On February 22, 2024, at 2pm EST, we hope you can join us for our next Foreign and Comparative Law Webinar – Fighting Terrorism Through Law: How Egyptian Courts Apply Laws on Combating Terrorism and Terrorist Financing. Register here.
Over the past decade, Egypt has suffered from crimes of terrorism that took place in the Sinai Peninsula and elsewhere across the country. As an example of a recent act of terrorism, in July 2023, it was reported that at least four Egyptian police officers were killed and 21 were injured in an attack on the National Security Agency (NSA) headquarters in El-Arish, the provincial capital of North Sinai.
Egypt does not publish official data concerning the number of victims of terrorism. However, according to a 2022 U.S. State Department report on human rights practices, the Egyptian President, Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, had announced that over the past decade, 3,277 personnel from the military and security forces had been killed, with another 12,277 wounded because of terrorism. Additionally, a 2021 U.S. State Department report on human rights practices states that press reporting suggests that terrorists killed more than 90 civilians in 2020 alone in Northern Sinai.
In its efforts to combat terrorism, in August 2015, Egypt passed Law No. 94 of 2015, as amended on counterterrorism and terrorist financing. Law No. 94 of 2015, which consists of 54 articles, defines the terms “terrorist groups” and “acts of terrorism.” It enhances the penalties to which natural and legal persons may be subjected if convicted of promoting, financing, or aiding terrorism. It also sets forth new procedural rules for terrorism cases, including the interrogation of persons accused of such crimes. Moreover, it creates special courts to adjudicate terrorism cases.
This law has generated debate among legal scholars, human rights organizations, and political activists. Supporters argue that it will play a vital role in combating terrorism and enhancing the stability and security of Egypt. However, others claim that the law imposes unprecedented restrictions on the freedom of speech in violation of the Egyptian Constitution of 2014. Opponents also argue that it gives government authorities the ability to apply a broad definition of terrorism to arrest individuals who write statements, reports, and articles in newspapers criticizing the performance of the regime and to charge them with promoting terrorism.
Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
Policies and laws related to the rights of transgender individuals are frequently discussed by governments and other decision-making bodies around the world. The Law Library’s Global Legal Monitor has various articles on this topic, including developments in different countries regarding legal gender, gender-affirming treatments, and the participation of transgender people in sports. Recently, in England, the government published a non-statutory draft Guidance for Gender Questioning Children, which sets out how schools should respond to requests from children who wish to socially transition, meaning that they wish to be treated as the opposite of their biological sex, such as by wearing different school uniforms, changing their name, or using different facilities.
The guidance was developed taking into account the conclusions of the Cass Review of Gender Identity Services for Children and Young People, which noted that a social transition is not a neutral act. The press release states that “proper use of this guidance means social transition, in practice, should be extremely rare when the appropriate safeguards are put in place and the child’s best interest taken into account.”
The guidance acknowledges that children under the age of 18 cannot obtain a gender recognition certificate and therefore cannot legally change the sex they were born with, thus a child’s legal sex will always be the same as their biological sex. When defining the term gender identity, the guidance notes that it:
is a contested belief. It is a sense a person may have of their own gender, whether male, female, or another category such as non-binary. This may or may not be the same as their biological sex. Many people do not consider that they or others have a gender identity at all. (Guidance at 6.)
The guidance thus deals with how to approach the social transition of a child to a gender identity that does not match their biological sex.
In the press release announcing the publication of the guidance, the government stated that it has put the best interests of the child first, and adopted a parent approach, which is at the core of the guidance. In almost all situations, the guidance provides that parents should be consulted before any decision is made.
The guidance notes that there is no general duty on schools to allow a child to socially transition, that schools are not required to accept all requests for social transitions, and that a cautious approach should be adopted. This does not mean that a school has to refuse a request for a social transition, but if it decides it will accommodate a request, “a cautious approach should be taken that complies with legal duties. Some forms of social transition will not be compatible with schools’ and colleges’ statutory responsibilities.” (Guidance at 6.) The guidance states that schools and colleges (colleges provide education for 16-18-year-olds) “should not proactively initiate action towards a child’s social transition. Action should only be considered after it has been explicitly requested by the child.” (Guidance at 9.)
