LR 2001 12(6), 190-
191
60
she provided a false alibi for Ian Huntley by lying to police about her whereabouts at the time the ten-
year-old girls were killed
61
These two ‘poetic’ appellations do not emanate from the tabloids, but rather come from a broadsheet:
‘While liberals worry that the release will make the youths dead men walking, hunted by vengeful
attackers, debate still rages…’ (The Times, 23.6.2001 ‘Touch and Go: The Start of a High-Risk
Experiment in Rehabilitation’). The headline ‘MARKED MEN’ is from the Sunday Times (24.6.2001,
p.11).
J - '+ + ' %& ! '. ! & ! &- ! ,+ ,

&! & "* ,* $ !.'D/
& !& + 7 & + ! % & & *& +
&+ %& * + % & &, % , ! - & !
&) &, * $ % ) . #, * & * % ) &
- &) ! & $ & 3& ! & %& + *
& , & + *% + !& &+ $
+ % & &, . - & - $ ># $ &$ ! ,
# $ ! !. !& * &+ %% + + -,
: , * &% & %& # $
+ , & % * + - ! & *) & - : , &! !.
+% ! J - ) - ! &- ! &
" : , & .'? &! I + * & ! % *(==@ "
+ * + + &! & & & - & ! &+ ! ! & &+ &%&
* & 7% & '.D6 & ) & &+
,& ! , A 8B + ,A B , & A B !
) A ! B. $ * & ! ! I & *& +
& &+ & !& ! , ) - -3 !
-& % * *& + & , ,+ ,. ! + &, * &
# D9 3 & ! &- ! "+ ! >* &> J>+ &! &.'
&+ I &# & ! ! -, $ , $ ,
& $ &# %& + ! " * &+ '* * $ . & + )
*& + ) &+ ! + &! & & + .
& ! &, * & %& ! .D;
&+ + * I &# $ ),! &

$ $ ># $ ! + ) + . $ # *& + J
* $ $ ! -! * ) + *& + - , %%
+ . + $ 1 !% - ! * %&
$ $! , ! $ % & " + &! & * .'
% & ) ! -, + ! . + - ! &- !
& ! && $ ! $ - *& $ ) $ & *
% $ & ! * &* .DD &+ & * + 3& !) !
62
News of the World, 24.6.2001, p.6 ‘Can Bulger killers’ secret be kept from their future wives, children,
bosses…’)
63
Bingham, T. (2000) The Business of Judging Oxford: Oxford University Press at p.331
64
BBC2 ‘Eyes of the Detective: The Murder of James Bulger’
65
Acland, C.R. (1995) Youth, Murder, Spectacle: The Cultural Politics of “Youth in Crisis” Boulder:
Westview at p.47
66
See Young A 1996 Imagining Crime: Textual Outlaws and Criminal Conversations London: Sage,
Chapter 5
% % " !+ + & ! !& ! .'DC & + + * &

*& %% & - *& + & &, + - && ! ! &
$ & , %% & ! & $ + % ) &&, -,
! & ! % & + *& +% !J -
- !! )& - & %. & & $ $ ! &- !
% ! ) $ , !* ! $ & # $
! ! ! I. $ )& + * & & !
# &) & ! * &% & & & ! % &+
"I & # &' - ! * !. ! % - &
) && ! & * !* ! - & $ ! *&
* &+ ! % - ! - &+ ++ ! -, , !& . &
+ ! >% + $ & % ! & $ %%& !
) & +% ! -, ) * &, ! $ ! *!
-, "+ & ' ! ") *& # '.D@ ,$ & 37 % ! $ *
"- -, + ' + &$ &> & &!
- $ ) + !) + & ! ! > !.D= Q& ** & + $
& ! & ** & * ! * ! !C< ! 7%
* &+ 7%& ! ! %! ! &% * (==< $
+ & & , #! 3) &+ .C( +% !J -
$ & ! & + & % - & 3) &+ $
+ ! +% & &, * &3 ) 3 .C/ %
7 ! ! *& ) + + 2(
*+ , & ! !& ++ ) &+ .C6
+% !J - $ & + &# ! + - - & $

A ! , * + ! B %& & ! !- &
+ !* - !$ & &+ . &% *
67
Sunday Times 21.2.93.
68
See Franklin, B. and Petley, J. (1996) ‘Killing the age of innocence: newspaper reporting of the death
of James Bulger’ in Pilcher and Wagg (eds.) Thatcher’s Children: Politics, Childhood and Society in the
1980s and 1990s London: Falmer
69
See Kember, S. (1995) ‘Surveillance, Technology and Crime: the James Bulger Case’ in Lister, M.
(ed,), The Photographic Image in Digital Culture London: Routledge; See also Young A 1996 Imagining
Crime: Textual Outlaws and Criminal Conversations London: Sage, Chapter 5
70
See Warner, M. 1994 Making Monsters London: Vintage
71
See Mann, K. and Roseneil, S. (1994) ‘Some Mothers Do Ave Em: Backlash and the Gender Politics of
the Underclass Debate’ Journal of Gender Studies 3: 317-331
72
See James, A. and Jenks, C. (1996) ‘Public Perceptions of Childhood Criminality’ British Journal of
Sociology 47 (2); Fionda, J. (1998) ‘R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Venables
and Thompson: The age of innocence?- the concept of childhood in the punishment of young offenders’
Child and Family Law Quarterly 10 (1): 77-87; Gelsthorpe, L. and Morris, A. (1999) ‘Much ado about
nothing- a critical comment on key provisions relating to children in the Crime and Disorder Act’ Child
and Family Law Quarterly 11 (3): 209-221
73
See Barker, M. and Petley, J. (eds.), Ill Effects: The Media/Violence Debate London: Routledge ;
Buckingham, D. (1996) Moving Images: Understanding Children’s Emotional Responses to Television
Manchester: Manchester University Press
I &* + , # % $ & $ & $ ! ,& % & !.

& +% !J - ' &** ** , & $ &!
+ & &, 7% ! ! # */C@6<<
% ! /<<<< % *& + & ! & .C9 ! *& % -
+ &$ ) , & ! -, & . ? &! *? &)
&** , & ! " ) - + & % - , + ,
$ ) ) $ ! $ - + &# ! -, $ ,!! $ !&
*(<'.C; -& +% $ $ ! ,: ! %& ,
* &! $ ! $ , - ) $ ! , &> ! + &.
+ * -, 7 ! *& - ! -
& , & ! -, %& + ! # & %) * *
+ && ! & %.
,$ & !, &! & %& - ! % - *

% * +% !J - , % $ & #! ! *
+% $ !$ &# . *& $ !
% ! ) ! !! & &**CD %& $ &! &
& - . $ +% ! -, * & %& ! &
*& + * + , + + - & ! & %% & & . % I &$ : !
%& ) !E" $ ! &, + , - + ! $ .'
+ ! + ) ) &+ , + + *
# ! ! %% & ! - & + +- & * % - ! ,
,+ , +% !J - . 3 $ & ** )
! &+ !, ! $ $! , & ! & & $
%%& %& & + ) & * & &
* ,.
& -3 * + & & *

3 3! + * 7 && * ,
* & & ! + &# & % $ &! $ * ! &- ! "%&) ,
$ -, ' %& >%& * &+ *& + + ! 7% & . &
*& + ) ! ! $ ++ ! + &! & $
!* ,+ , &! & - && ,+ ! ++ & ! ,
$ & - & && + . ! &* & + !
& & ) - 7 % ! - !& **& ! +
* 7%& &% !- # * & &.
74
The coupons stated, ‘Dear Home Secretary, I agree with Ralph and Denise Bulger that the boys who
killed their son James should stay in jail for LIFE.’ Hansard, H.C., Vol. 229, Col. 684 (July 27, 1993).
75
Thompson & Venables (Recommendations as to Tariffs to the Secretary of State for Home Affairs)
[2000] s. 18.
76
V v United Kingdom (and T v United Kingdom) 2000.
!- & ! & + * + ! *& ! + ! )

** & + 1 & ! ) %& && &!
+% & * & **& ! + * 7%& . (/ *
+ # % %& ) *& $ (/A6B>A9B &
& ! * & &! & + % 3 ! % & (<A(B
"& ' & . $ )& & (<A/B * ! ( % #
*": * ' & ! &! & *, & (<A/B &
- 4 & ! %& !5 + ' *! ,-
%& &) !. 3! + - *! & *
3 &: ! 4%& % & + + % & !5.
I & 3! ) "& & ' "& ' *& ! + *
7%& + $ & * ! ! ! ** * .(/
$ &*& ! !.CC & & ! & $ && !
*, * & & & * % &% * +% & %& *
% * & 3! + $ %% & ! - % & &) &
& !!$.
&+ % &% 7 : *$ , &&' %% $

! -, + ! . - + ! & + * % % &
%& - )! ,$ & # , & ) ,+ % &*& +
&. + ! ) ! - & ) ! %& + !) *& +
& $, & ! & $ , & *& + ! & , & !
% &, %% , & *& ! & &) & * &! & + ,
) ! + + ) !3 * *& 3 . -
&& # - * %% +%, + !
!! - ) 3 + * & * & & (<
& - * $ & $ ,$ & * %&
) & OC=
+ : + ! '& $ 7 &- & 7 *

& & %% & * 3 -
77
Butler-Sloss said at the time : “the qualifications set out in Article 10(2) were as relevant as the rights
set out in Article 10(1), including the prohibition on the use of one party’s convention rights to injure the
convention rights of others. The qualification of the right of freedom of expression included the
protection of information received in confidence so that you cannot have regard to Article 10 without
having regard at the very least to Article 8 on privacy. The rights under Articles 2 and 3 were also
relevant, and are not capable of derogation, with very serious consequences to claimants if they were
breached.”
78
Cream Holdings Limited and Others v Banerjee and Others [2004] UKHL 44. This considered Interim
injunctions and the threshold test which has to be satisfied before a Court may grant an interim injunction
under Section 12 of the HRA. The judgment appears to have reversed the perceived dilution of s12 (3)
and to have put some substance back into the provisions of s12.
79
The Express called the ruling "an abominable crime", the Mirror called it "a sorry day for the freedom
of the public to receive information"
3! &,' & % * &, $ &

$ & , + * & -, $ &% 3 & %& ! .
- ) ! $ &+ % !&
8 ++ $ $ - + * , !! ,$ %
!& - $ * 8%& + . ,
& !* * %& % -, %& ! 3! & &$
%& ) ) - + & ,.
, ++ & $ ! + 3
** ) , % $ & $ !) * * &+ ,. ) !
*& & - !& $ *& + * -& +% !
J - . & & ! 3 ) & * & % *
% &, * *! * &+ . % & + *
" $ &! & ' 3 , *& -
$ 3& ! * $ * ! ! . +
% + $ & K ! ! + & *& % -
* &+ - +% ! J - .@< + * &
& -3 &% & ! ** ) , & !&
$ , ! ! * * &+ -, +
!- ! % I& & - , + K - !
* &+ - +% !J - ! -& + - #.
" &) ' ++ ! &, +
&% & 3 ** ) , *& - ! & ) - * &
,+ , %& ) $ - +% * * , *
& .
+
* +% !J -& & ,Q & $&
& &) & )! & A B + ,$ & - ! -,
3 . & $, & &# % ++ ! + "* &
*& + 3 ! &, ) ! & ,% ! &
& ++ ,.'@( & * %& $ ! ) -
$ ! # $ ! * %& - ! * &+
- % ! & & $ ** $ !+ , !
# ! $ $ -& &
. & - : & &*& & ! - &
80
A front-page report in the Sunday Express informed readers that magazines like Spain’s Interviou,
Germany’s Stern and Bild, Italy’s Espresso, Gente and Oggi and Japan’s Focus were offering large sums
of money for photographs of Thompson and Venables, representations which would ‘slap a £50,000 price
on their heads’ (24.6.2001 ‘We’ll show Bulger faces’).
81
‘Editor probed over Bulger story’ Evening Standard 23.6.2001.
*! &
,- & % & %& * ! % $ & &
! - $ % - ! %&) %& 7 + ! ! &
&! , & * & !. % * & ++ $
,* & ! * - !& ! -
! + * & > % $ + , % %
+ + &+ .@/ * &+ - + ! & !$ & ) +% ,
- + - +% - %& & +- & *% %
-& # 3 ! - &! ! & + .
& 7 +% % & * & *
* & & $ $ & - ! *& + % - -,
& ! ! - $! , ) - & .
+ &, & & + I & & *& + % *&& + ) !
Q &+ , & ! $M !.@6
$ -" % - ! * &+
$ & - * +% !J - , & *& & I &!
& . & ,Q & ? &! Q ! + ! -& !
3 ! #! $ %%& 7% . +
+ ' !* !! % % &' ! % - ! ,
"$ +, &* # , ) ! - ! % !
- ! # & * + '.@9 ! + &, @;
! !* * 3 & ! & J + !, *
-& +% . +*& - )& * -! *
&, &! $ ! - %% ! ** %& & !
+ & +% ! % &! ! + . %& & % & !
$ - % ! & ! & , ! !$ % ! $ -
+ & .
* !$ $ && & $ %& )

- + ! *& %& * & ** ! & % , # !
) * -, %& O && % & & &
!- % % %& ! , * ! )! .
% - & $ )&$ & + &% & & &
82
See Hamelink, C.J. (2000) The Ethics of Cyberspace London: Sage Chapter 6, Akdeniz, Y., Walker, C.
and Wall, D. (eds.), (2000) The Internet, Law and Society London: Longman
83
http://www.petitiononline.com/Jamie91/petition.html is the address of a petition posted by ‘Marie
Gloria, Florida, USA’ which demands for the release and anonymity rulings to be undone. Messages
posted by signatories include the following: ‘Attack these 2 monsters as soon as their photo is released to
the public’ (USA), ‘Where are they? Tell Me! I have always wanted to track down and kill a baby
murderer’ (UK), ‘Who cares if they were rehabilitated, kill 'em anyway… I hope you hunt them down
and rape them’ (US). Threats are also made against Thompson and Venables’ family and lawyers as well
as Lord Woolf.
84
‘Editor probed over Bulger story’ Evening Standard, 23.6.2001.
85
Channel 4 Dispatches, ‘Unforgiven: The Boys who Murdered James Bulger’
! ! & && , ! ,& & ) **& ! + * 7%&

- % - , && ! + & & 7 ). + !!
& ! + - * ! - $ $ 7& + . && , )
%& ) %& &- % - # , & &+ **
$ ! - & , " '+ & - !
% * *>& . ! -* * + & ) ,
! & %& *& + &+ ! ) *
* *& + && ! & %O & * & %% *& )&+
& !& ** , * && , +.
&+ * %& - + * * , * *& &% & 3

& ! ** ) , + ! $ &# ** ) ,. *
)&+ %& ! & ) + & *
&,' 3 $ !+ %& - )
$ ! ) # *7 3 &3 & ! .
%& &+ + +% - +% + . $ ) & ,$
*& + $ &# * # ! % $ + ! - *& ! % , + &
& % - & - &% & * &+ ! &+ 3
, + *& & + & , & ++ &
!) . !! & & " ! & +' *
;<' ! D<' & *3 & & , !& % - ,.
***
! ! "# $ % "#% &"##! ! "! ' % %
"##( " " ) * ## +" #" % % , %,# -% " %+
! &% % ,#%( %+ # ! &% ," " "!( " "& % +%
%* + ' % ! %+ &% % - % "#
, %& ! -%#- * ##. %* , % , & !%+ ! ! "#
"##( " "& " #% %+ " % , " " # + " %+ !
! "# %* - " "- % " %* ! ! % "& * - (
"#&","& ( % " , #& " %+ "&& !$ - + / #(
"&/ !)*" ' #/ & #(' &% ! ! , + & #( "&& , " # " ( %+
*% #!0 1 ! & %
# &" + % 2345 ## " +"& " " #( 54 & (

&% %, % *" " ! ! "# *" % % ,% ! & % %+
" &% ," ( "! % " " &% ," ( + % " " %#! *
%*# ! " % " % * #! % ##"## " &% ," ( %
" ! ," (" " , & " ," ! ( (* % ! ! % "-
"& ! " ( ! - .".- ## " %#! ' - % (*
,% % " ! ! "# % " %+ % ., #& +% " % * & ' + "!
, #&' *% #! "- "! " " "# ++ & % " , & %+ & 2
+ "#+ %+ * & (' " , "& & #" ! *"

#" % " ! 6 !% ' ! ! "# *" &% !% !' + %
"&& , ! " #' " " $ % !% !#(",%& (, "#) %
" % %" ! %+ # !&% ," ," !+% " * # % ! % #
7 # 7 % % , -" "++" +% ,% " * *% #!
, #&#( " % & ! % ' "&& % ! +% " % *" +"&
% ,% " " % %1 % " &% ," ( 5
! %*" ! ! ! "# & " ! %* - &% %+ & (

&% + ! "# +% " % +% , % "# + %*"!"( &% ! !
&"# !" %& " " " % -% ,#"& +% &" %
&% + ! "# +% " % ' # #" % "- . " # & " #(. ,, ! %&
" (" ! " %! & !" ! ! "# , % %
† Dirk P.F. Meerburg Advocaat De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek, London

1
Percival v Wright [1902] 2 CH 421
2
L.C.A. Verstappen and P.H.C. Schriks, in: Misbruik van voorwetenschap, 1989, p. 11
& " ! 8& " & 239: 9 &% " ' %, " 8& " " !
%- "- #" - #( #%* % %! & #" #" %
!" %&
8& " $ %* % 8 !" )' %#!
&
8& " *% #!' " +% " - ( #% #+. #"
# " ! # ! ! % &% " " "#, % % % ! ! "#
& ,% % *" % #( ,% !' ( & # #" % ' 23;3
" &# ! % +#( ! & ! - #%, %+ & !

! "# # + % & , % # , !"( " ! % # "
%+ & " % % " % ( " & -
! ! "# ' % " %+ ! +% " % $ & )' &"

"##( ! & !" ( % ## %+ & " & #" %"
&% ," ( ( " , % * %' !% %' ,% % %+ , & + & +% " %
* & #" % " &% ," ( % % & * & % "##( %*
*% #! # #(' + "! , #&' % "- " + &" ++ & % "
, & %+ & % & "(% &% & ! % #-" &% ," (
% +"##* &%, %+ ! ! "# # # " ! " (% * %
! ,% %+ % ., #&' , & - +% " %
< %+ " % * ( ! "! # * % #( %! & ! " " #" - #(

#" " *" " # (" %% ,#"& " % & (" !
! " # ( %+ & # *" " ! ( % &% % $ %
#" ! " ! # * ) " " "& % ++ & ! ( , % ! ,% %+
! +% " % &% #! "& "##( + # # " , & *% #! "
+#& % %+ &% % & -"# %+ # -" " : *" "#% " !
" "##%* ! ! "# ( ,#%( &% #! , %- ! " %%! *% & -
" ! " ++ & # * "& - " ! *" !=
% ' #"*( " ! " *% #! ! ++ & # % " # * " !" "

&" ! ( ! ! "# ' " " "& % % %& 8& " " "##(
++ & ! * % ," %* "& % 0 ! ( " #'
7 1 !7 ," ( % #( "&& ! "##( &% .," ( %+ , % "& %
3
Section 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act 1934 provides that the executive can issue regulations to
prohibit certain manipulations. Consequently, in 1940 SEC rule 10b-5 was introduced, which forms the
basis of most actions regarding insider dealing in the US. Other insider dealing rules may be found in the
Williams Act 1968 and the Insider Trading Sanctions Act 1984.
4
G. Rietkerk, Effectentransacties door ingewijden, NV 1984, p. 182; Prof. Manne, Insider trading and the
stock market, 1966; H. Berkman and A.C.C. Herst, Handel met voorwetenschap", NV 1988, p. 21
5
Berkman and Herst, ibid.
2005] Insider Dealing: A Dutch Perspective 97
! +% " % " ( - +% *% #! , % " #( "- "! "

" "& % " " , & . " ! + " * &" ' %* &% #! "
1 (>?
, " ( " % * ( ! ! "# &% ! ! !" # "

!" " - % 0 " % &% %+ "++" &", "# "
- % 8, & " #- #,#"( + #! #- #,#"( + #! " ! (
, % * % " ",, %, " %+ " +% " % "!-" " &% !" (
" % % ! - %+ ! ! "# " " " & %+ +"
*% %+ &", "# " # &% ," % " # % "
&", "# +% %+ % - % " !
% $ # ! &% ," )% , - ! ! "#
& % ," ( "* % % &% ! ! %+ ! ! "#

%+ 23@4 23@9 ,% ' % % , %,% ! %
%! & " , %- % & "# %! ' , % ! ! "#
&% !! +%##%* 8
2 '* % ( % ## # ! " %+ " &% ," (' % " "

% % %#!' % " ! & !% % (% ## " '* #
! ,% %+ % .! &#% ! +% " % " " # %+ + & % %
, %+ % ' * & &" " % " #( &% ! ! % "- +# & !
, & %+ & "+ , #& ! &#% ' * ## , ! ("
"8 %+ *% ( " , % " ! " "8 + %+
244'444 % %+ " "8 %+ +% " % %+ +
1
%( !' + "8 " % % % " 244'444' % "
&% " % %+ , "#
5 ,% "( & , " " ! !" " +% ",,#&" % %+

" &#
, %,% ! 8 *" % * #&% ! ( "## # " % % +% " % 7" "

# %+ + & % % , %+ % 7 *" ! ! % *" " !' " *% #!
" " , %,# " ! ! % % " # -" +% " % " " # %+
+ & % % ,% % * ,, !.%++ *% #! % , " # #%'
"#! - % %+ % % 8 ,#+ !- % * # "#
&% (" " #' % % 0 ,% *" % +%##%* ! (
" (# #" - "& % @
6
Dutch Company Law Commission, report concerning abuse of inside information , Staatsuitgeverij, The
Hague, p. 4; Prof Manne, ibid.
7
In 1987, in the explanatory memorandum of the bill which would lead to a prohibition of insider dealing
under criminal law, the government mentioned that the reasons that the Commission report did not lead to
legislation were "the complexity of the issue and doubts about the feasibility and urgency of a legislative
%##%* , #&" % %+ % % 0 ,% ' "+% % !