Determining Whether to Accommodate a Social Transition
The guidance states that where schools and colleges wish to accommodate a social transition, they should wait for some time, referred to as “watchful waiting,” “to ensure it is a sustained and properly thought through decision.” (Guidance at 9.) The child’s parents should be made aware of the child’s wishes unless this would raise a significant risk of harm to the child, which the guidance anticipates will only arise in rare situations. Once a period has elapsed, the school should consider several factors, including their safeguarding obligations, the views and, in the majority of cases, consent of the child’s parents, the age of the child, any clinical information the parents choose to make available to the school, the seriousness and context of the request (including if the child has been influenced by peers or social media), and both the long and short term impact on the child, along with the impact on other pupils. Once a decision has been made, all staff are expected to support the child in a consistent way. The guidance specifically states that staff members may not adopt any changes unilaterally, such as calling a child by a new name or pronouns.
Addressing Change When a Social Transition is Accommodated
In cases where a social transition is agreed to, the guidance states “the school or college should communicate this to other pupils and staff where it is necessary and proportionate to do so. This should be done sensitively, without implying contested views around gender identity are fact.” (Guidance at 11.) The guidance further provides that schools and colleges
should only agree to a change of pronouns if they are confident that the benefit to the individual child outweighs the impact on the school community. It is expected that there will be very few occasions in which a school or college will be able to agree to a change of pronouns. (Guidance at 13.)
With regard to a child’s pronouns, the guidance states that primary school-aged children (ages 5-11) “should not have different pronouns to their sex-based pronouns used about them.” (Guidance at 13.) For older children, schools are not required to specify which pronouns are used for each child. When requested, the factors above must be considered and the school may decline a request to change a child’s pronouns.
The guidance states that where schools permit a child to change their pronouns, no child or teacher will be compelled to use the preferred pronouns and there must be no sanctions for those who do not use these pronouns, but the child’s preferred name should be used. While the guidance is clear regarding this, it also expressly provides that bullying should not be tolerated. (Guidance at 13.)
Registration Requirements
The Education Act 1996, the Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, and the Data Protection Act 2018 provide that the registration of a child can only lawfully include the sex they were born with and their legal name. For all schools, the registration must include the child’s legal name and biological sex, but in cases where a school is accommodating a social transition, a note can be included that states the child should be ‘known as’ and their new name if the steps above have been met.
Single-sex schools can refuse to admit children of the other biological sex, but cannot refuse to admit a child of the same biological sex they cater for, even where the child is questioning their gender identity.
School uniforms. Photo by Flickr user Florian Ramel, April 13, 2014. Used under Creative Commons License 2.0, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/.
School Uniform Requirements
Schools across England typically have uniform requirements, with the policy being set by the schools themselves with the main legal requirement for uniforms being that the cost should not be excessive. While some schools have moved towards a unisex policy, which provides flexibility for children whose social transition is being accommodated, others have different uniform requirements for girls and boys. In cases where schools have different uniform requirements, a child who is questioning their gender should typically be required to meet the uniform requirements that conform with their biological sex, unless the school has made a decision to accommodate the child’s social transition, using the factors listed above. (Guidance at 16.)
Use of Single-Sex Spaces
The guidance provides that, in all cases, schools must protect single-sex spaces such as toilets for children over 8 years old and showers and changing rooms for children over 11 years old. Any support to a social transition must not allow access to spaces that do not match the biological sex of the child and that which is assigned to the facilities. This is required to meet the legal requirements contained in the School Premises (England) Regulations 2012 and the Education (Independent School Standards) Regulations 2014. In cases where using facilities that match the child’s biological sex causes them distress, schools and colleges should find alternative arrangements for the child, which could include providing access to the facilities at a different time to the other children. (Guidance at 14 et seq.)
Participation in Sports
In cases of sports, the guidance is clear that in cases where
physical differences between the sexes threaten the safety of children, schools, and colleges should adopt clear rules that mandate separate-sex participation. There can be no exception to this. Boys constitute more of a risk to girls because they are generally stronger, larger, and heavier than girls, especially when they are going through or have been through puberty. It would not be safe for a biological boy to participate in certain sports as part of a teenage girls’ team. (Guidance at 17.)
It further notes that in sports where safety permits mixed-sex participation, for competitive sports schools and colleges must ensure that it is fair and that mixed-sex sports are unlikely to offer equal opportunities for girls and boys. (Guidance at 17.)
Legal Basis
While the guidance itself is non-statutory in nature, many legal considerations were taken into account, including duties under the Human Rights Act 1998 for publicly funded schools and colleges to not act in a way that is not compatible with the rights set out in the act. The Equality Act 2010 also applies to public and private schools. This act includes the Public Sector Equality Duty, which places a general duty on public schools and colleges to have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, and victimization in the exercise of their functions. The government stated that the guidance includes areas that have not been tested in the courts.
Next Steps and Reaction
The government is currently seeking public opinion on the draft guidance, with the consultation period running until March 12, 2024.
The draft guidance is a hot-button topic and reactions have varied widely from welcome acceptance to concern that it does not go far enough on both sides. Some members of the government, and some parents whose children’s pronouns had been changed at school without their knowledge, have welcomed the guidance. Other politicians think it does not go far enough and are unhappy that social transitioning is allowed in schools at all. Former Prime Minister Liz Truss expressed concern that new legislation would be needed to close loopholes in the law.
The draft guidance has been met with criticism elsewhere. Teachers have expressed concern that it leaves several questions unanswered, which will continue to place schools in a difficult position. Three major children’s charities have been reported as expressing concern that the guidance was published without consulting children and young people. Stonewall, a charity advancing LGBTQ+ issues, compared the guidance to section 28 of the Local Government Act 1988, which inserted section 2A into the Local Government Act 1986, prohibiting schools from promoting homosexuality, or teaching “the acceptability of homosexuality as a pretended family relationship.” Stonewall claims the guidance is legally unworkable and contrary to equality laws.
Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
The following is a guest post by Emma Southern, an intern with the Digital Resources Division of the Law Library of Congress during the summer of 2022. She was a student of communication, legal institutions, economics, and government (CLEG) at American University in Washington, D.C.
Behind every department in the United States federal executive branch are countless offices with specialized tasks and missions. One such subset is the Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy (EERE) under the umbrella of the Department of Energy (DOE). The EERE describes its mission as follows: “to accelerate the research, development, demonstration, and deployment of technologies and solutions to equitably transition America to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions economy-wide by no later than 2050….” Those research, development, demonstration, and deployment activities are organized into three pillars, namely buildings and industry, sustainable transportation and fuels, and renewable energy, and 10 technology offices: advanced materials and manufacturing, bioenergy, buildings, hydrogen and fuel cells, geothermal, industrial efficiency and decarbonization, solar energy, vehicles, water power, and wind energy.
Decarbonizing transportation across all modes: air, sea, rail, and road
Decarbonizing the industrial sector
Reducing the carbon footprint of buildings
Decarbonizing the agriculture sector, specifically focused on the nexus between energy and water
This year, EERE celebrates its 30th year—at least as the EERE. This blog outlines the journey of this particular office and how it came to be the Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy for the last 30 years.
The Z Machine. Photo credit: Randy Montoya/Sandia National Laboratories. Photo uploaded by Flickr user U.S. Department of Energy. Used under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY NC-ND 2.0 DEED).
Before the DOE existed, federal government actions and activities regarding energy use were separate and limited. In 1973, President Nixon established the Office of Energy Conservation, which, at the time, was part of the Department of the Interior. The office was tasked with the coordination of projects, research, and education on energy conservation. This would be the foundation for the offices that would eventually become EERE.
The next year, the Federal Energy Administration Act (Pub. L. 93-275) established the Federal Energy Administration (FEA). FEA’s responsibilities included the need to “plan, direct, and conduct programs related to production, conservation, and allocation of all forms of energy.” Additionally, the FEA would absorb the Office of Energy Conservation.
Later in 1974, President Ford signed the Energy Reorganization Act (Pub. L. 93-438) which established the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) and the Energy Resource Council. The Act empowered the ERDA with oversight of “research and development programs respecting all energy sources.” However, the FEA was still an independent entity at this time.
The DOE was permanently established in late 1977 by the Carter Administration. The Department of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95-91) detailed the formation of this new executive branch department. Specifically, in Title III, the act consolidated the FEA and the ERDA into the functions of the DOE, and it created the Office of Conservation and Solar Applications (CSA). Now, all matters concerning national energy policy would be coordinated by the DOE.
In 1978, President Carter signed into law two more bills: the Energy Tax Act (Pub. L. 95-618) and the National Energy Conservation Policy Act (Pub. L. 95-619). The former outlined the eligibility for tax credits through the use of qualified energy sources. The latter dealt with interstate commerce in relation to the demand for energy and with the conservation of nonrenewable resources. It also created the Office of Conservation and Solar Energy (CSE) to replace CSA. All of these responsibilities would eventually be held by EERE.
The Energy Policy Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102-486), enacted by President H. W. Bush, encompassed a vast array of energy-related topics. Title XIX—which outlined tax incentives to spur the use of renewable energy, the conservation of energy, and the use of qualified vehicles—directly relates to the research and development activities of the soon-to-be EERE.