! & % * ,,% " ! %,,% %+ " , % % %+ ! ! "#
*" &% ! - + % %+ %,,% &% & ! ! " ! ! "# "(
! " #' 8, + #! &% #! % " * *" +"&
& "( % " # #" - "& % , & A " ( !! " %
%* - *" " %# % &% #! % +% ! , -" #"* " "! "
%& 8& " !% " % ( % #(" ! "1% (%+ " # !"
!" %& 8& " * " " ' "& % ! , -" #"* *% #!
"! / " %! " -" " #( ,#"& ! % $+% ) " ' %*
*% #! " ( 7 1 !7 ," ( + ! % " , & + & &% .," ( *"
! +% " % > %* *% #! &"#& #" " ( !" " " !> # " #(
, -" #"* ! ! % , %- ! , %, +% &% !
! "#
& < ! " & ?@.;99 %+ 23?@; ",, " % + , & %+ %, "
# #" % " " ! ! "# , % % %+ ! ! "# *" %
, " #( ! ! %, % & - % ' % ## % % ! *% #! "
& " " %+ &% + ! & & &", "# " & ' *" %
" , % % % "# " '! ! % +"& # " + " & %+ & &% ," '
" " %+ & "##"* 3
23@@' %, " % % , # !" 7 %, " %! %+ % ! & +%

& " "& % 724 ,,# " (, & ,# 3 %+ %!
, %- ! ! +%##%*
7 (, % * % &% % ,% % %+ +% " % ' 8 &

, %+ % % &" ( % ! ' * & % , #& " ! * &
#" % " &% ," ( % % " & % %" ( - %+
"# % " ' * & , & . - ' % #! + "
+ % &" ( % ' ! & #( % ! & #(' " ( " "& % * & &
+% " % !' " ! % #! + " + % - +% " % %
" % , % % " "( , %+ + % +% +% " %
&% , #& 7
, %- % #" 8&# - #( % ! & % " ! ,#%( %+ " # !

&% ," ( % " & , % + " +% " "& % * &
&% #! - % , & % %+ " %+ " +% " % "!-" "
regulation".
8
Journal Officiel de la République Française (JORF), 29 September 1967
9
Prof. Dr. E. Wymeersch, in: Misbruik van Voorwetenschap, 1989, p. 57 - 58
10
77/534/EEC: Commission Recommendation of 25 July 1977 concerning a European code of conduct
relating to transactions in transferable securities.
23@3' % !% %& 8& " !&!! % ,# %* %! # %!

" ' %! # %! *" " &%! %+ ! "# ,% ! % ! & % " ! & "
,#%( %+ # ! &% ," ( " #" ' % ," & 23;4+% +
%! & ! " , % % % ! ! "#
# " ' B # " ! !" %& 8& " ! % +%

% 8' !" %& 8& " *" %, " ! ( %& " % +%
& "! $ ) %& " % *" "
#+. #" ' , -" ( ! &% ," *% #! % " #
" ', " %* & ( &" 1& % # " ! #
$ )' " " ! !+ % % " #' " + %+
% #" % " % ! %" "& %+ &% "& - .".- %& " % &
"& %+ &% "& &% #! # "! % " , " !' " + ' % # " #(' % "
" % %+ # " $ " +% & ! ! .# %+ &% ," ()
, -" #"* &% / & %+ % " ! ( &% "& "# # %+ "
, -" ( & " %& " % * " ! ! ( " ( " 7 %+ 7 " !
++ & "+ "! " " #"
&%! %+ &% ! & % #( ",,# ! % , %+ % "# " "! " ! %

%+ %& " % 23;@ !" %& 8& " %! & !
%* %! # %! ' " #" % #" % %! # %! ! - #%, ! (
% !% %& 8& " %! # %! *" % " ! & % *% #!
% " " ( +% " % %* % " " # %+ ,% % *
# ! &% ," (! & #(% ! & #( ++ & " "& % &% ," (0
&
! " ##$
" %- % ! %& 8& " #" % ",,# ! % & " "& % %

&", "# " & " "! " ! ! & % &% % - % % &
&", "# " *" % 1& % " ( ! ! "# #" % " % "#
! - #%, % "- " % +% # #" - "& % ( ! %+
23;4 23;@' " ## *" , %,% !' &% " " ,% % %+ !
! "# + $" " ) "-(! " " % ! " # ( %+ " , % % !
& "##"*' & ," #" "& ! " &# 99?" & "# %!
8 %+ , %- % , %- ! ! " +%##%*
2 * %' "- ! +% " % ' &% &# ! % ++ & " " "& %
#" ! & # ! % " 8& " , - ! (
" ' * ##' + " + &" #+ % " "& % ' , ! ("
"8 &" & " % %+ *% ( " " ! " + %+ + + &" % (' %
(% %+ ,
5 " , "( - % * %' "- !

+% " % ' &% &# ! % ++ & " " "& % + % #" ! %
" 8& " " # !% ! %+ #" ! ' + " + &"
#+ % " "& %
9 ! +% " % %*#! %+ " , & "#& & " & " !

&% ," ( % # "# , % % * & & #" ' %
"! "! &
" , & %+ * & , % * % " %*#! %+

, & "#& & " & %* % % #! " % " #( , & "
% , #& " ! " &" % ' * % "& %+
&% + ! "# ( % "- % (% !" & &# %+ &% + ! C" !
! &#% %+ * & " % " #( 8, & ! % "- "

+# & % , & %+ &
: ! " (* %' % #(! ,% %+ ! +% " % " !

"! ' "! %%! +" % 8& " " - & %+ &# '
% , " #
% % " " "& % &% &# ! ! % ++ & ! % +%

#" ! "( , " # ! , %- % ## " "& % ++ & !%
" 8& " #" ! " " ! ! % "- " ,#"& 7
#" ! 7 " ! *% #! +% 1& % , % % %+ " &# 99?"
& "# %! ' - + " ," ( &% & ! *" " #-"
#%&" ! % ! %+ #" ! #" #(' % % " !
! "# % " +% 8& " ' "& +% #" ! $ -
& % * # #%&" ! #" ! )*% #! ## , " # !
& & "##"* $" &# 99?" $5) & "# %! )' - + #"* %+
1 !& % * +% 8& " #%&" ! *% #! % , % !
! "# " ' , & %+ # #" % "& "##( % %,% & %
(%+ & " ! +% + " & "# "
##$
#" " % %+ & & *" 8, ! & # "#&% (

"& % % " &# 99?" *" &% ! ! %% -" ' %% %"! " ! # "-
, #& , % & % * ! ++ & # " %+ , %- " " & "
&% + ! "# ( *" "& ! ,, .%++ %+ " ! ," ( *" % 8,#& #(
,% !' - % "( "- &" ( 7 ++ & 7'
* & "( &# ! ! & " ! ! & "& % , %- % *" "#% &% ! !
"! / " &" " ! * % "!- ! " ! ," ( " " " " "& %
* & #" *% #! % * "- &% &# ! !' *% #! % , " #

7 ++ & 7 & % 2 &%- , % * % " " % , %
&% &# ! " " "& % ' !% % &%- " , % * % !% %,,% 22
< 29 %- 23;3' %, " % & #"!%, ! " ! & - ! ! %

&%.% ! " , % % %+ ! ! "# % % " %+
%, " % ( 25 #!% #( % % & " % ! ! "#
, %- % ' & " "!! % %+ 7 % 7 % , " 7 , & "#
& & " & "! &% ," ( % # "#, % 7 "!! % *" %
" & " " , %- % *% #!"#% ",,#( % & ! ( "
* % &% ," % # "# , % $ ! & - + % 7 %+
& 7)
% &
% ,% " %+ *#( %! & ! ! ! "# , %- % &"

* &" +%##%* + % # %+ &" * ## %*' *" %
" (, &"#&" %+ ! ! "# " ! " " #' " ( 8, * ",,(
" % , % & % 0! & % % , & " + ,#"&
+ & %#% ( &% ," ( "! " % "-( * " '

"1% " %#! " &( * &% ," (0 "
! & ! ,% #( % + "!! % "#&", "# < #( &% #!
" &% 8 & ! +"& # *" " ! " " * "
*" % " ,#"& "!! % % * & " *% #! , %- ! "
"!! % "# % ! " ! #%" % ! & % *" "& ! % % %+
$, #& % , -" ,#"& )' * & "#% * , & *" %
! ! !"( #" ##," , " , + !" , -"
,#"& %* - ' (* #("##%+ %, % " "#-"# %+
" *" & #%* " " %& , & " *"
+% $1% #() ! ! " " !
* (D ' % %+ "1% " %#! %+ ' *% #! "- % ##
" " %! % , & !%*
8 !"(' " , #" *" ! +% " %+ "! ' % "

" &( ,"& " *" " " ! +% " # &% ," ( " ! " " "
*% #! " ,#"& "#% % ! " 7 &% ! % %+ " ##
1& % ! & % " % & * ## "! % #(7 A " !!
% "( *" " " " ! " %#! *% #! % * ## % ," & ,"
11
Prof M.S. Groenhuijsen, Strafbaar misbruik van voorwetenschap en "Chinese Walls", Amsterdam 1991,
p. 44
12
Council Directive (EEC) 89/592
& " , % #! , & %% < " !"("

, #" ' " ! * (D %#!: 2 ##% " '" " # %+
* & %& , & ,# ! 8& " % ,& % " ! " !"
/ ( % " ' * & #! " %++ & "# ,% % , #&
,% & % + " / ( ( , % & % 0 %++ & ' & "#, %& ! *
" !
" ! * (D *" "&/ ! ( !" & % +

" & ' * & "#" &% ! ! " % ., #& +% " % "
! ,% "# %+ " ! * (D *" % , & - " 8,
&% #! ( &% &% #! % "( + , #&" % %+ +% " % *% #!
"- ! - %& , & , % !%* +"& ' &% .",,% ! 8,
&% #! % " % * +% " % *% #! "- "! " ( ++ & " "##
% ' % 8, -% & ! &% "! & %, % " % ! " #(
%+ " ! * (D 0 "& % ' * & "( % "( % "-
%+ "## " %#! *" &#" * " (
&% + ! "# ( *" "& ! + + 1! "! %- !
",, "#' & , % $* & % #( # % ,% %+ #"*' % %
+"& )' " ! & % * & &" " " , % " (' / " ! ",, "#
1! ' # " *" & "( % %* % $ ) " % ., #&
+% " % *% #! "- #! % " ,*" ! % !%* *" ! , & %- '
" !$ ) " + ", ! ( , % ++ & " "& % *" " ! &
&% / & %+ " " "& % 29 &% #! % %* ( ,% & % '
& " ! * (D E "&/ "#
&% #! " ! " * " ",, ! &" *" % ! ! "# "

+% %+ " " , #" % " % +% %+ "- % ' % * & "(
% "( % &"#' * & " ( - *" % ,% !
#" ! " "
'
& ,%# &"# " # " !! % &% %+ &" " "

! ",,% " #( " " # %+ 1! ' , %- %
,% ! ! "# $ ( &% ,% " ! 233= & %
, - % %+ & "! ' 7 & & 7)' *" " ! ! 2333
++ & %+ %* * , %- % , & + &"##( " " *% #! %
& "( " #-" % .! &#% ! +% " % *% #!' ,%
, #&" % ' # " % " +"##%+ , & %+ #-" & (
% ' ! % %* " "& %+ &% + ! "# (*" %- !
" # %+ & " "#"' + & % %+ " &# :? %+

& & , %- !
13
HR 27 June 1995, NJ 1995 / 662
2 ,% ! % "& " ! " (, % * % " ! +% " % %

%% ++ & " " "& % % +% #" !
" & # !% " & 8& " * & &% !

FG % % " 8& " * & #%&" ! % ! %+
#" ! " ! * & "##%* ! ( " % ' %
& * & " " ! % # ! % #( % &
8& " C%
& * % -"# "#% ! ! ( -"# %+

& % ! ! "
5 ! +% " % %*#! %+ " , & "#& & " & "!

# "#, % ' &% ," (% % ' %* & & #" %
"! "! &
"* & % , #&#(! &#% !C" !
* & ! &#% "( " % " #( 8, & ! % "- "

+# & % , & %+ & ' " !# %+
! & % %+
9 , % % %+ + & % !% % ",,#(
" % ! " ( * %' % #( ! ,% %+ !

+% " % "! "! ' "! %%! +" %
8& " " - & %+ &# C
% # "#, % ' &% ," (% % * % ,#%(

* % " &% &# % % ++ & " % %+ " "& %
% #(! ,% %+ ! +% " % * "! % &
"! C" !
& % , % &% &# ! % ++ & " " "& % * "

- * % + #+ ## " ! % # " % * & "# "!( 8 ! %
% % * & % %*#! %+ , & "#& & " &
% ! & % 5
" ' 2333' # #" % %! & !" &% !, %- % ' " &# :?"
%+ & & ' * & &% " ",% % % ,.%++ ! ," '% %
"!- % " % ++ & & " " "& % ," ! " , & - !
", "# " % (, %- % %+ " &# 99?" %+ & "# %! '
* & !! % 8,#& #(, % ,, .%++
% #! % ! " " &# :? %+ & & !% % / &" "# (

* ! +% " % " ! &% &# ! ! " "& % " " "
# "# ( "( "& %+ ,% % * % ! &% " !
+% " % "! " & (" !" % ! &% ' % (0 "#+'
, & " % ## & & ( ! +% " % #! ( + ! &%
"( " ! % (' % " " "& % &% &# ! ! ( &% !
! & % &% #! &% "& "#%++ & &% #! &# " #(& " , % #
#" % % "1 % + " & "# % * & " % "! " !% '
"!- % (% + " & "& - * 8 , % %+ " &# :? $9)$ )%+
& & &% + % + " & "# % * %.&"## !
A "## * !- % " "! " ! % "
% "& - * & "( # "! #" % "- ! +% " % " !
& " & "! ! - % %+ & % " 8 , +%
,% % ' - % # -" % " " * %# "( "! %
! ,% %+ ! +% " %
"#% # -" % % " " " " &# :? %+ & &' #

, ! & % ' "( " ! % &% " " & " " %+ 8 " % "# ( -
% & " 1 !& % ! ! "# "( % ,% !' "
" "& % % " 8& " & 1 !& % + % ! #" !
* ## &% ! !" & "#%++ & $ - % ' "! !#(' , % ( -
%, % & & %++ & * ## #" - #(#%*)
& " % ! ! "# , %- % * " % "##- " !

%+ , %%+ +% , &, % & % - # ', % & % & 2333 "- "!
8! # "- % &% - & % ' " ! " %!( %+ &" #"* *"
! - #%, ! &% & , &+& 1& & " "*" ! %+ ,#%( "
%, % 2: %* - ' % "1
% &" " " * * % +% ,% & %
" *" &% ," " # * &" % 8 " ' " " ' " 7&", " %+
! (7 *" " ! ' *" B%% "' +% < %+ #, '
* % *" "&& ! %+ "- " ! +% " % "## !#( & - ! + %
," '* %" *" " , - % ( %" !%+ " % # ! &% ," ('
! %# "( "+ B%% " , & " ! ! %# " +% " " % %+
=44'444' *" " % & ! " " , #& %++ *% #! "! +%
&% ," ( " ' &" +" # ! "+ " * ! #( , # ! "#' % +
" & " ! ",, "#' &" , #& , % & % +" #! % , %- "
B%% " "! " ( ! +% " % % %+ ,, "# ! & ! ! "
& & " "# - ! & , ! ( , % & % ' %* " B%% "
#+ "! " " - +% " "& % " ! "! " ! " +%
14
Amsterdam District Court 11 July 2001, JOR 2001 / 162 (Content)
7! & % 7 *" % &% - & 2= " " %* ! ++ & #( & &"

, % , % & % $" !' % " #" 8 ' % "&& !' * % * ## "- %
!+ ! #+ % &% " ! , )
< 9 & 5445' %, " % & # "!%, ! "

& - 2? !
& - &% " " , & ,# ' * & " #" % " !
% % #" % * & " ' + % 25 <& % 544: % *" !' ! & #(
",,#&" # -" % " < " 25 <& % 544:'
" %+ %, " % * ! " % #" % % "-
,# ! ! & - " % "## #" % #" ! ! ! %
! "!# ' ! "+ # #" % " % & " #"
,# " % %+ " & - * ## # " " !#(! ++
* " ! % ! ! "#
+ ##! & , % %+ " & - " ! ,#&" % *% #!

8& ! &%, %+ " &# %* - ' % ,% " %+ ," & #" '
+ %+ * & - (! + % %+ ! +% " % ' " &# 2$2)%+
" & -
2 7 ! +% " % 7 "## " +% " % %+ " , & " * &

" % "! , #&' #" ' ! & #(% ! & #(' % % % %
%+ + " & "# % %% % % + " & "#
" !* & ' + * "! , #&' *% #! # #( % "- " + &"
++ & % , & %+ % + " & "# % % , & %+
#" ! ! -" - + " & "#
& & # / " # -" +% " % 7&% #! "-

+# & 7 % , & %+ & " % , %- "
7# # %%! %+ " + &" ++ & 7 & / "( - %
/ "##( & ! " ! "! 8, %, % " % ++ & %+
+% " % &% & !
% ' % % " " & - %! &

" / %+ &" "# ( * ! +% " % " ! #-"
" "& % # -" 8 %+ " &# 5 %+ " & - , %- !
" "## , % " (, % + ! % &% !