Subscribeto In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
But have you ever wondered if there are current federal laws on piracy? Title 18, Chapter 81 of the United States Code covers all of the actions that would be classified as piracy and are in force today. Besides committing piracy, it also includes knowingly supporting the actions of a known pirate. For example, 18 USC §1657 makes corroboration with pirates illegal and carries a maximum sentence of three years in prison.
United States Code: Piracy and Privateering, 18 U.S.C. §§ -1661 1982. U.S. Congress. (1982) Retrieved from the Library of Congress. //www.loc.gov/item/uscode1982-007018081/.
How does 18 USC §1657 define “corroboration with pirates?” It states the following:
“Whoever attempts to corrupt any commander, master, officer, or mariner to yield up or to run away with any vessel, or any goods, wares, or merchandise, or to turn pirate or to go over to or confederate with pirates, or in any wise to trade with any pirate, knowing him to be such.”
“Whoever furnishes such pirate with any ammunition, stores, or provisions of any kind.”
“Whoever fits out any vessel knowingly and, with a design to trade with, supply, or correspond with any pirate or robber upon the seas.”
“Whoever consults, combines, confederates, or corresponds with any pirate or robber upon the seas, knowing him to be guilty of any piracy or robbery.”
“Whoever, being a seaman, confines the master of any vessel.”
The punishment for conviction can be fines, prison time of up to three years, or both. Additionally, 18 USC §1652 and 18 USC §1653 provide legal definitions for the term “pirate” according to the federal government.
Pirates have been considered “hostis humani generis” (which translates to “enemies of mankind” in Latin) for centuries, however this section (18 USC §1657) of the U.S. Code was debated in the courts less than 12 years ago in the case of United States v. Ali (2012).
United States v. Ali
United States v. Ali was a district court case filed against Ali Mohamed Ali, a Somali national, regarding the hijacking of a merchant ship, the CEC Future, in the Gulf of Aden.
According to the district court decision, on November 7, 2008, armed pirates seized the CEC Future and held its crew and cargo hostage in an attempt to compel the company Clipper Group, which owned the vessel, to pay a ransom. Two days later, Ali boarded the vessel and played the role of a translator and negotiator for the pirates. Ali helped strike a deal where the CEC Future and its cargo were to be docked and kept in the Somalian port of Eyl, while the ship’s crew were to be immediately freed safely. After roughly one year of negotiations, the pirates eventually received a 1.7 million dollar settlement in January 2009 to give back the merchant vessel to the Clipper Group.
The government formally indicted Ali in 2011, based on several sections in title 18, chapter 81 of the United States Code, in the first instance of charges in the District of Columbia for negotiating and receiving a ransom in an act of piracy. The charges against Ali included conspiracy to commit piracy as well as hostage-taking charges. The case was argued in the District Court of the District of Columbia and appealed.
“Ali’s alleged involvement was limited to acts he committed on land and in territorial waters—not upon the high seas. Thus, the district court restricted the charge of aiding and abetting piracy to his conduct on the high seas and dismissed the charge of conspiracy to commit piracy. Eventually, the district court also dismissed the hostage-taking charges, concluding that prosecuting him for his acts abroad would violate his right to due process. On appeal, we affirm the dismissal of the charge of conspiracy to commit piracy. We reverse, however, the district court’s dismissal of the hostage-taking charges, as well as its decision to limit the aiding and abetting piracy charge.”
It is amazing to think of the connection between the golden era of piracy in the 17th and 18th centuries to the legal definitions and laws today. It will be interesting to witness the evolution of piracy laws as new forms of transportation and technology emerge. Many questions come to mind when thinking about the future of piracy in the legal system. How will the legal definitions of pirates change or remain the same in the coming years? Are crimes of piracy still going to be defined by actions that were taken upon the ocean? Are international piracy crimes on the rise and could they possibly be a continuing trend in the coming years? Only time will reveal the answers to these questions, but now we know where to look for some of those answers in title 18, chapter 81 of the United States Code of Law.
Subscribeto In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
The following is a guest post byTristen Wallace, an intern with the Digital Resources Division of theLaw Library of Congress. She is an undergraduate student studying English and cinema and media studies atWellesley College.
If you received a public education in the United States in the last century, chances are you recognize at least one of these written works: To Kill A Mockingbird,Native Son,Hamlet, and Les Misérables. What do these pieces of fiction have in common, other than their residency on school reading lists? Each deals with the law in some way, whether that be from the perspective of a young protagonist witnessing her father’s defense in a trial similar to the Scottsboro Trial, or from 19th century France in the wake of rebellion. In these widely-taught works of fiction, American lawyer and legal scholar John Henry Wigmore recognized their potential to increase civic knowledge and act as valuable resources for lawyers.
Throughout his career, Wigmore’s influence on legal education, evidence law, and the American judicial system cannot be overstated. One of Wigmore’s most significant contributions lies in the field of evidence law. He authored the monumental treatiseWigmore on Evidence, which is regarded as a preeminent resource for U.S. courts, and still stands as a cornerstone of legal education and practice. Published in multiple volumes, this comprehensive work provides an authoritative analysis of evidentiary principles, rules, and their application in both federal and state courtrooms. This treatise delves into common law, the historical evolution of evidence rules, the Federal Rules of Evidence, as well as state evidence rules and codes. Trusted by both state and federal courts, Wigmore’s treatise serves as an essential resource for crucial evidence-related inquiries.
Like Oliver Wendell Holmes and other lawyers and judges of his time, Wigmore had a penchant for lyricism and often turned to creative writing outside of his prolific legal writings. He often looked to literature in the form of poetry and novels for self-expression and even published a volume of musical compositions called Lyrics of a Lawyer’s Leisure and the marching song, “We’ll See Them Through!”.
It is unsurprising, then, that Wigmore’s love for literature drove him to produce the most extensive list of legal literature of his time: Wigmore’s List of Legal Novels, published first in the Illinois Law Review in 1908. These 100 novels explored various legal themes and dilemmas, offering readers a glimpse into the intricacies of the legal profession. Through compiling this list of stories, the legal system becomes demystified and more accessible to a wider audience. The novels chosen by Wigmore shed light on the ethical challenges faced by lawyers, the complexities of legal reasoning, and the human drama that unfolds within courtrooms. By combining legal knowledge with literary skill, these novels engage and educate readers about the intricacies of the law.
Wigmore made sure that his selected novels fell into one, or more, of these categories:
(A) Novels in which some trial scene is described – perhaps including a skillful cross-examination;
(B) Novels in which the typical traits of a lawyer or judge, or the ways of professional life, are portrayed;
(C) Novels in which the methods of law in the prosecution and punishment of crime are delineated; and
(D) Novels in which some point of law, affecting the rights or the conduct of the personages, enters into the plot.
(A) Works in which a full legal procedure is depicted, sometimes exclusively a “trial scene,” but just as frequently the preliminary investigations leading to the trial.
(B) Works in which, even in the absence of a formal legal process, a lawyer is a central figure in the plot or story, frequently but not always acting as the actual protagonist.
(C) Works in which a specific body of laws, often a single statute or system of procedures, becomes an organizing structural principle.
(D) Works in which, in an otherwise essentially nonlegal framework, the relationship of law, justice and the individual becomes a central thematic issue.
-Weisberg, page 18, italics in original.
If you are interested in some of the titles on Wigmore and Weisberg’s lists, here is an abridged list of some of the more popular novels:
As many works of legal fiction have missed both Wigmore and Weisberg’s lists, I hope to offer my own suggestions for revitalization, including those from underrepresented authors and genres. Please note that this list is not meant to be exhaustive.
Wigmore’s tireless efforts to advance legal education, his meticulous scholarship, groundbreaking work on evidence law, and his unique contribution through legal novels have shaped legal practice and scholarship for decades. As we continue to navigate the intricacies of the legal world, it is important to recognize and appreciate the multifaceted contributions of those like John Henry Wigmore, whose legacy continues to illuminate the path forward for legal professionals and captivate the imagination of legal enthusiasts. And maybe several of these will make your reading list for the new year!
Do you have a book that you think should be included in the list of legal novels? Please let us know in the comments.
Subscribeto In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
On December 3, 2023, the National Electoral Council of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (commonly known as Venezuela) initiated a national referendum with five questions concerning the ongoing territorial dispute over the Essequibo Region. This was followed by the passage of the bill for the defense of Guyana Essequibo by the National Assembly, which was aimed at reinforcing Venezuela’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
On December 14, 2023, Venezuela and Guyana jointly declared their commitment to a peaceful resolution of this dispute through bilateral dialogue.
What is the dispute about?
The dispute revolves around the territorial claim to the Essequibo region, which constitutes more than two-thirds of Guyana’s land area. This area, administered by Guyana since 1899, encompasses approximately 159,000sq km2, featuring significant and rich in natural resources, including the world’s largest per capita reserves of crude oil. Venezuela asserts sovereignty over this region, citing historical boundaries from the Spanish colonial era, and dismisses the 1899 Paris Arbitral Award, which has been contested by this country since 1962. Conversely, Guyana upholds that the border is as determined by this arbitral award.