," " ", * % ,% ! +% " % + % "
+% " % ( "&/ % ! ,% %+' % ( ( % "&/ %
15
Amsterdam Court of Appeal, 10 December 2004, JOR 2005/39 (Boonstra)
16
Directive 2003/6/EC
! ,% %+' +% %* "&&% % +% "&&% %+ " ! ," ('

! & #( % ! & #(' + " & "# % * & " +% " %
#"
"( &% ,% ! ! ++ & # "# "!( 8, & ! ( , #&

,% & % ! * ' % % #( , %- " "&& ! "!
! +% " % ' "#% , %- " , % -%#- ! "& "##( ! "
+% " % ( ++ & # -" " "& % 2@
% " , & %+ " & - " # % " %+

! & % * & , & %+ & ( *% #! %- ,% ! &#% %+
! +% " % &%## & ! " ' " " # %+ &" '
& " &# :? %+ & & 8, #( " " % # -"
* & ! & % , & *% #! %- ,% ! &#% & ! "+
# #" % ' , " !% % ",, " ! !' "!- & ( %
%+ %, " & #" % $7 7) " !' ,% %"/ %
* ! +% " % , &+& % % #-" ! "
& -' " 7 +% " % , &+& % % "##%* " &% &# % %
! "* " % ,"& % , & 7 2; ! "& " '
#" % " % $" ! !)"!- & ' " " 7&% ! " %
+ # " % % %+ ! & % %+ ,"& % , & B '
&% - #(' &% & ! " &% #! , %-! " "# +% % .! &#%
"!- & " +% %! + ! % / +% " % % , &+&
% ,#( % "##%* " &% &# % % ! "* " % ,"& % , & 723
%* - ' &% "! & % ( 8, %, % &" %* " %
"#*"( " ( % " # $ - * + %+ ! )* " ,"& & "
+% " % *% #! "- "! % , &
* ## "#% &"##! " " &# - &" "-

" - #( ! & !" " " , #" % ' " " ! ! "#
& "- % " % % ,% ! #" ! "
& - %* - / " % ,# " , &+&
,% % %+ " " , #" % , &' &# = %+ "
& - , %- ! " HF G " "## , % " ( , % +%
" " " , #" % 7
&# 2 %+ " & - &% " "# (! + % %+

" " " &# 2$5)%+ " & - " %+ , & + &
" & %+ " " , #" % " ! + !
17
This requirement of causality also removes the need for a "Chinese walls" exemption as a trading
division of a properly partitioned (financial) institution should not be able to "use" any inside information
held by any of its other divisions.
18
CESR's Advice on Level 2 Implementing Measures for the Proposed Market Abuse Directive, December
2002
19
CESR's Market Abuse Consultation Feedback Statement, December 2002
. &% ! & ( " , % ' % , % "& &%##" % " % ' % & "
!% " ,% % %- ,,#( %+ % ! " ! +% " + " & "#
* & " ++ & %+ + 8 ' ! & #(% ! & #(' , & "
% "# , & % & " % +" "! &% ! % '
. ( % ## %+ + " & "# " &#% %+ "
* ++ & %+ # "! - % "& % " %+ &#%
, & '
. " "!-" " %+ %&&" % "#% #" "&& % "! % "#%
#& % & ! " ( -% & " %, % " % " + " & "# $%
! & #( " % )* # "- , - % #( " ,% % %
" + " & "# " ! , %+ / #(+ % ,"& %+
%, % -% & ! % , & %+ " ' * % "-
#" % #(! &#% ! " &% +#& %+ % , #& " , %,
" ! ++ & - *"(
% !% " ,% - ! - #%, " " " , #" % ,% !

%* - ' + % &% "! & % ( 8, %, % &" " "
+% %! %+ % &% ' " % + , #& , % & % * ##
" #( && ! % " ++ & , %%+ %+ & " % %+ 7 +" "!
&% ! % 7
+ "# ,% " &% / & %+ " ! & - %! & %

%+ " / +% !" % % +( &% , " % ( %+
" ' #" ! % !' &# ?$3) %+
" & - , %- !
" "## / " " ( , % , %+ % "##( " "

" "& % + " & "# * % " % " #( , & " "
" "& % &% ! ! "# % " " , #" %
"## % +( &% , " % (* % ! #"(
/ " " %+ / % ! & ! " %- ' % " (

% " # * % % " " "& % &% &# ! ! 7 ! +% " % 7
" +% *" ! % " # " " , #" % % '
, %- % !% % " &#" $" ! !% , %,% ! &
,# # #" % ) * " % + &" % "! - +
# -" % *% #! + % 8& " "& % & - '
&% #! ## ,% # % &% " " , " ! ! "# % "
" , #" % ' * & "#% &% "& "#%++ &
# ,# " % %+ " & -' & &

# #" % ! & !" %- " ",,#&" # " ! # -" %* - ' "&&% !
%"1
% " %+ & (%+ " & ' % 8 !" ' " !
& #" % 54' " ," "( #( % & " 8 , % +%

(. "& , % " " ! " #D" % %+ + " & "# " #" ! !%*
% % #" % $ ) % 55@9I5449 52 " % #!
" & " #- #%+ " % " % * % " 55
" , %- % %+ " ! & - "( &% ! & #( ++ & - - "

! & - % ,# ! " #( +" % & , %- %
" % ! - ! "# " ! &% %+ & &"," # %+
! + !+ % , %- % %+ ! & - 59 %* - ' ( " 1 !
%+ & 9' 544:' !" ! & &% 1& ! + $ ,% !)
&#" % ! & ++ & - %+ " & - 5:
#" + + (" ' & # #" % " " , ! % & " "
+ " *% * * & , #& , % & % &% #! && + ##( "& " "
! ! "# # "- 8! % ' ! ! "#
#" ! " " % "#, " %* - ' * % % *
# , " % " & - * ## "##- " ,% & %0
! !% < #( * ## ##
20
Autoriteit Financiële Markten
21
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2273/2003 of 22 December 2003 implementing Directive 2003/6/EC.
22
some of which, such as the UK, are also late in implementing the Market Abuse Directive.
23
Cases C-6, 9/90 Francovich and Others v Italy [1991] ECR I-5357
24
Amsterdam District Court 3 December 2004, JOR 2005 / 13
! " # $ % # ## ! &
' $ # ( ! ( ! ) &&
* ! #+ ' ! + $ $ ! "
$ , ! &! ! # # ( ! "
, % , ( $ ( $ # &! $ & $
- + ! % & + $ %" + ! $
' $ + !$ ( % % & && -
$ ! # ' % $ & !
! " $$ ! ( # & ) ! +
( " ( ' $ . ($ $ ! ! &
( -$ +# " / $ !( !
*! ( /
%"- ! & & ! $ &
$ % $ , "% & ( ! $ ( %!
# & % $" & ( $ $ " (
(- $ %" , % ( & "
" + ( & 0 # $ 1 ! % ( +
( $+ $ ' - &*! ( (
- $ , , "& $ + / ! - & !
, $ , # ( $ - $! !( $
$ ! * , - + , & ! , , + $
, % ! ! % 2
3 & ' - &*! ( # -$ 4

% !%0 $ ! ! + ! $( $ (
#! 5 " # - & ! $! $ 6 &
! # - *! ( ' $ 22 &
+ 4 - " ($, # && ( %
# ! $ ! # - $ (! " $ ( , #!%
, $ (! "& $& 5 3 &
†John D. Pickles BSc (Auckland), law student at Birkbeck, University of London

1
Icons Project, University of Maryland, 2003
! # - % $# - $ & % "
! ,&! $ & - %" # ! + $
" $ $ $ % % !( # # "%& 0!$(
&& ! 7 $ %" , / 0!$ # , 8
$ ! # - + ! $ 29 $ :
# - "+ ! ( & $ - $! # &
# - $& " - + $ # $
; - & , ! ' $ " -

&! $ # - & ! ( $ ! ,
!$ $
% " $ $ & ) 7 +
$# ( & # ! # $ & +
! 7 & " " ) 7 + & !
%$ %" - - &$ $
' " ! $" !% $ , + $ "$
, ! ( ! &' 7 $ ( $ < "
% <9
$! & (- " (
# $ ) 7 & ( =$" ! #
* " $ " ) 7 + !$ ( ,&! # $ +
$ ' & " $ $ - % (( ( #
# $ %" $ 26 & ' -
& *! ( # -$ 4 - " ( & $ &
- $ $ , % $ & + $ - "
( - " ! "+ !$ ( , + $ !
! "5
' $ 0
!$ !# - & , & ! >
!- & # $ ! ) - ( +
, - ( ! $ % 7$
8 $ , & ( $ , #
# ! $ %" " ! # , ! &! ! 7 &
0
!$ " ' (- , % " $!
+ ( ) - ( + ,
- ( ! $ ! 7 (- ,
& ( ( ! # , ! & (
# - ! 7 (- # ( 7
# # " ! , ! & ( ,
2
Human Rights Watch, In the Name of Counter-Terrorism: Human Rights Abuses Worldwide, 2005
2005] Terrorism Legislation 111
' " # # ( ! , ( !
/# "% ?! $ $ # & %!
%# ?+ $ # & (! $ $ - $ # - !
$! "# # &! ! % ! " 9@@9+
$ 8! $ $ ! $ , $
# ! $ - - 6
" 2AA= ' $ *! (

# $ ! ( ! - $ % $
# " % !
/ ! B "
$$ 29@ & , # & +
( #! & # # , 4 ( $
( 5 , ! $$ $ 29@ $ # &"
/ ! #! + ! # " ( C
C&! $ (CC &C
C
( CC C C $ - $! (( ( - C
C %
$ # "8 $ #!% # - % + $
6+B@@ # # , / ! $ " + !( ! &(!
% - $ % ! ( 9@@B $ (
# C ( $ < " 2@+@@@<# # / ! $# "
3
, ( & 22 #, % 9@@2+
! (- ) ( 7$
- - ( # ! &&
< +< < # - ( <& # &!
- ! /# $ &
"+ ! !( + ! +
+ &# ( ( D
&& &
! # ## - $ "
( " #
! # $ ! ,
> < ! (& ! $
, " < <! $- <# $
! & <$ ! & $ % <=
! > &$ & - $ $ $ 4$ ## $5 ! $ &
, " ! # & - - , % & $ ! $
! $" % & $ & 8" " ( !
& $ $ ## + &$ & " #
! $ ! " / ! & ! $"+ $ &
% & & #! "& ! 4 ## 5 "
3
Unclassified White House Memorandum February 7 2002
4
Amnesty International- The Death Penalty, 2005
5
Amnesty International- Facts and Figures on the Death Penalty, 2005
6
Human Rights Watch- In the Name of Counter-Terrorism: Human Rights Abuses Worldwide, 2005
7
Foreign Affairs Committee of the European Parliamen Report, April 26 2005
,$ # $ $ " " ! ( ! "E %"

% , 6+@@@ $ 3+@@@ - 4$ ## $5 2AAA :
(& $& ! > ( ! )

9@@9 , < ! ( / - < , !$ "
- (! $& & / - , , # !
! # $ , & ( 7 %& 0
!$( $ $ %
- & ! ; # ! & ! (
( 7 ( ( 7 </ <! $ 9@@9 ,+
( 7 C - % ! # $ $ %" # ! &
# ! C # ( &$ ( %" ( 7
( $ &, ( &/ $ ( &! $
% ! %" ! + ( 7 &! ( " & !# /
& ! & $ ( 7 C - & % $
$& & </ +< ( 7 , % ?! $ $ !%0 (
! ( ( 7 , - ( & $ &
# -$$ & ! $ - - $
( $ D & ! # - *! (
' $ ! $ , 26@) F 4 ( 5+ (
$! & ( , % - $
& / # & # % "& 8 , 2= $ 9@
% " '. * ! & $ , -$ &
( !# & 2@ ! # , -$ ( $ !( !
! $ ! # , "$ $! $
9@@2 ) $ ! "
! "> , - & (- * "

# , ! C $ C % " & $ - $!
! # $ & " $, ! ( 8 (
! " ! - % $ $ - $ , C
$ C & $% $ % 9@@2 $ $
, ( ! $ & $ $ - " ,
# + , " ( $ & - - - $
(( ( ; ! " $& + $ , (
& ! ! ' $
$ ( + $ ( $ # - - "+ ! # "&
( ) ! &, $ ?! $ " $ %"
?! # !$ % ! ( # $
$ , ! $ $ " ,
8
Human Rights Watch, Torture Worldwide, 2005
2005] Terrorism Legislation 113
$ # " $& "E # $

- % ! $ & " $$ - % $, "
! $ ! # / $ & $ # $ & - %
$ #!% %" * "
$, $ ; , &( ( +
)$ # " ( & &# ! # %- +
! - & "+ , (! - " !$ +
" ## $ " ( !# & ( $+ ! % $ $
$ $$A " " ! !$ -
(&
0
! + , & $ ! 0! "E ( ( &
$ " ! & $ - # ?! & ! &! &(
( ! # & !
$ " ( " & (- C ! " ! &
( # + ( ( & #! %" ( #!% +
!( , # & , !( (-
! + $ $ $ ") $$ 7+ - 2@
$# $ /# + $ $ %" ' !
( 9@@B !$", " $ & ( ( # $
# & ! ( $ &! $ & $ , ! (
+ !$ $ # " C # (
$ & (! $ ( $ # -
- - , & #% , ! ( $ ! )
! ( , ! ( ! "
$ # $
9
Hans Juergen Wischnewski, Lessons From German Counterterrorism, 1995
10
Judges speak out against erosion of independence by government, The Guardian, April 26 2005
***
!"# $ % $ & '( $$)$ (* + !!# $ % $
#,- $ . / 0# (* 1$ 1)'$ ) )1 2##, 3)
(()' 4 1)$ "## 1 3 -2 3 ! 5 (1( )$4 ) ' 4
) )1 (* )5 $ ($) %)$3 + 11 ( 4 )$ 2, ()' $
$ ( 36 5' 4 33 ) ) 1 . - $$)$ /
1 $ ) $ ) 35 ( ('$ 6 /6 ('$ 6
)' (3& '( $$)$ / 5 (1( 336 $ 1 $$ ) /)
('$ 6 )' (3 $ 3 /36 $ )3' ) /6
($ $67 $ 3-,
$$)$ )$4 ) 53)6 ' ( $$)$ ) ) $ '3 )1

$ ) 35$)( )1 ( ) * 4/ ) () 7/ 1 36 -
( ) )' ) )1)5 $ ) $ '3 )1 5 $( . '((
1'$ $ 4 $ - 8' ) '( % $ )$4 )
$ ($' '( $$)$ ( / $$ 1$) 4 9 $)
) % $ . ' 3 '( $$)$ ( / $$ 1$)
.)3' $ 4 9 $ $. ( - '$ $ )$ + :)$ 5 6( )3)4( 3 11 ( )1
'( $$)$ 3 $4 36 (()' 1)$ () ' ' 11 ( .
4$ $ 4 )- % % ( ) )1 (* $'5
$ 8 ) $ )' '$ )1 4$)% 4 5 ) ) - )%+
3 ) ). $ 4 ; () $ % 5$) $ ( <3 () 13(=+ )
/ () ' $ /) / > + '( $$)$
1$' )1 $ 3 /)'$+ $ '$ )1 $ ;() ' 3= ($ 1( +/'
5 $ ('3 $ ) )1)5 $ ) ( . % 5) 1 4 / 3 ( )1
† LLB, M.A.
1
R.Pape, ‘The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism’ American Political Science Review, 2003
2
S.Atran ‘Soft Power and the Psychology of Suicide Bombing’, www.jamestown.org
3
Security Council Resolution 1373 was passed unanimously in response to 9/11 attacks and was one of
the most expansive resolutions passed imposing measures against all acts of terrorism throughout the
world.
4
See www.un.org/terrorism/sc.htm#reso
5)% $ 1 .)'$ )1% * $ 4$)'5 % +1 6+($ /3 ()' $7 $

( / 4 '( $$)$
() 5$ . 1 ) )1 $$)$ ' $ /6 3? (
@
A ? 67 5 $ 4 ) )1$ 5 .)3 ( ) + 53)6 /6
7(3 . ' 3+4$)'5 )$ ()$+1)$ ) 6 ($ (+($ 3
)$ 5)3 ( 3$ ) +% $ /6A $ ( $4 )1 .)3 ( $ 4 $ 336
() $ ) 36 ; $4 )1)55)$ ' 6= )$ 3( . 36 ;$ 5$ . )$
6 /)3( $4 =1$) $4 5)5'3 ) + $. 4 4 $ )$ -
$ 7 . )3 ( 7 / () ' ( ) 5$)( / % $$)$
;)$4 ) =+; 5 $ 33 =. ( + $4 $ ' ) 5'3
$4 ; ' ( ; ==+ '$ 4 ) $4 )1 $$)$+ $4 )1
+ )$ $4 )1 )+ 5 4) % $ )+
() $() +)$ 5$)5 4 5$ $ 36 )'4 -B
)$ 5 (1( 336+ ' ( $$)$ ( )1 $$)$ % $ '(( )1

)5 $ ) () 4 ) 317 13( /6 5 $5 $ )$-
)1 5 6( )3)4( 336 5 6 ( 336 $ $$)$ ) % 3
'3 )' 36 $)6 4 6 $4 - (* $ ) $ 1)$ +
. $6 4 7$ * $$)$ )5 $ ) % ( 3 . 5 $5 $ )$
) 36 33( ( )1 '$. . 3- () )/ $ % / %
) ) % ) 4' 4
1 '$ -0 % 33 4 ) *33) $ $)'4 ) C )% . $6
5 (1( ) )1/ . )'$-
)$ ( 336+ ) )1 317 ($ 1( $ 6$ ) 1 31
6 53 ( + 6 1)$ - 1)$ ( '$6+
. )1 ) 3 + $( $? )3)46+$ 34) 5$).
) 36 (( 5 /3 :' 1( ) 1)$ $$)$ % $-D '4
$$)$ 1)$ $36 ? ' $ 6 $ / % .
$ ( '$ - 6 ($ 1( 3)11 $ 4 ) ) E 3 ;)1
% $ $'( ) =- '4 )% )/ )$ * )% ) /
() 4 $ ( ' 3* )? ( +% ) 1)'4
)$ 5 3 $' $ + ) % ) 5'/3( 5 ( (3 % 337 5)$ -
$ + ( 5 % $$ )$ () 5$ ($ / ;$ ' 3
'( = ) )'$ /3 % 6 )1 6 4 1)$ '$ % ) $
5
A.Guelke The Age of Terrorism and the International Political System, Chap.2
6
J.Johnson and J.Kelsay Cross, Crescent and Sword, 1990
7
D.Rapoport ‘Fear and Trembling in Three Religious Traditions’ American Political Science Review,
1984
2005] Suicide Terrorism 117
)$ 1 ( 1 / 3- $ % /' 3 '5) )$3 $ %

; . % =% 5 3) 136 4 53 % )' )'4 1' 31)$
$ '$ :)'$ 6+5$)5 33 3. ) 6 $4 -
$$)$ 1)$ )15)3 ( 3. )3 ( )11 )$ 3 % )1

() / % 53)6 3 D## /64). $ ) '55$ ()' $7
$ .)3' ) $ - )33)% 4 $ ( .)3' ) /(
)( % 7 () ) ) )1 ) 6+ !,# %
. 3)5 )1. $ )' 4 )' ) 3 7()3) 3 4$)'5
% ) $$)$ ()3) 35)% $ - F1$ ) 14 $ C+ 4 4
$'443 )1 ) 3 3/ $ ) 317 $ ) +% $ 4$
5$)5) )1 $$)$ % ( % ($ / /6 3$ (8' $
F% 5) )1 % *C- )$ $ ( 36+ % ( ) /6 / 33
+3 $ )1 <3 3 ( " 4$)'5 G +%
)1 ' )1 ' ( /) / 4 $ 37< 3 5' +F 3 (*
$ 5) /6 6- . ) 53 )$ 3 + ) .
$ 33$6 % % ( ) 14 A ) 11 ( . $' 1)$ 13( 4
$ % ' )13) 65 )1)5 $ ) C-!
)/ $ < 5 # () + $ )1 ' ( $$)$ 36 $ 46)1