Why does Venezuela want to include this territory?
Venezuela’s interest in the Essequibo region stems from a combination of historical claims, economic interests, and strategic considerations. Venezuela’s contention over the Essequibo region dates to the early 19th century, rooted in its belief that the territory rightfully belonged to it since the Spanish colonial era. Its interest has intensified following the discovery of substantial crude oil deposits off Guyana’s coast, making the region a strategic asset. This area is not only rich in oil, but also other valuable natural resources such as iron, gold, diamonds, and uranium, which represent a lucrative opportunity considering the economic struggles it has endured for decades. Geographically, the Essequibo region holds strategic importance for Venezuela since it provides direct access to the Atlantic Ocean, diversifying Venezuela’s maritime outlets which are currently confined largely to the Caribbean.
What was the Venezuelan referendum about?
The Venezuelan referendum mandated by President Maduro, comprised questions aimed at bolstering Venezuela’s territorial claims over parts of Guyana and challenging the jurisdiction of the ICJ. The questions sought ratification of Venezuela’s longstanding rejection of the ICJs jurisdiction, endorsement for creating a new Venezuelan state in the Essequibo region of Guyana, and proposed issuing Venezuelan citizenship and identification documents to the local population in this area.
The 1899 Paris Arbitral Award, under the 1871 Treaty of Washington, delineated the boundaries granting Venezuela the Orinoco River mouth and adjacent lands, while assigning the land east of the Essequibo River to the United Kingdom. A joint Anglo-Venezuelan commission was charged with demarcating the boundary established by the 1899 Award, and in 1905, the boundary was demarcated, producing an official boundary map and a signed agreement.
What is the 1966 Geneva Agreement?
The 1966 Geneva Agreement, initiated after Venezuela expressed dissatisfaction with the established boundaries to the UN Secretary General, established a mixed commission of representatives from the government of British Guiana and the government of Venezuela to resolve the dispute. In case of failed negotiations, the Agreement tasked the United Nations Secretary-General with selecting a final resolution method, which led to the involvement of the ICJ, as per article 33 of the UN Charter.
What is the legal status of the disputed territories?
According to the ICJ, the boundary between Guyana and Venezuela was resolved through the 1899 Paris Arbitral Award and the 1966 Geneva Agreement (between the United Kingdom, British Guiana and Venezuela). The 1966 Geneva Agreement led to the UN Secretary-General’s decision to settle the controversy through the ICJ. In 2018, Guyana filed a case with the ICJ, which confirmed its jurisdiction and announced its intent to adjudicate the validity of the 1899 Award and land boundary. In 2023, Guyana requested provisional measures to the ICJ under Article 62(1) of the ICJ Rules to halt Venezuela’s referendum, and the ICJ’s 2023 Judgment prohibited Venezuela from altering the existing situation.
What additional resources does the Law Library of Congress have?
The Library of Congress houses various resources regarding the Venezuela-Guiana boundary matters including:
Additional Library of Congress resources on the territorial dispute between Guyana and Venezuela are available here.
The following general Guyana legal resources are available at the Law Library of Congress:
The Global Legal Monitor is also a great resource for legal developments in Venezuela.
Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
Join us on January 25 at 2 p.m. EST for our next foreign, comparative, and international law webinar, “Legal and Citizenship Status of Afghan Refugees/Migrants in Pakistan.”
This webinar aims to offer an overview and history of the legal and policy framework concerning the treatment and rights of Afghan refugees/migrants in Pakistan. The session will also delve into how courts and government administration have interpreted Pakistan’s citizenship law, determining the recognition or denial of citizenship rights to Afghan refugees and their children. On September 26, 2023, the federal government of Pakistan announced a policy to “repatriate all illegal and undocumented foreigners including those who have overstayed their visas,” with effect from November 1. The webinar will also examine the implementation of the recent mass deportation of Afghans under this “Illegal Foreigners’ Repatriation Plan.”
This webinar will be presented by Foreign Law Specialist Tariq Ahmad. Tariq’s work at the Law Library covers mostly South Asian common law jurisdictions, particularly India and Pakistan. He takes a particular research interest in issues related to religion and the law in South Asia. Tariq holds an LL.M. in international law from American University Washington College of Law and an LL.B. from University College London. He also holds a B.A. in political science from The Ohio State University.
Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
To celebrate one of my favorite fall locations, I explored the origins of the beautiful and historic Washington Crossing State Park in Titusville, New Jersey. Its storied existence is a testament to the dedication of volunteers, historians, artists, governmental officials, and legislators who have sustained the park from the late 19th century to the present day.
Citizens, community leaders, and historians were driving forces in the long road to establishing the park. In February 1910, New Jersey Governor John Franklin Fort worked with local community leaders to draft and deliver a proposal to the state legislature for a commission to explore the commemoration of the site as a possible park. Later that year, the New Jersey legislature enacted ch. 33, a law creating the “Washington Crossing Commission,” a body charged with identifying, acquiring, and making available lands for a public park.
Screen capture of chapter 33 from Acts of the Legislature of the State of New Jersey (1910). http://hdl.handle.net/10929/55061
Local newspapers, historical groups, and writers kept the public interested in the project. Lambertville resident, T. J. Walker’s 1912 poem “Washington’s Crossing,” printed and distributed by the New Jersey chapter of the Patriotic Order of the Sons of America, helped inspire new legislation, chapter 32, to establish what was at the time a 100-acre park later that year. In 1914, a descriptive sketch of the area was published titled, “The Washington’s Crossing Sketch Book.”
Washington’s Headquarters, Washington’s Crossing, N.J., Five Miles from Pennington. NJSL Postcard Collection. 1907. Retrieved from the New Jersey State Library Postcard Collection, Digital Jerseyana Collection. http://hdl.handle.net/10929/28850
Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
As we begin to wind down for the holidays, I hope this message finds you content and well. And before we close the gates of 2023, I wanted to express my appreciation for your generous and unwavering support during the past 12 months.
While the previous years were dominated by our response to and recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic, as pretty much everywhere else in the world, this was the year the Law Library of Congress moved forward to fully create and embrace a durable, hybrid future. Despite continuing to face some unique challenges and opportunities, we persevered, learned, and grew stronger – together, with you by our side. Our achievements would not have been possible without the hard work of our employees, the collaboration of our partners, and the support of our patrons. To celebrate this “togetherness” as we head into 2024, we are presenting you with an overview of the Law Library of Congress updates and achievements from this year.
The Law Library team has been successfully handling multiple ongoing projects, new initiatives, and increases in research requests, despite major staff shortages and budgetary obstacles. It makes me feel very privileged and so grateful to be surrounded by so many wonderful, knowledgeable, and hardworking colleagues. As a team, we are fully committed to outcome-focused, user-centered, digitally-enabled, and data-driven results to guide our further transition to a more digital future. Our efforts are intended to ensure that the Law Library evolves to meet the needs of its patrons, so we can continue to support our partners in the law library community and beyond.
In 2023, the Law Library’s experts have been tirelessly providing research and legal reference services to our patrons from all three branches of government and the public. The expertise of foreign law specialists was actively sought by congressional staff and several government agencies. We continued hosting in-person and virtual classes, trainings, and events, as well as engaging our user communities and partners so they can learn more about our collections and services.
In Fiscal Year 2023, the Law Library’s Public Services Division (PSD) and two Foreign, Comparative, and International Law (FCIL) divisions responded to a total of 10,626 research and reference inquiries. Of those, 9,394 inquiries, about U.S. and foreign law, were received from executive branch agencies, the courts, members of the U.S. bar, and the global public. Another 1,232 inquiries came from congressional offices and legislative branch agencies. PSD also provided 783 hours of coverage in support of congressional work, 122 hours of which were under 2 USC 138 outside of the regular work time. The Global Legal Research Directorate (GLRD) staff provided 71 webinars, briefings, orientations, and presentations for congressional users, federal government attorneys, and the general public, with 4,489 attendees, as well as 51 in-person classes and tours for 958 patrons. Our specialists published 307 reports on legal developments around the world in the Global Legal Monitor, the Law Library’s online legal news product, with an average of 100,000 page views per month.
Providing free access to U.S. legal materials remains our focus, as it benefits not only American citizens but also the global public, by serving as a model of transparency and democratic governance. In this effort, we successfully continued with the digitization of the U.S. Congressional Serial Set, with over 16K volumes, and we just launched the Supreme Court Records and Briefs digitization pilot, with our first shipment of the 27K+ volume set already underway.