() $() - $'( '$ 3() ) )1 $$)$ 4 $ 3+ $ $ . $ )1
$ ) 3 3 $6 () $() - $$)$ () $( $ % * $ ()$
$4 $) 4 $- ' ( /) / 4 5 )$ $
5)% $ / 3 ( )'4 1 ( )1 )55) 11 ( )1 ($ 4
() $(. / .)'$ )1 5)% $1'3 5 $ 6- ' ( $$)$ * )
13( )'4 5 ) $4 )( 6 ) ). $% 3 $ $
$ 4 $$)$ C - + ) ' )5 $
5 $ ('3 $36 5 ? 53 )1< $ E$)5) * C $$)$ F5$)5 4 /6
C % ) 5$ (5 3 )/: ( ) ( ' 5'/3( )' $ 4 4 $
5'/3( 6-
% 337 /3 '( $$)$ ) %)$* )1 . '3

$$ ) 3 ()$ 13( 4 $ ) (* ) $ )% .+ '$
)1 $ $ 4( )$4 ) 3- (()$ 4 ) < 5 )
5)$ ( )$ )1 $ 4( )$ ) )1 ' ( $$)$
4 )1 '5 ) )1 (* +/ ) ( ) /6 3 $
1'$ $ (* %)'3 / $ 3) $ () $(. 5'$5) ;1)$ (+
'5 ) $ $) '( ) )1 7$ 3 F * 4)11C7
$ 39< 3 + ( ) )1 (* /6 /$ ) 4 $ )1
8
The Palestinian Islamic Jihad is not to be confused with Islamic Jihad (Hezbollah).
9
9th December 1994, Israeli TV Channel 1, p.99 ibid.
10
op.cit Pape
3 3 ; =1)33)% 4 5 /$ (* =- ) . '3
) ) . $ )'$( ( $6 ) ( $$6 )' '( (* ' -
$ $ 1)$ 1$) )$4 ) % ) $ ($' .)3' $ 1)$
5 (1(5'$5) )1( $$6 4)' '( (*- 65$). + +
$ 4+3)4 ( 3 '55)$ + 3( ) )1 $4 1' 4- 1 $
% 33/ % 337)$( $ 6 )15$)5 4 )($ )-
5 5 $ % 33 * ) )% 3 )'4 $ $ 3 ) 5
/ % 5)3 ( 3(3 5 $. 4 () 13( (. )1
)$4 ) ; = .)3. + $ )(3 $7(' 5$ ( /3 6 (* -
) $ %)$ +FA $$)$ +
+ $ 46 ($' 3 33' ) - ( )( 6 $ ) 5 $ 3)1 $$)$
()' $7 $$)$+ $ 6 / ) % 6 )1 )55 4 ($ 4 C
; 5 =- 3 )'4 $ ) 9 $ 44 $ 1)$ 5 (1( (* 6/
3)4( 336 '( 1$ . +)(( ) % $ (* %)'3 / )
?5 ( 6 ) $ $) .( . $ - ()'3 / 5 $ )1 $ 46
)1 '$5$ /6 $$)$ )$4 ) /' )$ 3* 36 $ 13( ) )1
5 G$ ( ) ( 6 )1() 5 4 $$)$ )$4 ) -
5 ( 336 $' )1 <3 ' )- $ * (
3 $ $ ) 43 / ( ' 6 3 (* () 53?
5 $. . % ( ( $ ( $ $ 39< 3 () 13(- %) )1
) . ) % 33/ ? @ ) )1 . ' 3 % ) .)3' $ 1)$
'( )5 $ ) + ) . ) )1 )$4 ) ( / $.
/6 11 $ 1 ( )$ 11 $ +1$) $ 34 )' ) ) 3 )
5)3 ( 3-
11
P.Wilkinson, Terrorism versus Democracy, p.219
3%
Total attacks
Suicide attacks
97%
Deaths from non-suicide

48% terrorist attacks
Deaths from suicide terrorism
52%
) )1)5 $ ) + ' ( /) / 4 5$). )/ . $6 '(( 1'3 1

'(( '$ /6 ' / $ )1 ( ' 3 13( ) $4 -
(()$ 4 ) 5$ )1 !"&72## 2 ' ( (*
)' ):' &H )1 33 ) 3 $$)$ (* ,"H )1 ) 3 -
' / $ )1 ' ( (* ($ 36 ). $ 5 (
)% 1 3. . $6 () - $ )1 ' ( /) / 4
5 ( 336 4 1( 4. ) 3 ' / $ )1 $$)$ (
%)$3 % 1 33 '$ 4 5 $ ) 1$) 000 !"D )&," 2## &- )7( 33
12
cited in R.Pape 2003. Further information available at US Department of State www.state.gov.
13
U.S.Department of State, Patterns of Global Terrorism 2001, www.state.gov
I () 4 $ ) J , )$ $ ) 3 (* )' $ )1
() 13( $ 1 $36 $ ( . 3)5 - <$
$ :. 3 '+ !! + !!2 !!,
/) / $ 3 * ) G/)33 ( $$ )' (* $4 - 465
)$4 ) 3 3 6 3 3 3 . () '(
(* )' 465 /) $) <* - 37K %)$*
(* / E 6 G !!"+ )3 2###
% )$* 62## - 1$ ? ) )12##, ' ( (* . 3)
)(('$$ ' $ / +< * +$ * + $ 3+ G/ * ' -
5$)5)$ ) / % ' / $ )1 ' ( (* ' / $ )1
1 3 6 $ '3 $$)$ 5' ). $ (('5
$$ )$ - ' ( (* (()' 1)$ 3 H )1 33 < 3
(* ( 5 / $ 2###+6 3 ) ,,H )1 33 $ 3 ( ' 3 % $
*33 '( (* B- :'$6 14'$ $ '3 )1 ' (
/) / 4 $ )' 4- 1$) 5 /$ (* % $
1'3)1 ' ( $$)$ 4 ) *33). $ $ )' 5 )53+
43 $ 4'3 $ (* ( (3 6% $ 1$) ) ## 3. - /3 6 )1
/) / $ ) 13$ /' )$ $* 53 ( ) 31
) 3 3 ) 33)% '( $$)$ ) 13( ( ' 3 )
. ( 3- $ K' 33 0 5) )' 1 ( ' ( /) / 4 ) )
$ '3 4 1( 36 )$ ) $ 65 )1 $$)$ (*-
)% . $+ 6 ) ))(('$ (3' $ )$ % . ) (' '3 . 11 (
/) $ )1 1$ )(( ) ) $3 3 $'( .
'$ -
%))1 ) 5)$ 1 4 /6< 5 D $ 1$ 36+ :)$ 6)1

'( (* $ 5 $ )1 3 $4 $ ( 5 4 )(('$ (3' $ $ $
)3 )$ $ ) (* - $ $ ) 5)3 ( 3 . % ( $
. $6 3* 36 ) % '( (* - (3' 3( ) + $ 3
. 5 ( 4) ) - ' $)' . '(
(* ( )(('$ 1)$ 6 $ ) -4- $ . 4 +$ 3 ) +)$ 1)$ ) 5 (1(
$ ) 33+ 4 . $ ' 336 )5 7 $ 4 )1 $4 1$)
3( ) $ 33 + ) 1 1)) $ '$ +( 1 /' + ) /
3 $6 / - <3 6 4$)'5 ' 4 ' ( /) / $ )5 $ -
11 $ 3 $ 5+ 11 $ 4) 3 ) . ) )
3% 6 5) /3 ) ( $ 43 +3 $4 $ ( 5 4 ) $ $4 4
)1 $ 3 - . $ )' 4$)'5 )1 ' ) 36/6 () ) 6-
14
R.Gunaratna, ‘Suicide Terrorism: A Global Threat’ Janes Intelligence Review 20th November 2000
15
A.Moghadam ‘Palestinian Suicide Terrorism in the Second Intifada: Motivations and Organisational
Aspects’ Studies in Conflict and Terrorism vol.18, 1995, figures from Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs
www.mfa.gov.il
16
C.Quillen, ‘A Historical Analysis of Mass Casualty Bombers’, Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 2002
17
R.Pape, 2003.
() 13( $ * ( 6 .)3. 1 $ 1 % $ 4$)'5 )

5$ ( 5 4 55 $ / $ )$4 ) 5 5 $-
() 36+ ) )'4 1 $ 4) 3 % $ % 3)1 $4 C

3 $6 1)$( 1$) ) 3 ) 3 1)$ 5'$ ' )1 317
$ ) - . $6 (* ( !"# / $ ( 4
)($ ( - 1$ '( (* /6 )7 4$)'5 )(('$$
( / $ !" % /) / 4 )1 $ 8 / 6 $' % (
% 67 . ). $ ' $ % $ %)' - 5$ 3 !"&
/ 6 $' +/ ( 1$ $ $4 ) / (* /6 ' (
/) / $ / 3) 4 4 ) G/)33 "- % ) 2&$ ()/ $ )1
6 $ '( $$)$ /( )1 :)$ () ( $ 1)33)% 4 % (*
% $ G/)33 /3% '5 /' 3 4 )' 4 $ $' +*33 4
2, ' 3 $ (* $ ( 5 ( * 5 4 $))5 +*33 4 1167
4 - ) 3 )33) 43 6 $ ( 4 &# % (3 $
) )1)5 $ ) % 1 336 ($ /36 '(( 1'3- % $ % 3)1
$( $ ( $))5 1$) / ) % 5 $( . $ 4(
'(( /6 4$)'5 - !"& (* ( '4 ) )1
$ * % ) . / () 3 $4 ) )5 ( 5$)5)
)1 ' ( $$)$ - ( 336 . ( $$ )' ) ' /$
)1 (* /' 5) 33$ $ ) $ ) 35 ( ('$ 6
/ (' 6$ $ $ ( . 6 ) 4 )4$ 5 ( 336 1 $ -
$ 5) . ()$$ 3 ) / % $ )$ ) )1 5)3 ( 3
' ) ( ( )1 ' ( /) / 4- '( 1 ()$
<3 $$)$ ( 5 4 $ 4( $ 1( ) ) $ 37
<3 5 ( 5$)( - $ 3 ) / % $ 3 <3
$ )$ 5)5'3 $ 6 )14$)'5 '( ! ($ 2#+ ( /
$)'4 '55)$ )1 $ ( ' (5 3+ 5$)1 ) 3
)( ) +( / $ )1() $( ' .$ 6 ' 3( ) -
( ) )' '( /) / 4 $ '3 )1 ( 3('3 $ ) 3
5$)( /6 )$4 ) 4 ) / )1 / 1 ) $ 4$)'5
(' - 5$ ) ? 531 <3 $'443 %
- '( (* )(('$$ $)'4 )' /' / %
3)- 1( ' / $ )1 (* ($ 4$ 36 1 $ 4 4 )1
3) (()$ 5 . 3* $ % 5 $ ('3 $36
$ 3 3 % . )1 (* !!0-
18
Also known as Islamic Jihad the group seeks the creation of an Islamic republic in Lebanon
19
Also known as the Islamic Resistance Movement, the group emerged from the Palestinian branch of the
Muslim Brotherhood in 1987.
20
see www.jmcc.org/opinionpoll
2 )$ ( $ /3 5 $ )1 / . )'$- 5 (1( 336

$4 4 )$ 5)3 ( 33 $ ; 3 )'4 13( 4 . (.3 3)
3)=+ )$4 ) . $6 5 (1( 4) 3; 5$ ). =
3 )'4 $ )% . ( )1 $ 31$ ( ) - (()$ 4 ) )$
( % G $22 . () )$ ' ( (* 33
) $ )$4 ) () / - ' ( /) / $ *33 <
!! + % $ % 5 ( * 5 $ 1$) $ * - ' %) 6 $ 3 $
<$ <$ % *33 % 6- . 4 %)
(' / 3 $ 1 )' 5$ )
5 ( 3* $ ' % % <$ E' $ ' 4 % ) ( ) 5)% $
) 53 4 ) % $- 5 ( 3* ()33 5 6 $3 $
!!B $ ' /) / 4- (* () ' ' 32##2 % +
/6 )$% 6+ ( 1$ % 4 4). $ / )
3 4 $ % 31 - $ '3 5)% $7 $ 4 4$ % $ /6
3 )$ 6%)'3 . ') ) 6 )$ $ 4) -
6 ' (3 $ % $ 3) '( (* )1 '36 2##, 4 31$)
) 5 ( )$ % $ % . )1 )
$4 3 . ' 394$)'5- E'$ )$* $C < $ 6C ;<EE=
'( $$)$ (. 6 4 '$* 6 / )$ )$ 73. - ( $$
)' 11 (* + 1'$ $ ? % $ $( 5 +/ % ' !!0
'36 !!!+' 3 )$4 ) C3 $ / '33 (3 % $$
( ) ;3 $ () ' ) 31 ( =- ' ( $$)$
55 $ ' 3 ). / $ 2##& % 6 4)4' + $ () '3
$ / *% $ $4 -
)1 ) '$/ 4 $ $ ) / 5$)3) 4
() 13( 1)$ ' ( /) / 4 ))(('$- ) ( $61)$ 4$)'5 )%)$*
% 6 $)'4 $ $( 6 )1 . 3 /3 )1 (* / 1)$ $ )$ 4
) '( $$)$ + )$ ( $6 1)$ )( 6 ) / 1$' $ )$
5) 1)$ '/ 35 $ ) )1 / 1)$ /$ /4 )
.)3' $ 3. - . $ ' 336 ). $ 4 55 $ ( )1 ' ( (*
$ 8 ( 2##& '55)$ - <$ ( /36 3 $4 5 )1 (* )(('$$
$' 7'5 ) ). $ )1 ). $ 4 6 ) $ $ 8 4). $
) ' 2" 2##,+)1 ) () (' . 6 - '( $$)$ ) 3) 4 $
( ()13 $ )$ ) ( % + ($ 436 ( ()11$ $ )$ -
21
The LTTE is a very sophisticated organisation with 8000-10000 combatants and a core of 3000-6000
trained fighters. It has an extensive overseas structure providing financial support, weapons procurement
through both legitimate and illegitimate arms trading and propaganda activities.
22
Y.Schweitzer, Suicide Terrorism: Development and Characteristics, www.ict.org.il
'( $$)$ )57 )% + ) /) ) 7'5 5 ) )-

. ' 3 $ 6$ $( )1 3 $ ( / 4 $)' /' 1 $
3 ) ( $ (3 $ ( 5 /3 )15 $ ' 4 1)33)% $ )
$ *)$ 1)$1 $ 3. -C2&
. $ 1$) )$4 4$)'5 $ $

. ' 31 ( )5 $ 4 ) $ )% .+ 1' ( )
) . )1 4$)'5 ' / ? - 5)$ ) )
)' '( $$)$ ) ))3)1) 36 . 36 (3 -
3 )'4 $ 34)' ('3 $ )$4 ) /) 53)6 ( 8'
6 $ /)' /6 11 $ . 3' 6 - 34)' )$4 ) )
/ )$ ($ $ $4 ( $ () $ / 3 /6
/31 6 . )36 :' 1( ) 6 . / 5 $1)$ 4 ' 6-
3)+% $ ('3 $ )$4 ) 55 3 ) () ' (6 () 5) )1
(' 3 5) 36 5 $ +$ 34)' )$4 ) . . $ ' 336
)5 7 ( 4)$6 )1 $4 - () ( 5 )1 $ 6$ ) ) + )% . $+
' 8' )$ 34)' 1 -
'$. . 3 )1 $$)$ )$4 ) % 33 3% 6 / ($ ( 3

$ 4 ( ( % 33' - ' ( )5 $ ) 55 3 ) 4$)'5
1)$ . $ 6 )1)5 $ ) 3$ ) ) 3 5$ ( ( 3 6 )1 )
( ( 31 /3 6- () 7/ 1 36 )% 11( (6 )1
( (- ( )3)4( 3 53( 6+() 7 11 ( . +() $)33 /3 6 )1
() 8' ( + )1 .) 4 1 . ()' $7 '$
)$ 3 /)) 4 '$ () / ) * 5)5'3 $ ) )1 (*- ) /
( / () $'( 1$) () 5) 5$ '( ) ' $ +
( ) $)4 436( $ % ( $ 1 $36 36 . 3 /3- ' (
/) / $ ( 53 4 ? ( 3)( ) '( )$ (('$ 36
/) / $ % ) 3) ) 53 ( 5 $)' - % 6 '(
/) / $ ( $ ( 53 ( $ ) $% (( /3 ) ) $6 4 )
* 5 3. ( ( (' ? ' ( ' 3 /6 ) 4
?53) . )5 ' - )3 * : 3 ( $: 2,
() (3' / ( ' )1 3)% () )1 ?53) . 2B () 75 $7( ' 36
$ ) )1 ' ( ) )$ 1 .)'$ /3 ) $ ) )1 (*
23
Dershowitz p.33
24
A.Dolnik and A.Bhattacharjee, ‘Hamas: Suicide Bombings, Rockets or WMD?’ Terrorism and
Political Violence, vol.14, no.3 Autumn 2002
25
According to a recent invoice found by Israeli troops during Operation Defensive belonging to the al-
Aqsa Martyrs Brigade the shield, electrical components and chemical supplies for a suicide bomb cost
$150. ibid. p.21
; 3 )'4 $ $ ) $ )( () '( 56 4 ) 6 )
1 3 )1/) / $ =-
33 $$)$ )$4 ) $ ) . '3 36 /6 . ( 4 $

5)3 ( 3 4 - ) ( . 6 * ) ' 5'/3( )5 ) )
5$ '$ ( ) 7 *$ ) '$$ $ 4 ) $ - 5 (
$$)$ ($ /6 ' ( /) / 4 / (' () )
11('3 $ 5 $( . $ ) )1 /) / $- )
1 $ 3) $ .$ $ 3 ) 5/ % 1$ 8' (6
)1 (* 1 $ )1 $4 5)5'3 ) + 3 )'4 /6 $4
/ () ' ) % 33 3$ 6/ 5$ -
$ ) 31 $ 5) / 3 6 )1/ 4 .( )1 (* 5$)5)$ )
) ( ' 33* 3 )) - $$ ) 31 $ ) ) $ / $ )$ 3 ) )
( 3 5$)/ /3 6- % 6 $$)$ F' . ( C )%
4 ) 4 C20- $ 46 / ) 5$ 1
$4 3) )15$)5)$ ) % 33/ () ' /3 ) 1' ( )
)( 6 $ ( $ '3 )1 ' $ )1 ('$ 6 % 33 '$
? $ 5$ '$ ) 3 $ - (()$ ( % 5$ ( 3
)/ $. ) . $6 ' ( (* ) / 4 )($ (6-
1)$ ' ( )5 $ ) )1()'$ % 33 4 ' ( /) / $-

1 $ 3 1)$ () $'( ) )1/) / +% $ 6 $ 1)$
)1 /) 6 ' )$ ) )$ . (3 $ ) )/ (3+ 5$ 5 $
' / $ )1 /) / $ 1)$ 4$)'5 ) () 36 ( $$6 )' ' (
(* ()'3 / ' /3 4 /3)(*- I . 3% 6 $ )1 / )1
/ )3' $ $ )3. ) ( $ 33 ($'53 A ) 5 6 1)$ 6 4
) $ + (3' 4 3. + 3 1)$ 4)) 33
$. ( )1 ' 6J $( )' ( +/' 3 +I ()'3 . $ 4
6 $ '( )4 $J2D- ) 6+ $ / '$ ' / $ )1
5 )53 % 33 4 ) / () ' ( /) / $ - $ 2" $. % %)
' $ 116 .)3' $ + (3' 4 3 $ )1 37K $4
; 3 $6 % 4 )1 =% ) $ . 3 IA 6 1)$ ' ) % 5
$ 1)$ /)6 % ) % ) ) $ 6$ ) )5 $ ) - 4 )11
($)% % ) $ . 4 $ 3 ) 4) '
/) /)5 $ ) L / () )'$ /44 5$)/3 J-
26
ibid. Dr.B.Ganor
27
J.Conrad The Secret Agent A Simple Tale
28
N.Hassan, ‘An Arsenal of Believers: Talking to the “Human Bombs”’, The New Yorker 19 November
2001, in A.Moghadam ‘Palestinian Suicide Terrorism in the Second Intifada’ Studies in Conflict and
Terrorism p.69
<$)1 )$ $$ ) 2! ($ / $ 3 ) 5 / % $$)$
)$4 ) $ ($' ) )1 F ' ' 3/ 1 C $ . 1$)
F() $ (C- 1)$ $ 4 )/: ( . 5$) ) .)3' $C
6 () 1$ () ' 6 $ 6$- . '3
$$)$ %)'3 . $ * )% % $ 4$)'5 $ 4 ) $
) 4$)'5 . 5$ ( ( )1 * 4 . ) + * 4 5 ) )4$ 5
%$ 43 $ ) $ /' 1$ /) / $C - 3 '(
' ( /) / $ F3. 4 $ 6$C- )$4 ) 3* % '$
(* % 33 / ( $$ )' - 4$)'5 '( () 1
$ 46 ) %)$*- ) $ * )11 3'$ + ?5) '$
% 4 )1$ )'$( - $ 3 $ $ &# . ' 3%)'3 1
F() $ ( C 5) /3 )/$ */ ( ' 4$)'5 5$ '$ $ ()$ 4
)1 . ) 5 3 1 - ) . ( 4 )1 $ %)'3 )' )
/ $ 6 3-
() $)33 4 )1 )$4 ) $ )5 ' 1)$

() '( 4 (* - 1 4 )/ $ 1'3 ) $
$ % 33 / 1 % $+ 1 6+ ' ( (* - '$ 4 3( 5 $ ) )1
5)3 ( 3 4) ) '( 5 ( 5$)( )$ 1 $ 5$ ( )1
3 $6 1)$( ) 1)$ 4 )3+ ' ( $$)$ ( . 5$)1)' 4 .
5)3 ( 3 11 ( - )$ (+ '(( 1'336 36
53 ) )1 3) (()$ + G/)33 % '(( 1'3
( 5 4 ) ?5 3 '3 ) 31)$( 1$) / )+ %
'(( 1'3 5$ '$ 36 $ 4 53)6 )1 5 (7
* 5 4 $))5 ) $ * !!& 5) 5) )15 ( 3* -
' $36 4 / 3 1)1 )$4 ) ' / 6 )4

)$ /6 ' 4 (( )- ) 5 $ % ) $ 44$ . 4$)'5
<3 (' '(( 4 4 31 ) )5 )1
$ ) 3 4 - 11('3 ) 4 % )' $ ' 3 '(
(* + ()$$ 5) 4 1 $+ <3 %)'3 .
.)( 6 )% . - )11 $ 4 36 )/ $. I 5$ 5 )
$ 36 () ( 3+ + 4 ) 1$ ' ( < C
3 $+ $ $ 1 +% . ) $ $ 3 /36
)$ 36 1 $% $ < % 4$ 5 ( 3 )/ $. $ '
$ ) 3/) 6- /6 )1 !D# < + )7
()$+ 1)$ 3 53) ($ 3 ) % )$ ()' $ ; 4 67 ?=
29
M.Harrison, ‘An Economist Looks at Suicide Terrorism’ 5th June 2003 available at
www.securitymanagement.com/library/Suicide_Harrison0803.pdf
30
Prof.A.Merari, Director of the Political Violence Research Unit at Tel Aviv University. Taken from
radio discussion between Prof.Merari and Dr.Eyad Sarraj, founder and Director of the Gaza Community
Mental Health Programme, April 9th, 2002 www.npr.org/news/specials/suicidebombers
M N $ 3 ; . 67 %)=- )'/ 1'3 % $ < ()'3 .

( . '(( ) $ )$ ) $ ) 3 $$)$ -
1)'$ 6 $ 1'3)1< 3 $$)$ A ( . % 53) +
+3)//6 ' $ %)$* $ 5$ 36 $
13 ) )@ 1)(' %)$3 ) ) <3 5 )53 $
534 J& -
F( $$) 7 (*C 55$) ( % ( 3 $ )% G&2 ($ ( 1)$

() ' 4 5) ) )14$)'5 ) ' '( $$)$ - $4'
5$ ) )/ $. ) ( 5 '3 4 ) )1 $$)$
4 $ ( ( %)$*- F '(( )1 $$)$
6% $ /$ $$)$ . $6% $ &&A C- () (3' ) 1)$ / % 6
)1() / 4 $$)$ )/ / )3' $ )3. ) ) () ( ) 6
)1 $$)$ C ) 3) 4 6 ( ) ) () '( '( )5 $ ) -
3 (* $ * '36 2##,+ 1$ '( (* %)
6 $ +3 ($ ( ) 1( ) ( $$)$ /3. $ 46
'(( 1'3 4 4 4$)' 1 $ 53) (+5 ( 1'3 $
) 4' $ 6 % 33 ) 5'33)' )* (* ) * 5 $ $4 )
$ ) - $4 $ 1$ ) () ( ) $$)$ / ('
' $ /36 6 ) ) % ) 4 $$)$ %)$* -
' 534 )1 5 )53 () ' '$ 1 $$)$ %
$ 5 6)' 4 /) )()$$'5 - )'3 ) / $ 5) 4 )
34 4$ . ( / ( ' )1 $$)$ + 6 )'3 / $ 5) 4
5 )1 - $$)$ ' / ( $. % 6 1$) 5)5'3 ) 6
/3. 6$ 5$ -
$36 !"0 $ 5$ . ('$ 6 )' (3 /

% 36 5) )' FA $ ) 3 () ' 6+ (3' 4
M ('$ 6N )' (3+ ' ' ) ( $6 5)3 ( 3% 33 ) 3. )
$ ) % 6 1$' $ ) )1 5) $ .
$- 43/ () ) )1 $$)$ 3) +% )' ( 1(
5 $ 3 ' 6 )1 )$ 4 % 33 ) + % $ 1$ + $ (
5 ) ) C&,- $ ) $ ) 35 ( ('$ 6
'( 1$) % 33 4 ' ( .)3' $ 1$) )$4 ) % ( '
- ) 5) /3 ) 5$)13 '( /) / $ ) 36 33
1 ()$ % ( ()'3 5) /36 13' ( ( ) /6 ) ) ) *33
31
B.Hoffman, Inside Terrorism , p.75
32
A.Dershowitz Why Terrorism Works 2002
33
ibid. p.186
34
UN Document s/pv.2655/Corr.1, 18.02.86 p.31, www.un.org
3. 5$)( )1*33 4 ) $ / 6) ()5 )1 55$

4. $ '/: ( . 6 .)3. '( +/' ' (
/) / $ $ ( $ 36 '( 5$) '( )1 )( 6 6
4$ % '5 % I5)5'3 $7('3'$ $)7%)$ 5J 6 )% 1
3. -
1 $ $) / $ &B '44 ) % ) () F '$ $7 ' ( C .

5 6( )3)4( 3 $ )/ ) % 6+ 1)$ )1 ' 1( ) @
F )% 6 $ 8' 3 ) 6+ $ 4 ) 1 CA 6 .
8' 3 6- FA 44$ ) $ ( /) 3.
6+ 6 6 $ 1)$ % 6 3 (* % 33)$
/3 6 ) 5 $ 1$) C&0- %) ( $6 5 6( )3)4( 3() )
1)$ ' ( /) / 4 $4 % $ % 33 4 ) *33
% 33 4 ) - 3) 47 $ ()' $7 ' ( $$)$ $ 46 % 33) 36
/ '(( 1'3 1 $ ). )$ $ '( ( . % ( ()'$ 4
. ' 3 ).)3' $ 1)$ ' ( (* -
' 6 /6 <) + 5 G * 6&D $ . 3 1$) . %5) )1

$ 34)' ('3 $ $$)$ $ ( $ 3 13' ( - ) %
' ?5 ( 36 1 36 / (*4$)' )1 '/: ( . $ % 36
) $ 336 13' ( $ ( ) )1 % $ ) :) 4$)'5-
43 ) 13' 3 1 ()$ % $ )( 3 . $) - $ 34) +
)( 3 55$). 3 ( ))3 % $ 4 34 / 4 )1 :)$ 13' (
% 33/ () $ '$ -
! " "
! "#$
3 ( ) / $4' 5 $ ('3 $ $ 34) 5$) ) )$ '55)$

*33 4 )1 (. 3 ' )'/ 36 1( 6 )$ ( 3
35
O.Grasbad, Israel on the Couch
36
ibid, p.177
37
J.Post, E.Sprinzak and L.Denny, The Terrorists in Their Own Words: Interviews with 35 Incarcerated
Middle Eastern Terrorists Terrorism and Political Violence 2003
38
Z.Sardar ‘When the innocent are murdered, we all go into the dark with them’ The Observer, 16th
September 2001
() 5)$ $6 $$)$ 4$)'5 . ( $) 4$ 34 )' () 5) &!-
13' ( )1 $ 34)' $5$ ) )14$ 36 13' 3 ( $ (

3 $ ) .'3 $ /3 )1 5$ 5)5'3 ) ( ) /
' $ - . )'4 )$ 6 )1 $ 34)' () ' 6
5)' 1 ( 3/ 3 1+ 11 ( )1 .)3 ( $)'4 % ( 6
1 3. $ 13 1 $ % - ) /6 )11 ,#+
5$ ( )1 $ 34)' 5 $ . % $ . )3 ( ) )$ )1
. ' 6 )1 3 ) 4$ $ /3)) $'( )
() /6 ('3 $ $$)$ % ) $ /)' /6 11 $ . 3' 6 -
)$ 3 $ 4$)'5 () ' '55)$ $ )1 5$ $6 )/: ( . +
() $ % $ 34 )' 4$)'5 % ) ) () ( $ 3. %
55 3 4 ) 36 ) $ )% () ' 6- ('3 $ )$4 ) $ )$
3* 36 ) $4 4 1( . '3 ) * 5 $ ('3 $
% $ $ 34)' )$4 ) . '( % $ ( 4)$6 )1 $4 -
3 )'4 $ 34) 5$). ' 1'3 )/3 ) ))31)$ ) 4$)'5
5$ (5 3:' 1( ) )1.)3 ( 6/ ('3'$ 3 )$ ( 35 $( 5 )
)1.( )-
) 5) /3 ) $ . ' 3C ) . ) ) ( $$6 )' ' (

/) / 4 () 53 36 % )' (' 4 $ 34 )' ) . )
5 $ ('3 $36 3 +% $ :' 1( ) 5$ ) 4'
/ 3 1)$ ) - )1 / ) 1)$ ) C 1 4
1)$ )1% ) ) - $ * %)$ % + )
$ /( %)$ - 1$) ) $ 6 () 13( .)3. 4
' 3 + '( (* 3) )(('$$ 4 ( '$6 $
' 3 () ' ( $ 4) @ 3 / $ ) )1 )'
$ + : )$ $ ' $ ) '3'
)' $ < 355 - (()$ 4 ) $ 34 )' ? 1$ ( )1 $ 6$ )
% )(' $ ( '$ 4) % <$)5 '
3 . 4 ' 3 () ' 6 % )' 3 $- ( 35 + 5)$ $6
' )$ 6 ) 4' () ' 6+% 3( /' ' '$5$ 436 $ 34)
4 . % 6 ) 5)3 ( % 1)$ 6 6 $ ' $)' ( 35 4
) $ % 6 ) 5)% $- 3 . ) )$ ) )? ' +
% ) (( 5 $ 4 )1 5)$ 33 $ + % )/ 3 . $
;3 $ =% $ ( )1 ' - 3 ( )($
)1 $ 6$ ) % ( 5 '$ ( ) )1 ' + 4$ ) )1
<$)5 ' 0"# - + . 6 )$ ) 1)33)% $ +1 (
39
None of the 11 identifiable terrorist groups in 1968 could be classified as religious, in the 90s at least
20% of the 50 known terrorist groups can be described as having a dominant religious component or
motivation from B.Hoffman, “Holy Terror”: The Implications of Terrorism Motivated by a Religious
Imperative’ Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, vol.18 1995
40
ibid. Hoffman
1)'$7 )' $) 4 $ 6)1% 337 8' 55 )3 $ * )% 4 %)'3

() 31 - ( 6 /)3 '5$ % 33 4 ) '/ )
% 33)1 33 / () 5 $ 4 1)$ C )3)46 5 $ ' 3 6+
% ( 5 $ ('3 $365)% $1'3 $ 6$ ) $ )-
$ 6$ ) % )5 /6 <3 !!# $ %
$ )' / / % <3 ( )3 $ )1I )36 $J- ' (
1)$/ /6 3 ( )1% * )11 ( + ( 3331 / 3) 4
) 33 ) 1)$ )$ 3 ) * - $- G ' 1+ )1 $C
)334 37K' .$ 6 / $ )1 $' 3 /
'5$ 3 ( )' (3+ )1 )5 ) '( / )3' 36
5$) / @I 33 $ % ) . $ () ' ( % 33
'5 33- (3 $ '( ' $ $. 365$) / / (' )'3
) 5$ . 5$)5 $ 6 /' / 3) 4 ) 33 - $ $ ) % )/ 3 .
% '( () 5 $ )1 ( )1% $ 4 6+
) 1)$/ +/' ) / 3 . '( 5$) / 6 ( J, -
) . $ 36+ $ 3 $4 ( ))3)1 )'4 3 :' 1 '(
)5 $ ) $)'4 $ 6$ ) % ( 5 (1( ($ 1( )1 311)$
)/3 ( ' 1'$ $ ( )1 % 33)1 ) - * /$
$ ) G ) &$ '4' 2## )' ( I E)$ . $6 (3 $
) @ 4$ )1 3 ( ) $ % + 6 33
14 A 5 )53 % ) $ ) ) 3 )% $ /3.$ $
% <)36 A ) 4 % 33 $ ?( 5 1)$ '
) 4 )'$ 3. $ J,2- )1 3 G $+ 4
' )$ 6 ' 3 11$ <3 $ ( 1)$ )1
34 ) $$)$ ,& - $5$ ) )1 E)$
(3 $36 . $6 5 4) )'$( ( . 1) (( 5
$ 6$ ) )/3 4 ) ) 8' ) (8' ( 4
*33 4 )1 )( (. 3 - 5)$ $ 6 3)1 $ 39< 3 $'443
8' 336 ' () 5$) 4 $ 1 '$ ?$ ' - 5$ 3 !!D
% // )' ( F' ( '$ 4 % $ 5$ /3 1)$
* )1 .( )$6 )1 $ 3- % ) .)3' $ 1)$ '( )5 $ )
% 33/ ( 33 $) $ 6$C,,- )$ )1 ( 1'3 $
' $. 436 () ) 5 $ ('3 $36 13' 3 () $ 4 $)3 )1
(3$ ( 3 ' )$ 6 ( ) 4 $$)$ )5 $ ) - 1(*3 $5$ .
?5 (6 53 6 /6 ( ) )1$ 34)' 3 $ ) 53 ( )'3
3 . $ $ 34 )' () ' 6 . $6% $ $ 3 4-
41
Ha’aretz, January 23rd 1995, taken from R.Israeli A Manual of Islamic Fundamentalist Terrorism 2002
42
A.Moghadam Palestinian Suicide Terrorism in the Second Intifada p.65 Studies in Conflict and
Terrorism 2003
43
The Jordan Times April 21st 2004
44
p.105 B.Hoffman Sunday Times 13th April 1997
34) 3 () ? 1)$ 5 $ )1 . ' 3C 6

1)$ 9 $/31 . 3' 6 - )$ 3$ $ () $
$ '$ 36 % ( ) )1 . '3 % $
; = () $ 31:' 1 )/ . $ % 36 5 $( .
/ 6) 5 3- ) ? $( )1 5)3)4 - )% . $+ 5
) $ % )' ' $ 4% $ 4 36 )$ %$) 436 / 3 C
( ) ) ( ) ?5 ( )('$/ 11 ( . 36-
. 3' )1 )( 3 55$). 3 55 $ () ' % (

1 '( $$)$ - /) < 3 )( 6 3 )( 6
' ( /) / $ $ 43)$ 1 3 $ 6$ + ) $ 34) 1$
( ) F( ' )1 5 )53C+ ) 3 $ 31 () -
('373* > 3'5 33 <$ / * $ () 1 $( 3)6 36
%)$ 55 ) 3 ) 67 63 5$)5)$ ) - + '36 B ( 3 /$
6 )1 3 (* 4 $ ; . $ $6 )1 1$ '( (*
( $$ )' /6 F 5 C 33$ % ) *33 1)$ 6 $ * )3 $ !"D=
% ' /$ ($ ) $ 5 $1)$ (3' 4 ) )'$ 4
1 3 )1 ' ( /) / $ 5'/3( 4 )1 3 (* 4 $
;% =- <)5'3 ) ' $ $ . (6)1 ($ 4$)'5
113 ) % ( 11)$ () 1)$ + '55)$ 317. 3 ) 4
)( 3() ) (( 5 ( )14$)'5 )/: ( . - /3 )14$)'5
55$). 3 1 $ )1$ : ( ) ()'$ 4 () 1)$ 6-
() ) <$)1 )$ $* $$ ) ,B / 3 . $ $(
)55)$ ' 1)$ * )$ .'3 $ /3 ) )11 $ 1$) $$)$
)$4 ) 4. 4 53 ( () ' 6 )$6 1)$ 3.
$ 1 3 - F $$)$ 1 ( ) () 5 1)$ 5)% $ () ' 6
% ( /) )55$ )55$ . 5$). 6)' 4 5 )53 %
( . ) . 6 $ $ )$ . 3' /3 /6 C,0-
<$)1 )$ $$ ) '44 6 * 6+% )' % ( ) ( )
' $ * 6 )1 )( 3 $ ( ) % ( 4 . )'$ 3. . 3' -
5 $ ('3 $ ($(' ( 6 6/ )$ . 3' /3 /6
. 3' /6 31 - ( 5$ )C 6 ' 8' / ( ' )1
.$ ) . ' 3($(' ( / (' ( 5 $ ) C ( )(
13' ( /6( )( ) $ . 3$ 6 - ( ' )$ 5 )1
.$ ) + 6 . $6 5$ ()' + $ 36 5 $ ) 3 4+ 1
4 )$ $)6 3 . )1 $$ 53 ( /3 3) - ( 5$ )
45
op.cit M.Harrison 2003
46
ibid. M.Harrison
% ) ( )) )1 31 ) )/ (' 4. )
% 33 $ ) . 3' /3 +- - 6 3(
. $)'4 $ 31 +/' 3. 4 ) % 33 4 $$ 5 $ /36-
)' 4 5 )53 3$ 6 4) $)'4 3) 4 5$)( )1 5 1'3 ( )( )
(8' $ $ '3 - 1$ '4 5$)( )1( )) 4 6 6
3( ()$$ ( 36+)$ ( )) ) / ) ()$$ ( )$ 3 1)$ )-
$ ) 43 5$)13 )1 ' ( /) / $- < )53 1$) 33/ (*4$)' +

)1 /) ? +)1 . $6 4 4 . .)3' $ 3. 1)$ '(
) - '$ $ )$ +1$) 5 6( )3)4( 35) )1. % 6 . 3 3
() )- $ ' )% . $+/ ) () ) ) )$ %
4$)'5 )15 )53 * ) 36 ) ) 33 / $ )1 5)5'3 )
.)3' $ 3. - 3 )'4 6 5 )53 ?5$ % 33 4 )
() '( ( ) 36 ) 5 )53 / () '( /) / $ + 6
/3. 6% 334) )5 $ 6 ) 36 1 % * * - $ )
(' ) ,D / % $ 3 $ $ 6 $$ : (3 $ '5 () )
() ( 5 ) $ . 3 ) $ 4 5) - $ 3 $ $
$. % 4 )3 %)'3 7/ /) / $ $ $ $ () (3'
)( 3 5'/3( )5 $ :)$ 1 ()$ $ ($ )-
$ 6+ 3 ' 33 () '( ' 3 1)$
)3)4( 3$ ) )$ 1)$ )( 336 55$). ( ' % $ '5) 6$ ( .
) )'$ $ $ 5 6- 6 $$ : ' <3 /) / $
%)'3 7/ /) / $ () (3' ) )1 '/: ( % 336
33)$ 5 6( )5 )3)4( 3+ )$ 61 $ * 1 ()$ 1)$ ' (
4 $ 336 4$ /65 6( $ 5 6( )3)4 - )1 )5 )
$ ) . $)) $ ' (' /6 $ +5 $ 5 $ (
$ '3 )1 :'$ 1 $ )$ /$) $ 1$ ; !""7!&=)$
)1 1$ )$ $ 3 ) 5$ $)'/3 - () / % )'
)3 ) + % 4 )15 $ 3/ 4 + ' 3 ) /6 $ 6
. )3 ( 4 $ 3%)'3 $ '3 $ ' ,"-
() $ 3 ) . $ . 4 )1 1 36 ) )'$
4 6+/) )1% ( $ ( $ 3 $ / 5 6( )3)46- 1 3'$ ) *
$ . 4 1)$ %$) 4 3 ) + $ / . 13 / ( '
6 . / ' /3 ) 1 $ 3 ( !,"- $$ : 3) '44
<3 6)' 4 5 )53 6 / $ / 33 4 4 33 1)$ )1 5)
' )$ 6 (3' 4 )11 36 ( $- 6 6/ 53 ( 4 ) )
$ 3 $ ' (( 5 /3 ?5$ ) )1 4 $ . $ ($(' (
)1 $ 3. - )$ ? 53+ / .)'$ )1 4$6+ ? ' 1 $ +
47
www.npr.org April 9th 2002
48
see The Jordan Times June 2nd 2004: ‘Trauma soaring among children – UN’ about children losing all
sense of normalcy UNWRA has released fresh statistics on children and intifada
( $
% )% $ $( (53 $ )$ 3 ( ('3'$ (
/ )3' () 53 ( - 6 53 ( $ 4$ ) ) )( 336
34 1)( - - )(('56 4 1)$( + ( $ 3- $)% 4 '5
' )$ $ )( 6 $ $ . ' 3 () 1)$ /3 % )4 (+
' 8' .)( 3 )5 ) (5 ( 6 ) 3% ( )( ;
)/ $. ) 1 % 33 % () ) )$6=- () / ) )1
$ 34)' )$4 ) 3 1 ()$ * 4 36 () 53?
5 ) )-
) $ $ 4 1 4 /6 $$ : ) % $ 5)3 ( 3
$ 1( ) $ .$ $ 3 ) 5 / % '(
/) / 4 )5 - <)5'3 $ '55)$ 1)$ ' ( )5 $ ) 1 33 %
5)5'3 ) )5 1'3)1 5 ( /' 1 5 $ '55)$ $ -
55$). 33. 3 1)$ (* . $6 $ ( 336 $ 5) ) ( 4
5)3 ( 3(3 +1)$ ? 53 + $36 6 )1 3)< ( <$)(
3. 3 )1 '55)$ % $ 3)% ,!-
() ( 5 ) 33 ' ( /) / $ $ 3 3 )'4 .
:)$ 6 )1< 3 ' ( /) / $ $ - $ 5$ 7 3 ( /6 4 $
) ) ? + 6% $ %)$3 () )$ . )3 ($
%) . 4 $ '( $ - ('3 $ 4$)'5
3 ' %) /' ) 8' 3 ' / $ ) - () $ +
' %) &#7,#H )1 )5 $ ) '( $$)$ ( )1
( F 3 (* )% C() 5$ $ 36)11 3 B#-
3 4$)'5 $ . / '44 ) %) +1$' $
% $ $)3 )( 6+ 6 / $6 4 ) 5$). $ 8' 3 6 %
($ $ )( 3 ' + )$ ) 1)33)% 5 11 $ 1$)
$ ) 3) 5 $ $( 3 ('3'$ 31$ - 6 . $5$
'$ $ ( )1 (5 ) +F ) 5 1)$% $ 1 /'
5 / (*% $ 1)$ ' 6CB - $) )$4 ) C $ 4(5 $ 5 ( .
' )1%) ( / ' ) 1) $ 5 $( 5 ) )1' $ 5 $- 6
$ (3 ) 3 +( () ( 3 ?53) . ' $ 4'
)15$ 4 (6 ( ?53) $ 3'( ( )1 )( 3
)' 7 )/) 67 $( %) -
49
According to the Centre for Policy and Survey research: in 1993 65% of Palestinians in the Occupied
Territories were in favour of Oslo, and 57% were prepared to amend the PLO’s national charter to
formally acknowledge Israel’s right to exist. In 2002 70% of Palestinians believed that Ariel Sharon’s
plan to withdraw from parts of the Gaza Strip and some settlements is not serious at all to somewhat not
serious (Poll No.51, www.jmcc.org.) At this time 63.1% of Palestinians polled supported to some extent
the use of suicide bombing operations.
50
for more on female suicide bombers see Clara Beyler at www.ict.org
51
Donnelly ‘The Suicide Sisterhood’’ National Review Online April 26th 2002
$ $ % &
<3 '3 7 ) 3 )($ ) )1( 3 $ 1$) )11( 3

+ ( ))3 $ 34)' )'$( 33 3. $ 4 )1
1$ 4 3 /6 ) $ (3 F< 3 C 1$) FO ) 6C
$)'4 % /)1 )( $ ) 5$)5 4 - . ('$ )$63))*
% / %%%-5 %-)$4- 3 $ . 3 ? )% ( () 13( 5 $.
33 5 ( )1 . $6 6 31 . 331)$ )1 - 11 ( )1 )
6)' 4 (3 $ 1$) ()33 ( )1 $ 3 1 ( )$( ; =
' 4 ( ; = 5)$ )1&# 5 / $ 2###7& '4'
2##2@ 3 2B ' ( /) / $ / % "72, 6 $ )3 +0 ' $ "
6 $ )1 4 P 3 0#B2-
465 )$ )(('5 G * 1)33)% 4 $

(*) $ 3 ? /))* % $ ($ % ( $ % . 361$) ) '
465 )$ B& - 13 36 $ 3 $ 4 )1 ? (-
!0D % $ 3). $$ G * $
$$ )$ ? /))* % $ $ 5$ 7 $ 3 ( % $ ). -
< ) )()5 )1 )' ( ) +() ' ) / ($ 36 ($('3
( ))3- ( ))3 ; ) )$* 4 1'4
)( ) = )$ 4 3' ? () ' ' B,-
<3 ' )$ 6 ' ' ) ) )' () $)3)1 '( ) +

5 $ )1 3) (()$ + 3 5 $ )1 ? /))* % $
$ () 4 7 $ 3 $ 3- $ () $ $6 ) 3)
52
D.Burdman ‘Education, Indoctrination and Incitement: Palestinian Children on their Way to
Martyrdom’ Terrorism and Political Violence 2003 p.106
53
ibid.
54
The textbooks created by Egypt and Jordan include:
Palestinian National Education, p.67-68, For First Grade: poems to be learned by rote, ‘My Homeland’:
‘…The youth will not tire, They desire to be free or perish, We draw our water from death, And will not
be as slaves to the enemy’
Our Arabic Language, p.64-66 for Fifth Grade: ‘Know my son, that Palestine is your country…that its
pure soil is drenched with the blood of martyrs…’ Question: ‘Why must we fight the Jews and drive them
out of our land?’
Eighth Grade: Regarding the denigration of the Jews: ‘Racism: Mankind has suffered from this evil both
in ancient as well as modern times, for indeed Satan has, in the eyes of many people, made their evil
actions appear beautiful…Such a people are the Jews…’ (In Islamic Education, p.95)
These concepts are also used in Arabic language and grammar exercises for instance, ‘Determine what is
the subject, and what is the predicate, in the following sentence is: The jihad is a religious duty of every
Moslem man and woman’. (from, Our Arabic Language for 5th Grade, p.167). For further information on
textbooks see ‘Report: Palestinian Authority School Textbooks’ by the Centre for Monitoring the Impact
of Peace (CMIP).
(()$ 1 1' 4 $ 8' $ /6 ) BB-
5 / $ 2### <3 ' )$ 6 $6)1 '( ) '$$ ('3'

) 5$ 1$ )1 $ )1 ? /))* % ( () 7
( '/ 3$ 1)$ - '$ $ )$ +. $/ 3 5' /6 ( $
() . 6 4 % )' )) '( ( 1'3 $ 3 55 $ 4 5$ -
<3 (+ 5 $ 3 + 36
% 55$ 3. ) 5$)4$ /) / 1)$ ( $ )1
() ; $ 4 ' $ 2###= % '$/ 4 1 4-
<3 3. ) . 36 ( 3 )' )1 5$)4$
(35 .)( 4 ( 3$ ($ 1( $ 3. 1)$ - 6
. (3' $ ( )% 4 31 )1 $ 6$ 1 $31 -
$ 4 ' )113 3. ) (
. % 4 )1 .)3 ( ($ 3* 3 )) )1 44$ . .)3
/ . )'$ ( ' )1)/. )' () ( $ B0-
.)$( 4 ) . ) )1 $$)$ )$4 ) ) )1

. ' 3/) / $ ) 6 5$)( / ( ' 6 ( $ 36 ). $3 5
6 $ 5$) '( )1 () ' 6- ( 4$)'5 ()33( ) )1
. '3 ) ( $ ( $ (% ( . ( 3. . '3
% 33 ) ) ? / 55 $ * 7'5 )1 4$)'5- )3' )
) $ ( $ ( 3 ) 3 5$)4$ 4) 7 ) 3
/31 6 % '( ) 6 5$) ) 5 (
$ () (3 ) (3' 4 $ ) )1 ( +$ 7 '( ) 7
() ) 4 ) '$ 3 11 ( )13) 47 $ () ) 4-
'
& ! ' '

! ( "
) ( !
* "+,
'( $$)$ ' 8' 1)$ )1 $$)$ - ) '11 $ ) /)

@/6 .( )1 (*+ $1 3 + /6 (* $
3. + $ 1 3 - 1 % 33 ) $ ( . 4
55
13th October 2001, European Parliament passed Amendment no.177 which specifies that appropriations
for funding can only be used for ‘projects supporting peace, understanding, reconciliation and the
breaking down of hatred’.
56
H.W.Kushner, small children trade baseball type cards of suicide bombers, scientific studies suggest
that props similar to baseball cards can lead to imitative behaviour in children see ‘Suicide Bombers:
Business as Usual’ Studies in Conflict and Terrorism 1996
57
History and September 11 by Francis Fukuyama in Worlds In Collision 2002
5 ) ) 3 (* 4 ' 1( ) )14$ 1 ' / / )'$(

)1 % 33- '$ 4 1)$ )1 (* ' / $ (
$$)$ )$4 ) 5))3)15) 3 ' ( /) / $ - 1)$ $
( / 3% ' $ ' /$ 33 )1()' $7 $$)$ '$ $ 3 4
) $$)$ % )3- )1 $$)$ ( . 6 )1 6 * ) )
:' 16 -
$ $ %) 3 )1 1 ( B"- 1$ 3 5 $ ) )1 $$)$
4$)'5 3 $ 4 )1.'3 $ /3 3* 36 $4 - (
?$ 36 11('3 )()' $ ' ( (* ) ( $ $$)$ )
% 6) $4 + / 1 ( ) '$ .$' 3 -
( ( 722 )1 ()' $7 $$)$ ()' $7 $$)$ $ */ 4
5 $( . 44$ )$- )4' $ 4 ' / ( $ 1'3 ) )
). $ $ ( - $ )1367 )136 55$) ( )$ $ 5 . .6
)% )1 3 $6 4 $ 55$)5$ - $ '3 7 (53 $6
1$ %)$*% ( 3% 65 $ .)3. ()$$ 5) 4%
4$ )1 $ .)3. ( 33 1)$- )). $() $$)$ % .
) ' $ 5)3 ( 3 '$ 3) / ( ($ 36
5 6( )3)46 .)3. ) $% $ . $6 $ 35) /3 6 F% $
) $$)$ C% 33 5 ( 5$)5)$ ) 36 ) 3)%73. 3)5 $ )$ $ $
() $)33 4 -
5 $ ( 31 ( ; ' ( = $$)$ $4 )($ ( - 3)4(

/ /6 $)' 4 )'4 1 $ % $4 C ) (
5)5'3 ) +5)5'3 $ ). $ 4 6 % 335$ . 3 4). $ % 33/
1)$( )( 4 5)3(6)$ 1 ( 3) 4 3()$ 3 '55)$ - :'? 5) )
)1 % $ ()% $ ( ()'$ 4 )1 ' ( $$)$ () ) 36
/ /)' /6 5)* )1 $$)$ )$4 ) - 3)4( )
$4 4 ' )($ ( ' / 6$ ( 3)$ ( )$ 5 $ 4
$ $)'4 ) ). $ ' $ 4 )1 $ 5)5'3 ) 3. )
3 )'4 ? $ 3 ( )1 44$ ) %)'3 / ' % 3() 6'5$ 41$)
. ( 5)5'3 ) %)'3 / ' 3* 36 )3 ) 4). $ 3( 4
5)3(6- ) 1 4 )$ 5$ . '( /) / 4 $ 36 %)'3
$ 8' $ )3$ /3 ' 5 ) )1(. 3$ 4 - $ 36 )($ (
3 @ )% 1 $ ( (. 33/ $ ) % ( 3/ $ 3 )($ (
5$ 3. / :' 1 /36 ($ 1( ) 5$ . 3) )131 3 )
6 $ 5) )1 )($ ( ' / () $ /6 $'3 )13 %
)$ 33 4 (6- % 6$ 33) 47 $ ( 4 ( ) 36() 1$)
% )( % $ $$)$ )$4 ) /$ - /$ 3
)($ ( ( ) )3$ % 5$ 5)3( )11 $ '
58
Rohan Gunaratna ‘Suicide Terrorism: A Global Threat’ Janes Intelligence Review 2000
(. 3$ 4 ) $ )1 )( ) 35 ) )(
1$) % ( ' ( $$)$ - )($ ( $ 5) ' /@
F % 33($ %)$3 % ( '( ) )1 )3 ) 33'$
/ (' /)' )131 $ (( /3 ) . $6) CB!- $$)$ 4$)'5
( / . ) ( )$ ('373* 4$)'5 % ($ /36 $) 4
113 ) 3)6 36 ) 43 3 $+ -4- <EE +
4$)'5 % $ $ )( 6+)$ :)$ 6 $ )1+ '55)$ '( (*
-4- / ) !"# <3 ) 6- (* () I1$)
5 )53+1)$ 5 )53 J- $ ? 53 )1( 4 1$) % +1)33)%
5 $ ) )15$)1)' 33' ) - I % $ ' / 1)'4 )
$)6 +1$) )' A J0#- 1 (* $ $ '3 )15)3 ( 3
5$ ) 34 4$ . ( 5)3 ( 3$ 5) ( $6+ 1
6 $ 1$) 5$ . 6 )1 . '3 ' )$ ) 6
' / 3% ($ 3-
() 13( % $ ' ( $$)$ $'5 11 $ ))4$ 361)$ $

)/ ' 1)$ 55$) ( ) (*3 4 ' /' $ ()7)5 $ )
/ % 5 ( 336 11 ( ()' $ - )$ 4 $ %
4 $ $ )1 $$)$ ) $ ( I 33 % 6
1$) )' $ '( ' ) $ J I% 3
65 )1 $$)$ 1( $ 3 $ 11 $ + $ )'4
3$ 6 ) $ :) ()' $7 ( ) J0 - $ ) 3() ' 6
$ 5 36 / () 43 )3$ )1 $ 3 ? $' ) )1() 13( % (
( $ ( $ 3 1% ( )1 $ ) 3$ 3 ) - $
* ( )% $ 5 $ 6 ( )$ + ( ' $
. )1 )$% 6+ ( / ) ' 1'3 4) ) - )$% 4
53) $ ( )3 / % 5$ % ( $ '3
( 1$ % ( ))* 11 ( 1$) /$' $6 2##2- $ )' (
1)$ 5$ 3 ) 3 5$ 5 $ ) 3 1)$ 3
$$ )$6 5)3 ( 3 ' ) ) 6 ). $ $$ )$6 () $)3 %
1 $ 36 - ) 4$ )1 4) ) / )3' 36 3- )7
4) 4 ( /6 $4 4). $ ) 36 3 ) 3)(*
5$) $ ( ) )1 () 13(-
59
Benjamin R.Barber ‘Democracy and Terror in the Era of Jihadis’, in Worlds in Collision p.256
60
Ali Ahmed Said, p.178 C.Reuter My Life is a Weapon 2004
61
R.Paz. In 2000 the President Putin of Russia visited India and signed a Declaration on Strategic
Partnership between Russia and India. In 2001 the two states signed the Moscow Declaration of Russia
and India on Combating International Terrorism where the states affirmed that international terrorism is a
threat to peace and security, a grave violation of human rights and a crime against humanity. On 6th June
2000 the Russian Interior Minister told a press conference that he had signed two protocols of co-
operation between the Russian Interior Ministry and the Israeli-law-enforcement bodies i.e. the General
Security Service and the Israel Police.
/3 6 )1 $$)$ )$4 ) ) $ ($' $ 3 ) $ (5 ( 6 )

5$) ) 6 )1 $ 6$ /6 '5536 4 /) 3 $6
)1 () )( 6- % * 4 )1 )$4 )
$ ). 3)11 ( 3 $ )1($ ( 3 5)$ ( - )$ 44$ .
)(('5 ) ) 36 $ 1)$( $ (36 (. 4 )
('$ 3- $ )1 3 $6 ( ) $ 3 5)3(6 )1 $4
) + )' )3 ) + 5 $ ) % 33- . 4 () )
% )(('5 $$ )$ $ 1'3- 3 % )1 )(('5 )
(('56 4<)% $ ( / $ )1 5)5'3 )
% ( )(('56 4- '$ 4 3) < ( <$)( 3. 4 $
$)55 /6 ,#H $ '3 )1 $ 3 ( 6 (3) '$ ?(3' ) )1
<3 %)$* $ - ' ) $ )$ 1'$ $ ( ()
$ '3 )1 ('$1 % +/3)(* )' )3 ) - <)3(
)'3 ) 36 / 1)33)% 1 6 %)$*02- 1 ()'3 / 5$).
)3 4 ) )1 ' ( /) / $ ;% ) . 3$ 6 ()
$ = $. $$ ) %)'3 7/ /) / $ 5$ 5 (
()'3 / 1)$ ? (' 4 '( ( /' $ ) '( . (-
1 (+ ) 36 )/)3 $ $ )3. )1 < 3 )( 6 )1
$$)$ )$4 ) % ) ( )11 $ ) 1' $ 7 )' 4 )1 /) / $C
1 36 ' 5$). 4 ( .-
?$ 36 () $). $ 3 5 $ ) % 33 / :' 1 /6 $ 3
( $6 ) 5$ . 1'$ $ ' ( (* - $' $
/ 1 33 ' / $ )1 (* % $ 3 5$)5 $0& 1$) G+
3 )'4 $$)$ )$4 ) () 36 .)% ) $ 3 4
$ 3C $4 ) - 5 )1($ ( 1$) $ 3 '5$
)'$ 5$) )' ( )1 334 3 6 1$) $ ) 3 )'$ )1
' (+ $ 3 ) () ' 4 5$): ( )() 53 ) ; . )'4
6$ . $)' ) () 536 % $ 3 '5$ )'$ 1 4 /'
) % % ( ( ' ) $' ) *
%)'3 33)% $ 3 ) ?3 ( 5 '$ !0D-= $ 3C )/ (6
$ 4$ 4 5 )1 % 33 ) 7 4) /3 ( ) 36 )
5$ ) 5)3(6 )* ($ )5$ 36 ?3
% ( () . 36 () ( 336 ( / () ( 3 ' $
5$) ( ) 4' )15$ . 4 '( (* -
62
Israeli military commanders in Lebanon had ordered that a minimum of two people occupy every
moving car in the occupied zone on the misassumption that suicide bombers would not kill unwitting
passengers.
63
No Israeli has been killed in a terrorist attack in an area with the security fence whereas 19 have been
killed and 102 injured where the fence is not yet complete. See www.adl.org/Israel/court_of_justice.asp
% 33 ()' $7 $$)$ $ 46 )$4 ) % '

16 % 6 )1$ ). 4 )$ $ '( 4 ( . '( ) )
.)3' $ 1)$ ' ( ) - ) $ ( 5$) ) )
( 5 4 1)$ ' ( $$)$ + 3 ( 4 )1
5$) ) ) )1 . )3 ( - 5$)( )1 $ ($' + )($ )
$ ($' ' / () 1$) )$ 4 - )$ ? 53 $ )'3 )
/ 5) $ )1 ' ( /) / $ 5 '5 5'/3( 53 ( )$ $ )
F $ $ 11 ( J /6 % ( ' ( /) / $ / () )3
% ) ) $ * ) '3 - 3 4 ? /))* . /
34 /6 1$ 8' $ 1$ ( ) E)$ - )$ $ 5 $ 5$)
3 ( (3$ ( )'3 )5 5$ ( 4 )1 )36 $ $ )
) 8' )'3 $ '$ ) () ( 5 )1 $. 4
% 6 )1 ) ) $ ( 4 $ 5 $ ' 33 . 3- ' 6 )1 ' 3
$ 34)' 3 $ . $6% $ - 1 4$ 7$)) $ . ( 6 ' /
3% '( - $$)$ )$4 ) ' ) / 33)% )1 )11 $
5$ )- )1 (' () ( $ % 4$)'5 '( 37K % (
5$ (+4)$4 4 31 ) ? 4 () 13( $'443 - ' 4
)G ) . ) 4 () ) ) $ 3 -
' 53 1)$ ) 4 )1 $$)$ )$4 )
) 5$ 1 $+/) )1% ( $ . 3 1 )$4 ) $ ) '(( -
' * )$ $ 5) /3 6 1)$ 4 5)$ $ 6 /
% $6)1 ( 4 . (3 /6() . 6 4 4 % )' 5$)5 $ ?53 )
6/ ' % 436 5 4 5'/3( )5 ) )% $ ) )1
() 13(- G/)33 C () ' ( ) $ 4 )5 $ ) +1)$ ? 53 +
. / () . $6 )5 ( - ' $ % 33 5)$ ( )1
$ 5)$ 4 3)( 3 $ 4) 3 - ) )1 ('3'$ 3$ 5$ .
5' +F )$ 5)$ $53 C-0,
'!(')* !(
' ( /) / $ $ ) . /6 6 () / ) )1$ 34)' + ) 3 +

5$ ) 3 5 6( )3)4( 31 ()$ - $$ ) 3 6 )1 ( 1$)
) . ' 3 % ) .)3' $ 1)$ '( ) $ $ 4$)'5
1)$ % ) 6)5 $ - $$)$ )$4 ) 3. 4) $)'4
)$ $ ) 35$)( - 6 ( ) ' ( /) / 4 ( (/ ( ' )1
() 7 11 ( . . 5 6( )3)4( 3 5 ( '5) $4
' ( - 6 /3 4 )( 6 % ) 6 (* 6/3. $
% 33/ - 3 )'4 6 $ ) )1 ) . )
' ( /) / $ + 6 $ ) $ . /6 )5 $ ) 3 ( (3
() $ ) - )$4 ) % 33'3 36 )5 ( 8' % (
64
Malek Wabdeh a Hezbollah cultural representative in C.Reuter My Life Is A Weapon p.73
/ 3 . % 33 ) 11 ( . 36 11( 36 () $( $4 ) () 536-
) %)$$6 4 % $ 55 $ ( )1 ' ( /) / 4
()' $ % % ( $ ) () 13( / % 6 %) 5 $ ('3 $
5$ +1)$ ? 53 ' $ / + (6 )1 ? $ 34$)'5 )
( $$6 )' (* ) / 31 )1 ' 1 () ' 6+1)$ ? 53 37
K )( 4$)'5 - 3)+ 1( '( /) / 4
55 $ $ 8 ) 8' (*36 33' $ 5$) $ ( () 13( )
( $65$ () ) )$ ) 5 $ ) 3. 3 )/ (' -
) ( )1 % 4 / 3 /' 3) 4 % $ )$ '(
$$)$ 1 / 3 ( )15)% $ 1 .)'$ )1% * $ 4$)'5 )$
$5$ ' ( /) / $ )1< 3 ) . '$ )(*
1 ('36 )1 $ $4 - $ 5) )1 $ .( )1 55 3 4'
$ $ 6 5 6 )% $ 5 )53 % ) ' / ) )5 3 6
$ % 33 4 ) *33 3. - $ ) . ( ) '44 '(
$$)$ 31%)$* / $ ) $ 1)$ )1 $$)$ )1 $ $4
/ . )'$ () ( $ + 3 )'4 36 ' )1 ' ( /) / 4
$ % ) ) 534 )1 5 )53 1 $ 6 ) $ 1)$ )1
$ ( %)'3 . ) - $ ($ 36 ) 1 '373 )( 6
($ 5) . $ '$ ) 5)3 ( 3. )3 ( - $' ) $4 $
$ )$ ( % ) ( 5 $)' ' / $ )11 3
13( ( / '( 4$ $% (* 4 /) / ( % 3* ) 3 $4
($)% ) 31+/' ('3'$ )1 / %)$ 4
11)$ ) F( ' C . <3 / $ $ ('$$ ' )
)$ 6 %)'3 . ) 1 6' ) 36 ) 7 ' ( 31)$ )1
(* . 3 ( . 5$ ) 3 6 . $.
( 1)$ $ ( . 4 $ $ / (' 6
$ /3)% 4 3. '5 ) ))$ 5 )1 $ 6 ' ) %
) 6 6 + ) $% %)'3 / 33)4 ( 3 $$ ) 3 ()' $7
5$) '( . ) () ' +/' . ( ) ) '55)$ -
. 3 1)$ 5)% $7 $ 4 . $ $ 5$
) 3 % ( 6 . / $ . 4 )$ % 6 6 $ 1)$-
% $ )1 $ ) $ 39< 3 5 $1 ( 33' $ ) )1 % (
55 % $ 46 * ) 1$ ) ) 36 ) 1 3 ) (8' $
% * /' 6 ('$ ) 6 . . / 1)$4)
( ) ($ 4 ' - $ 3 /)3 $ )(('5 ) +
:' 1 $) ( 336 /6 ) )5 '( (* - 3))*
($ 436 )'4 $$)$ )$4 ) () ' % '(
(* :' )5$). 5) - - :' )5$). 6( -
'( $$)$ ' 8' 1)$ )1 $$)$ / (' 6 $(

1)$ )1 5 6( )3)4( 3 % $1 $ % $ 5 $5 $ )$ 5$ 7 5 6
5' % ( 6/ )' ) /6 * 4 )% 31 3) 4
% .( - $ () 5$ /3 6 )1 ( 55 $ )
* 5) /3 ) 5$ ( 13' ( ( 1 $ 1 ()$
)$ )' 36- ) 47 $ )3' ) ) $ ( 5 ) ) % 33 ) /
/' 3 ) () ($ 31 ( )$ % 33 6 $4 )336 1$) $)'
/3 / (3) ))$ - / % 6 ) )5 6(6(3 ) 3
) ' - ) ' '$ 1)$ ) * )% 31
6 '( /) / $ . / () () . ( ) 36 % 6 1)$
5 $ ) 336+ . ' 336+ ) 35 $ 5 )53C 534 )' $ *
'( )- ( ) 36 %) $ % $+ 4. 5)% $ )1
4 + ' ( /) / $ %)'3 * 5 1 6()'3 %
3 3 $ 3 11 $ ( ) $ F( ' C $ ( ( ' 336 * -
!" !
# $ % % & "
# " ' % ( " & ## )* & + " $,-
( .% " . "
! " ! / 0 &
" % " #& #'
& # ! &" 1 #! " ,

" & 2" 3 # % $
! " &" 4 )5 & )66-7' #
" " &" , ! # $3 %% $
& 3 % % & " $'
' ( % % & # # # & #

! % "# % '1 !! , !"
& ( 8 "
# # & ##" " ,& $ ,#
$ %" # % '9 , &
# $: # ( ; %" , # $
# & % % $ " " ,
" ,! '
& ## $ ## ", %&" $< &

=" #% .# &
# "# & . &
( ## '
†Law Student, Birkbeck, University of London

1
(2005) Johnson, P.Telegraph, 8th March 2005 UK Terror suspects can be confined at home
telegraph.co.uk/news
> $, , #" (! (
# $ # ' 3 #,
# " $ )66- 4 7 % %
% # ! -- ( ': # ( &
#" % ( % )66?, ( 3 ! " !
$, ( " #! $ +( ,: ,
% #! , ( : 3 $% ! ,
( " + " ! 1 # ! )66?'
& ! )665 ! ?@* % # ! -- )66-

& # " ' % & " !& #
& "# # )665,)A % % ! &&
-- ' % % ! &% & #
&& ' : & & # # #
$# $ "&& $ " % '
%% # $ $ & ; 3 #%
" " ,!" & # " $, # <
"# ! & ( !" B"

?? #" ! " !$ && %% !$
# $' $, C " " ':
% , " 8 ( && " $
& " 9'
$ " % "% & &

" % "# % $!
" ' " " 3 #
! & && " % , $ !$ ,
# ( " # % ( # " ': ,
/" # " ! ( &
( & % # ! --'
" ; "# D # "

# $ ' % " % " "% %"!
"# ! & % "' & " & ! %
%"! -* $ '
: ,/ D ,% " " %
& "# D , 8 # &"
( ! " E%" # " " % ! ,
# 9' % ! & # $
# " & % " & # "!2 ,
2005] Home Secretary’s Proposal on House Arrest 143
## # !$ $ "
## 48 ## 97 1 # ! )665, $ ! &
2
" # ' % " & & &
" '
%
! " &
% F $ . " , &% &!
! =" & # ,# "
! % # ! " " & # D
" ' % E8 % &
# &2" , " ! $ " ! #%
$ & & 9'
% % ( "% & # $/
&" " " " & % "% #
"# # & G3H # +" $' 'D .%
% & E8 # #% "
& # % " & 9'
& # # $ 1 /" ( %
H & )66?') & "
;I #$ # % % ( ! !
&% % ! % 2$
! & ': =" , & ,&
! ,!" ! # '
E; " &+" , $ ( #$ ,
% / #$ ! )66)E
8 % " !$ % " $& #

# & #' % "
"# '/" "# " % J:
=" " $ ! ! ( & &
, # # ': , , " ( &
1
(2005) Johnson, P.Telegraph, 8th March 2005 UK Terror suspects can be confined at home
telegraph.co.uk/news
2
(2005) Privacy International: UK announces house arrests and control orders
www.privacyinternational.org ; (2003) BBC News: Q and A: Anti-terrorism legislation
newsvote.bbc.co.uk; (2005) HL Paper 61 HC 389: Prevention Of Terrorism Bill: Preliminary Report The
Stationery Office Limited(2005) Ward, B.: UK : New Terrorism Law Fundamentally flawed
hrw.org/english.docs; (2005) Blunkett.D MP: Defending the Democratic State and Maintaining Liberty-
Two sides of the same coin? www.homeoffice.gov.uk/docs3/hs_speech_harvard04.html
" ## ; ': & # $, #" &

! " # ( # $ & 9'
'/ " ( ; & "

2 $ !$ 0 &/ ! ! (
3 ! & # &
$J '/ " ( ! ! & % $
% & # & # #% . ! #
% ' ;I #
% &! " $' !
2
" & " 0 !" &% % " " '
# # $ ( #" # !"
% ! , #" #
. 'D # " # ( # ( & ( #" ! " %" $
" & "$ % ! $' 1 /" (
" !$ .% " & , #
$' " ! "# #
" ! $ ;# " ,# " # && " # %
# '/" ! & , #
' D =" $ !
'
: "# # $, " # 2
" &
" " "# , # % % (
( &8# 9'D " ! " $ &
# , ! . $ #
# #'
!" #$% #! # #! #
# && ! ! # ## !" !"" ! ' !
( %' ( !) #* %# ! # # ))!# ! & $
$ " ! ! #! #'+ ! " $% ( ( ,
)! *
! ( ! - ) ) # !" & #" % ( %' #

#
. & # ! ! / 0 1# ( #2 3456' ( !
) # #! ! % $ ) !7 0 1 !"" #' + ! % $
( !& 8 #& % +* ## # + #
8) !) ! $! % ( % !" % $ (* !+ & ' #
#! 9 ! 3 )! # ! #) ) 7 :
. ) # $! %: $ ! (
( 2' #! % # ( !" ( !) # '
! ) % ! %! # - ('# !+ + # "
! + %#) ! $! % ( %*
) % # !" ! # & $! 8 # # %*
# ! $% *; $ # #$!!- $! ! !"
% ! +'7 )!# & +' ) ) # $
$ - # % # 34<= /' !" /! !"
$ 1 >* ( 9 ( # ! )! ) # + #
) & ! ! ( !) ! #* ! # $%
+ # ))!# ! " #( " !" ) $ $ !*
' ! # # ! ) ) % ( " !
! 7 " 1: !+ ( "! ## #'" "! #! ! #'
) #! # # !" " #+ #' ( ( "! ! ! #'
) ! "! #! # + ! "! !# # ! # #*
! 3? % !+ # ! !)! % ! ( !) # + #
†Birkbeck College, University of London

1
See Le corps puni: le châtiment sous l’Ancien Régime by Michel Porret, in Sciences Humaines, Hors
série entitled Violences, No 47 Dec 2004/Jan-Febr 2004.
2
To know more about the history of the implementation of the death penalty in early times, see p.3 in The
Abolition of the Death Penalty in International Law by William A. Schabas, 3rd edn, Cambridge
University Press.
!" ! 9! ; * $ & ! ) & !& ) &

& (' 8) ! % @ # ) ! ) # ! % @# $ # !
7% "! % ' !! "! !! 1*
!+ & ' ( ) $! ! # * # ( '

! !(# / # .34A5,346B2'+ ! ) $ # " ! #
7 / # # # 34?B1' ) % " !
$ "( "! $! ! ##* # + # ! 0
# 0 ( !) # * " ' !"" ! ! "% !"" # !
! ! $ % )!+ !" @ ( #* ( 7 ## $! %1
! !$ ( ! "! 7 ) #! $! %1' ## ( # ## ##
!" #) !" # "" ( % !" ! )! ) # *
# $! ! !" !"" ! !"
) % "! ! ! !"" #*
; ; ! ! ' ( !) # # #!$ ) !( ##& %

( !""# $% ! ! # ( #* #)
) !"! ( + % ) % #) & ' $ !
# )! # # # ! ! #' # + # ! ! % )! %
( * !+ & ' # ) # ! @& !"" #' ! # ##
# ( ( # 8 ! '+ ## !$ !" +
" ) ) !" +' %) # ! ( !
( !" ) $ %' # # 0 $% 9 % !$ #! ' (
/! ##! "! ( # >==>C7 !& + ( !
! # ## ) % #! ! )) % ! @ & !"" #
# #" ! !( ! %! ( ) #! #'$ # !" %'
% ! " % ! ) !# # !" ! #!
"! $ " "! ### & # !# #1*
!# ! + " # ! # # #D ! +! #'+ #
# # !" @& ) % ! +D ! + 8
!# # ( ! ! + ! $ ! $! ! #
) ! ##D ! ! #+ # # ! #') !" # ## % + 8
!+ ! + - # ## !" ) % +
## (@ & #.* * $ !+ 35 !" !"" , ! !"
8 ! 2' + ) !& !& & + ! ( !+ ( $! % !"
! (! + # # #! % ! +'
! # !+ ) % "! @ & !"" ## ) $
! +*
+ $ + ! !" ! + !# !
) !* #+ "! # ! ) %! ! # )$ +
2005] Juvenile Death Penalty 147
*;* ! + ( ( 8 ! !" @ & #' ; )

/! #! 9 3'>==< & (! + ) ) # "!
@& #' ( < ! B # ! # ! (
!# %! ! "! ! +
%! ( 35*
) ! $ ! !" 8 ! !" @& ## " $ !"

! # . 2* 9 ! !& '$ %! !& ! # #
!+ "! ' #! ! # # !+ #! % ! # !"
! + #! 8 # ! ( @& ) %') )#
& ! !" '(& ( ) !" $! ! !"
@& ) % . 2*
! "# #!$ " # #!

# %
! !& ! #'+ $ ( )! ) #' ! #

" # #! !" ! + ! ( ! A5.32!" ; !"
! /! !" # * # ( ' !
! % !" # # # !) #& # !" +! + .32 !
(! .>2 # !) ' + 8) % 8 @& !"" #" !
) %*
&' # #! # % ( !"( " %)
# #!* # * !# " ! )#! + %,** '
?.<2 !" // )! $ # # "! #

! $ !+ 35* ) !& # 7; #!" # !$
)!# "! # ! $% ) #! # $ !+ ( % # !"
( 1*
// + # !) 36?? #3<> # ) #* ;
# #) " # & ! ! ) !& #! !" ?.<2'
# & (7 ( '# $@ ! ! # ! !# # ! )!#
) ) # ! % ) #! ' (# ) # "!
! $% ) #! #$ !+ 35 % #!" ( 1*
* + % * !" ,* *'
/ /' !) 3656'#) " % )! $ # 8 ! !"

@& # A4. 2 ) !& #: 7 )
) # ! " ) #! + ! )!##$ % !" #
# $ )!# "! !"" # ! $% ) #! #$ !+ (
% # !" ( 1* 36> # # + ) #! / / 3#'>==A'
+ 8 ) ! # !" ; ;! A'+ !
! ! "% *
!# ) % % #) " # & ! * !+ & '# &

# # & ( # & ! # ! ) !& #! # !" / /'
+ %$ ! ) $ + + ! + $ "#
) ) #!" # *
- . #* !# ) * !#
% % / #
! + #! ) ! $ # # !"
) % ( # @& !"" #* ## !" $% E &
/! & ! ( # 3>'36B6' ?5:7 % #'
) % % ! $ )! ! ( # )! ) #!
+ !+ # ( % #!" ( !" !"" 1*
0' # #! /# + % # % + #!%)
(! # & 8) ##% "! $ 8 ! !" @ & # #

+ *
/ )# * /# + %
, #%# ' B.<2 !" # /! & !

) !& # : 7/ ) ) # # ! $ )!# )!
) #! # + !' + # ! '+ 35
% # !" ( 1* 3#'>==A'>B !" A< ; . ( 0 ! !"
; #2# #+ ) #! #/! & ! ' !)
3
Being added that Somalia had no recognizable government at that moment.
36?6* ! # & ! ! & ) !&#! #$ $%

# #+ !# +# % ) !& "! @& ) %B*
)# * # + %# " !# * !"
7 # # ! $ )! ! "! # !
$% 1 " / ' <.A2* 3 #'
>==A'A= # # + ) # ! #/ '+ + # !)
366=* # ! # & ! ! #)! *
! # & % + % " * # )! ! $%
#% ! 8 #! !" !"" #" !
) % ( ! + <'7 % # #
+! F 36B , !+ ) # !! ! ! !" $!&
#* "( 36B # 36> # ) # !
/! & ! ! ( # !" / ') # ;! ; '
+ ) #! // * !# ! + '+ #
! ) % ! ! ( # #1* ! !"
# !& ! ( # #'! #! # !" !
+ ! # !" @& ) %*
"# #!$ " % )%

# #!!#(
)) # @& !"" # 8 "! ) %

#! % ! # !" ! + .32* ;! ( $+!
!# ! !" ' % (! ! # # #"! $! ! !"
@& ) % .>2*
&' ) % /#$ # #!!#( # 1) !%
" #' #! # # ! ( # #! !" ! +

# ; !" ! /! !" # * ! ( !
* ! $ ( ! +' ;
4
However, ‘at the time of ratification of the American Convention on Human Rights in 1981, Barbados
made a reservation to Article 4(5) of the Convention stating that ‘persons of 16 years and over … may be
executed under Barbadian law’. Barbados has since raised the minimum of age under national law to 18
at the time of the offence. Barbados has made no similar reservation to the relevant provisions of the
ICCPR (to which it acceded in 1973) or the CRC (ratified in 1990) - See The execution of child offenders
from the death penalty under general international law by Amnesty International, AI Index Act
50/004/2003, 18 July 2003.
5
See The execution of child offenders from the death penalty under general international law by
Amnesty International, AI Index Act 50/004/2003, 18 July 2003.
#!& ( %' ) %?' !" #! % !

+ #7 ! % $ #!! ! 8 # ! $ ## !" #
) + # # !" ( !$ ( ! . 2' ( %
) !& $% #( " $ !" # #1* "! ' #!
# & $% +! #: + #) ! ( # ) '
( !( ! #) # !" + .
# !# % 7 ) # +12*
!! $ # !( ! # !" # )
( ! $ ! 8 ! !" @ & !"" #* " '
) ! $ ! # !+ $! #& ! (!
( # #' ! + # #
+ * # ) & ! #% ! % # # & $ ! ) #!
! ! ! !" # #+ ! - ( % # & ! !
)! $ ! *
$! " ! !" # # # # # ! ( #( !"

! ! # ## @& ) % #$ $ *
" ' # #' ! ) % !# & #
/! & ! ! ( # !" / ' & ! ( % !#
! ( +#' # ( ( + ) % $
)!# !35* ! ( ! #% ! '# 3656' #<
! #' + ) %' & ( +#:
$ !#'/ ' -# 4' G $ $+ *
% #' 8 ! #!" @ & !"" # " ! 8 % *
>==A #% ! # ! >= #
8 !# "& ! # # 366B*5 9 ! !& ' (
8 ! !" )! # $% $! # ( !" ! ! (
) ! !" ! /!& ! /& !
( # /! & ! ! ( #!" / '# #+ &
6
See International law, U.S. sovereignty, and the death penalty by Laurence E. Rothenberg, Georgetown
Journal of International Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Spring 2004, available at
www.findarticles.com
7
Pakistan ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1990.On the 1st of July 2000 the Juvenile
Justice System Ordonnance came into force. It abolished the death penalty for people under 18 at the time
of the offence in most parts of the country but did not include North-West areas (the Provincially and
Federally Tribal Areas). In December 2001 President Musharraf also commuted the death sentences of
125 inmates convicted of crimes committed as children. However, according to a communication released
by Amnesty International, this Ordonnance was repealed by Lahore High Court last year. As a result,
child courts should be suppressed and the juvenile death penalty reestablished. See Pakistan: Death
penalty for juveniles reintroduced by Amnesty International, press release, AI Index 33/025/2004, 9
December 2004.
8
8 @& !"" # & !" # 8 ! #! &

&! ! ( *
# & $% !# #' # !" ) % ( #

@& !"" # # % )! $ #! % !
+* # # #! ! " ! # !" (!& $! #
& ) % "! 8 #! !" @ & !"" #" !
) % & #! # # ( @&
) % #! % ! #! % ! +*
! # ## & ! # #! ! # # #*
9 ! !& '# & !" & $ + ! &! ' " ( # !(
! # ## ! ( # #* ( # >===' # 8 ) '
! # ; $,/! ##! ! ! ! ! ! ! !"
( # !) #! ! >===H34 ! %
! ! & "" #'+ ! # # #7! % !
#! % ! +1 ! ! ## #! (
+# # #!! # )!##$ 7!
@ (# )!# ! !" ) % ( ## !"" ##
&! ! !" ! +1*
# #! ! #' & ! ,$ (' "! " ) !"

#$ # ! ! * # !" #! % !
+' # $ ! # !" @& ) % #$ (!
# # 8 ) !# +! & 7) ## % !$@ 1 ! 6*
9 ! !& ' #$ ! #!$ ( # *
0' / + ) # / ) ) + 1)
!%
! !" @ # !( #' #! - !+ # ) )!% ! !" (

! +' # !" ! +'+ #$ (!
# #+ ! ! % ) # ! ! #
$! % * <A !" /! & ! '
! #7 ! ) !( 0 $% !
! % !" ; # # + ! # ! " ! + ! !( ! #
) + $ ! " ! % $% # $# ! !"
( ! + & ( # 1*
9
A state that has persistently objected to a rule of international law is not bound by it so long as the
objection was made ‘consistently and uninterruptedly’ - See UK v. Norway, International Court of Justice
(1951), ICJ reports 116, p.138.
# % )! ! ' # ( !+ ( ! ) ! $ ! !"
8 ! !" @ & #* ! # !( 0 ! # & !)
!"" )!# ! ( # # !" ) % ( # ) !) + !
+ 35 % # ! !" * #
! $! # & #! !))!# ' ! !
& '$% )) ! ( @& ) % # & ! ! !"
( #3=*
!$ >==> (! @ $! %' ,
/! ##! ! ( #. / 2'"! !" ##
)! $ ! ( # 8 ! !" @ & !"" ##
! * 7 ! !" ! #! % + # (
)! $ ( 8 ! !" !"" # ( !" ( % #
!" 1 7 # #$ !( 0 #$ (
!" # "" % $ ! !+ ! # ! !" 13>*
# /8) #' ! # !" @ # !( # 7 & # #" !

" & # $% ! ! %' #&! ! !"
# ) )!% ! # !# ! #!- !# !"
- "! ' $ ! ! # #
+ ! ' #) & !" ) ! #' !( ! ! # 1* $ !
8 ! !" @ & # # # (% $ ( # $ # !
$ ( ! # #' + ! ! !# # # ( #
7) ## !$@ ! 1 ! * !+ & '! # ) ### ## ( #
# # !" ) ## !$@ ! ! # + , # $ # ) ! $ ! !"
@& ) % @ ( # ) )!% : ; *
/ #) # #!!#( 2 +# " + 1)
!%
#) ( !+ ( ! # # # ( # # !" ) % ( #
!"" # $ !+ 35 !" ( ' ; - !+ ( # 8 ( @&
!"" # # "! # " ( ! ! #! . 2* !+ & ' !
+ ! # & + % & # ! ## * # # '
!# ! % !" @& ) % # % $
( $% ;) /! #! 9 3'>==< . 2*
10
‘International law has expressly determined that the death penalty, specifically, the death penalty and
life imprisonment without possibilities of release for crimes committed while a juvenile, is a human rights
issue’- See Juveniles and the Death penalte by Lynn Cothern, November 2000, available at:
http://www.ncjrs.org/html/ojjdp/coordcouncil/
11
Case 12.285, Report No. 62/02, Inter-Am. C.H.R., Doc. 5 rev. 1 at 913 (2002).
12
See IACHR, Report No 62/02, case No 12.285 Michael Domingues v US, 22 October 2002, available at
www.cidh.oas.org.
) % #! $ % ! "# #!$
2
; # @& ) % ( # !"" # ( 3? ! 34
# ;) /! 3656 # ! !# !
( .32* ; ! # )!# ! #
! ## + ! $ ! @& ) % #
) ; # # % ) ## " !
! ! % .>2*
&' 2 % %
@& ) % #$ # # ! !" ; *
! #E ( ' " # @& - !+ ! $ 8 '
+ # "! ( % !" $ # % 3?B> ( % ! ! ! %'
9 ## ## #* ; ' $! A?3 @ & # & $ 8 "!
# ! #@& #* !( 5= I $ !&
"! ! #3A*
! %'@ & # % # $ # $@ ! ) ) #
; #* !+ & ' 365=1#' ;; ) /! + # ) %
#- ! ! + 8 ! !" @& !"" + #
) ##$ /! # !' ! ) % (
'+ )! $ # % # ) # #
!# ! * + 365A 365? ;) /! $ +
" # ! !# !# ! % !" )!# ( ) %
)! @& * " ' + # ! 3654 $ !%& #'
/! ( ! !# #) " ## *
! # ( #' + ! )#! ' ( !"

3<' ) ) !" # "! $! , , +'
/! # % " +! - # *
) # # # ":
• # ) # ! ( % #!! $% " # !"

/! # ! !$ # C
• # #! ! # ## ) # !"" #
& 0 # #!" %C
13
See Streib report, 2000, mentioned in Les mineurs délinquants et la peine de mort aux Etats-Unis by
Isabelle Cesari, Editions Nicolas Philippe, 2002.
14
Thompson v. Oklahoma 487 US 815 (1988).
• # .2( !##% #) !)! ! ! #& % !" !

.2 - # ! # $ ! $ ! ! ) $ (! # !"
) # *
!# ! % !" @& ) %+ # #
# # 36553<* <,A #! & " 1#
# '$ ! % "! @ # # ( 8 ! !" 3<,
% ,! +! $ # ) # ) # .* *
# #2* + # + # ! ## + # #
!" % " ! ! $ ! +! #! (! # !"
) %. $ ! 2* # 7&! & ( #
!" %1 8 ! !" 3<,% ,! %! (
!"" #+ # !# ! ( *
$ !%& # "! # !) !"
) % ( (@ & #*
3656' ( !) & 3?' ; ) /! ' <,B

#! ' ( !# ! )! $
) % "! # ! ( 3? ! 34* # #
) % !" @ # # @ !" #' %
) # # #) !)! ! ! # & % !"
-# ! # $ ! $ ! ! !" *
/! "! # ! &! & ( # # !" % #! %
"! 8 ! !" 3?, ! 34,% ,! !"" # !
!"" #! # #!" %*
# # '36 ! !" A5 ! # # # !+ @&

) %' ; # 8 ! @& # !& #
% ! ! !" +! * ; 366= % &
! 36 ! !" A6 8 ! #! @ & #+! ,+ * E &
# ! ' ; # $ ! & ! ! !" #
! +*
0' % ) %% ( # #! # !
"# #!$
! ( # !# ! ) ! % " (# !
+' ; ! % ! & * ! # '
" #( ( ! /!& ! /& ! ( #
.// 2 !$ 3644' ; " // 366> $
15
Ibid
16
Standford v. Kentucky 492 US 361 (1989).
+ #) " # & ! ! ) !& #! !" ?.<2!" //

8 (@ & !"" #" ! ) %*
# # & ! # 7 ; # &# ( ' # $@ !

/! # ! /! # #' ! )!# ) ) # ! % ) #!
.! ) ( +! 2 % !& 8# ( ! "
+#) ( )!# ! !" ) ) # ' (#
) # "! # ! $% ) #! # $ !+ ( % # !"
( 1* !+ & ' !" #( (' & ! # !$@ !
; 1# # & ! ' 366<' 1# ( #/! '
( !" ! ! ( ! ) + / ' #- ; !
+ + # # & !* ; ! !#! # #(
#! % ! + # $ # ) ! $ ! !" # !"
) % ( !" 35*
E % #) - (' ; ! # & " #! %

! +$ @& ) %' ; +! #
! $ $! ! ) ) # $ # !" # # # #
) ## !$@ ! ! # ! $ * !+ & ' +! #
! # )!# ! : #' #!$@ ! ! $ !
8 ! !" @ & # # ! $ ! ## ) *
#% ! # #& ;# #'+ # "%
; "! # 8 ) ! C34 ; ! ' ( #) "! + $% ;
# ## & # ) ! $ ! !" @& ) % #
$ !( 0 # ! $% ! $! # #'
"! '$ ! $ ( )! # #'+ ! ! % &
$ ) ## !$@ ! ! *
# ( )! ! 0 % #' - ! ,
/! ##! ! ( # / $ % >==>' #) %
& * )! ! 0 %+ # 8 8 #! 9 % >5'>==> "!
! 366B'+ + #@ # 34 % #! * #!$&! #%
(! " ) ) % ( ! $ !
8 ! !" !"" #' % %! ( ) #! 1# )! "!
$ ! (*
/ ! # 8 ! #! ) $ #
% >==B'35 + ! ; # &!
! ! !" )! $ ( 8 ! !" %!
17
18
See IACHR Report No 101/03, case 12.412, 29 December 2003, available at www.cidh.oas.org
35 !" * 8) ! #
! #$ (! ! #' ( ;' ! "!
+ $ ! !( ! * "! ' /! ##!
)! ! 0 %1# " % #! $ ) !& + 7 "" &
%' + # ! ) # ! 1* # #' "! '
! $ ! ! ! ! !" @& ) %'
+ % ;; ) /! ! ( # !# !
) !*
# ! "# #!$ ! " %#%# % !

# 22 / * " )%
! + ! # & !$& ! #% + % "

!# ! ) ! !" ;; ) /! ( ( @&
)%' # & #! ) ! ! !
#* 9 >==< .32* % ! + ( ) ) # "! @ & #
"! ' ! ) % ( + ! + # #' # -
#! ! & + #) " ! # "! " !" )
) # .>2*
&' * % 2 // %)#% 03
# # ## !# ! % !" @& ) % #) !"

( * )) # #" ! # !" / #!)
; ! #'+ ! # ! !+ "! !" # ( $! ; %
/ !!-* ! # + + #34 % #! * 366A' $ !-
! ! # '- )) ' $! + !"" $ (*
!# ! ## ) $ ( % - ( !" ; % / !!-'
$ (( ! ( + %+ $ # !" # ( *
>==B 9 ##! ; ) /! !& # # '" (

+ # !# ! ! 8 !# + ! + 35 !"
* # #! + # )) $% # !" 9 ##! * % >?'
>==B' ;; ) /! ( ! &# #! (
!) & 3656 !+ ( 8 ! !" ) !) "! # !
+ % + 3? ! 34 % # ! * 9 3'>==<' ;; )
/! < !B " &! !" ; ! #'" ( )) ! !"
) % ! !# $ !+ 35 % # !" ( !# ! (
*
19
Roper v. Simmons: US Supreme Court, case No. 03-633, 1 March 2005
20
Ibid
% # (! ! !#
% !" ) % 35' ;
;) /! #+ !
"! !+ ( # ! #: !+ ! "
! ) !" #) !)! ! ) # D;! (
$ !# "" %+ ( !" !"" D !#
#! ! # # # 8# ( # 8 ! !" @ & #D #
!%J %'+ ( "! ! %>3')!
@ !
#! # & ## !+ % @& # - %
& !) ! # ! # #!" ! #*
+ ! !) ! "! /! 7" ! ! )! !" & +'

+! $ #( ! " (#!" ! + !# !" '
"! ( )!##$ % 8 ## ! 1# " #+ $
"! 1* #! # 7 ( !" 35 # )! + #! % +#
"! % ) )!# # $ + !! !! * #'+
! ' ( + "! ($ % ! ( ! #1*
( @& # 7 (! % ## ) $ #1
) % "! # #) !)! ! ) # "! !"" # 35*
# ; 1/! ! ## ' ! (+ /! 1# ! # & & #'
/ " # * # # # ! ; /
! #* !+ & ' # 1/! ! " #) ## ' ( (
$ - ( # @& 8 ! #+ # #( '# % ( 7 # ,$%,
# ! !" %! (!"" #1 % # $ )) ! 1*
! ( ) % "! !# # #
) # & ! ! !" ; /! # !' /! #!
7 ! ! # # #1 ( # #) '+ # ( # 3656
+ 8 ! !" @ & # 35 + # ! # ! * !
! #!' /! + ( ) % + ( # + 36<5 (
7&! & ( # # !" % - ) !( ## !"
( #! %1 !!- !# (# ! @ %& #!
+ 7 ! ! # # #1 # & !) ( # ) & ! #% )
) * # J % :7 ! " # !" !
# - % ;# ! % ! % +! ! #!
(& !"" # ! ! @& ) %1* # ; #)
" 7 ! ! # # #1 8 ## # @! % !) !
+ #$ # ! 7" # # !" ( ! #1* 9 ! !& ' " % ##
/! #! !# ; + 8 #& % ! ! )
21
The four liberal justices who joined Justice Kennedy are John Paul Stevens, David H. Sauter, Ruth
Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.
/! # !* !+ & ' ;) /! ! - ( "!

& +#!" "! ( ! # (# #*
0' # ! % %+ )# ) 2 / * " )%
;; ) /! #! + !$& ! #% & #( " "" #*

# # # !" 4> #+ ! !
# #@& # ! !+ 3> # #* # #
+ $ ! " ) #! * # ( #! ! #
! 1#) !" !+ ( # !) !" ) %* " '#
/ # + ! "! # ( ! !#'7 # # !
% # /! # & ! + (! 8 ) ! !
) %' & ($ ) ) # "! ! %
% >==>1*>>
@
! ( ! ! # ## @ ( @&
) %' ; ( ! $ ! #
! #! ! ! # ## * " ') ! ! # #! '
; + #! !" " + ! ! # +! ' (
; $ ' + @& ) % # +" * ;
##!! ) % ! #)!# ! + # ## ## $ *
# # J % # '7 # ) !) + - !+ (
!& + (+ ( !" ! !) ! ( # @&
) %1*
/! # - # ! !# ! ! #'
# " & ' )) # " ! & ! # (! #' ( #'
( &! % ! ( 0 ! #' + # !+ #! %1#
!# ! !" @& ) % #) /! *
% ! )% (+ ! ( ## #' /! #
$!& "" ! !" ! + ! # !
) !* ! ( # + !( #
" "" $ + #* ; ! # !
+ !+ ! # # *
!# #( " "" ) !$ $ % # " ;) /!
#! !) # !! ! $! ! !" ) %) # #
! ! # !" % &! & ( ! ! !"
) * # # ; ! '7 #+ # ( (
) $ % !" ) %1* ! # )! ' ;
22
5-4 Supreme Court Abolishes Juvenile Executions by Charles Lane, Washington Post, 2 March 2005.
;) /! #! # ! "! $ ! #!
$! ! # ) ! ##' + ! + ) %# "
! *
* )! %
" ( "! $! ! # ! !& ') % # ) #! ! #: #

!" ' #! ! #+ ) % #) '@ &
!"" # ! !$ # ! ' % $ # ( #
! $ $ # # !$ (# ! #%# ! !
$ $ " '! $ # #! ! # ! ! - # "" !
* ' $! ! ## # ! )% ! ! )!##$ 7#
"" 1 !" ;; ) /! #! * ! ! $' #
# !) !" ) %'+ % # #) # ) #*
!+ & '! # )) !" # 8 #) #' !+ ! #) "
# #" ! + (! # # !# 8 ' 7 & ! 1
7& 0 1 ) % ! "! $ ( # ) $ *;
( #! ! $ # * 9 ! !& '+ % ))
- # '+ @& ) % + # , # $ # >==A'
#! # & # + ( ! $! ! ## ! ! - ) !( ##
!+ # $! ! "! ( ! + " *
" ' ! )! ) # & #! #! #+ @ (! #

" # # !& )) (: ' -# # ! # $%
+*
(! ! #! ) ' #& + ! #
# #! !"" '@ # 8) ! % ## "! * $ $ !
!# # ( # ( :#! ( ( # ## #
! ) ! + #$ ( # #'# ! ( (' *
8 $ #! ) !$ $ % $ ! ) % # "!
!" ! * ! # )! !" & +' 1# & + # # #
# 0 ! !" ) #%# ! $ # !# )
( !) # "! $ $ # !" ) # $! %*
KKK
KKK
KKK
KKK

London Law Review Final Final 240x170 and Cover

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

London Law Review Final Final 240x170 and Cover

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Pages

Vol. 1, Issue 1 LONDON LAW REVIEW June 2005

I am delighted to express my support for the launch of this publication; to

First Published in 2005 by

LONDON LAW REVIEW

© London Law Review 2005

All rights reserved.

Copyright for individual articles generally remains with the authors.

ISSN 1747- 9436 (Print)

Brunel University Press

Proposal for an EU Directive on Aspects of Mediation 5

Med-ARB Hybrid: A Viable Solution? 27

Mediation: Moving to a more Flexible Access to Justice 49

Is ADR a Viable Solution or Simply Second Class Justice? 59

Injunctions Against the World 69

Insider Dealing: A Dutch Perspective 95

Critical Analysis of International Terrorism Legislation 109

Home Secretary’s Proposal on House Arrest 141

The Juvenile Death Penalty Under International Law 145

Internet Address: London Law Review’s home page is located at http://www.lawreview.org.uk

Production Editor Research Editor Business Editor

Articles Editor EU & Constitutional Editor Comments & Notes Editor

The issue concludes with our student-written articles, including a piece by

Paul Dougan, Executive Editor-in-Chief T. Andrew de Beaulac, Editor in Chief

LONDON, JUNE 2005

2 !( ( ' + " $ ( ! " ! $ ! %

+ * ! # * $! % ( " ! % % ' " ( %

"& " '( " '

# $" #" '( $ % "

:( % " " 0 " $

'! + $ $ + "##( # 0 "

' $ #( " " %$ #

% # 1&$ /3 $ $ #& + ## $$#(

" $$# . #" + #( = +#

Gesetzgebungsperiode), at 19; Hoffmann, Der aktuelle Beitrag—Mediation, 63 ÖSTERREICHISCHES

$ %& 0 #$ % + # '#/@ 0 + &

+ #" ( + ( 0 ##( &

$ "# & " "'! + # %

" ' 0 ' "% (&0 $$ $

" (&0 $$ $ & "%% $ ") ) "

$ + ' #" '( 3224 #

"% " $ % B $ # $ '# & #9

" $ '# % /33 "

0 + & ## "# $ "# #( (

" ( " # + $" #" &

( + $ # % '#% " &"

( 0 0 ' % # " ' + 3?

$( $ 8; / " 0 ' $ + '( "' %

$$# 0 "# # ## $ ," @&$ / 1

," # ( " & % '

# /44 3@&$ / 3 & #$

% ## # " " ," # (

% & ' ( "

" ' $ ' 0 #$ " ## 0 &

# &" ," ##$ 0 '# ' % #0 "

& #% # (& $ $ + '# %

$ '# ( - % # % '# $ "#

' ## " & "$ ," $ &

$ $ " '( 0 # '#

," #+ #" / $ ( $ + "

' " $"'#

" & '# ( (' ' + #

0 '# " ## 0&5< #