The Law Library’s initiative to digitize the U.S. Congressional Serial Set, in collaboration with the U.S. Government Publishing Office (GPO), has begun its fifth and final year. This project is a large, multi-year effort to digitize and make accessible volumes of the U.S. Congressional Serial Set back to the first volume, published in 1817 (15th Congress) through 1995 (103rd Congress). The Law Library of Congress is inventorying and digitizing the Serial Set, and the GPO is cataloging each Serial Set document and authenticating the digital files. The Library of Congress is displaying the Serial Set for free public access on its website, loc.gov. Since late September 2021, a subset of the Serial Set has been available as a digital collection on loc.gov. Our work continues to increase the number of items available and serial presentation for this amazing collection.
The Law Library completed its multi-year effort to preserve and publish the Law Library’s reports on foreign, comparative, and international law in the Legal Reports (Publications of the Law Library of Congress) collection. In addition to 18 newborn-digital, contemporary reports, our staff worked with the Digital Scan Center to digitize 1,293 legacy legal reports in FY23, resulting in a total of 4,200 historic and contemporary reports available in the online Legal Reports collection by the end of the fiscal year.
As the Law Library continues to expand its offering of online Foreign Legal Gazettes, 16,714 issues of foreign legal gazettes from 16 legal jurisdictions were added to the digital collection.
The website “A Century of Lawmaking For a New Nation” was migrated to our modern web platform, which includes full-text searching, metadata, catalog integration, and accessibility features. A Century of Lawmaking originally debuted online on March 16, 1998, as part of the Library’s American Memory collection.
This year, the Library’s Congress.gov team focused on data modernization, enhanced features, and accessibility improvements. The Law Library continued to serve as the public interface for Congress.gov, providing assistance with Congress.gov for the public, as well as congressional and non-congressional governmental entities. Our staff participated as subject matter experts on the Congress.gov development team, advocating for the adoption of enhancements that are requested by the public to better serve their legislative information needs. In addition, the Law Library, and its remote intern program, provided support for the modernization of historical legislative data so that this data can be displayed on Congress.gov. A new system for tracking the support the Law Library provides for users of Congress.gov resources has been developed and implemented. The Law Library also promoted the latest Congress.gov enhancements by drafting release announcements that are published on its blog, In Custodia Legis, and through posts on social media. Finally, the Law Library continued its efforts to educate the public about Congress.gov by providing the Congress.gov webinar, which introduces Congress.gov and highlights its latest enhancements.
On the physical end of making our collections more accessible, we are in the second and final phase of the third quad in our compact shelving replacement. Procurement for the final quad took place at the end of the fiscal year, with construction to commence in Fiscal Year 2025. To improve discoverability and access to the Law Library’s collection, the classification of retrospective collection items from the obsolete LAW shelving system into the Library of Congress K classification also successfully continues, thanks to both our employees and our tireless volunteer, Jolande Goldberg. Thank you, Jolande!
Our goals in 2023 focused on continuous improvement of services, such as preparing to launch a reference chat service for our congressional patrons, adding the ReadSpeaker TextAid accessibility feature to additional Law Library online resources, continuing with the Guggenheim Scholars Program, and executing the Law Library’s signature events, including several events to support the Join In: Voluntary Associations in America exhibit. Here are some highlights:
With the Guggenheim Scholars Program, we created an annual stipend of $5,000 to fund a legal scholar for research at the intersection of demography, technology, and criminal justice. This year’s winners are from CA State Polytechnic University, Pomona, and GA Southern University, with the joint proposal “Compliance and Corporate Counsel in the Age of China’s Social Credit System.” The announcement for 2024 was published on October 17, and we are still accepting applications – until January 31, 2024.
Through our partnership with HeinOnline, the Law Library Reports database has launched to great fanfare from our academic audiences, and has yielded great visibility for our comparative, multinational legal reports. As of April 2023, all of the Law Library’s legal reports on foreign, comparative, and international law topics were accessible via HeinOnline. In less than six months, the HeinOnline Law Library of Congress site received 9,226 visits, 6,035 page views, and 1,303 searches.
The State Law Libraries Outreach Initiative to strengthen the ties between the Law Library of Congress and state law libraries continues. Since its initiation, we have hosted special appearances from law libraries in California (late 2022), New York, Minnesota, Virginia, Georgia, and Wisconsin (during 2023). They will be followed by Hawaii and Maryland (in early 2024). We are grateful to our state partners for supporting and contributing to this magnificent program.
The Library of Congress exhibition, Join In: Voluntary Associations in America, which opened to the public on December 15, 2022, is still going strong. The exhibition is housed in the South Gallery, on the second floor of the Jefferson Building. If you have not visited already, we hope that you will come and have a look! The Law Library’s team worked very hard on this exhibit with colleagues from across the Library, and we were thrilled to support it by hosting multiple events, such as:
A reception to celebrate the opening of the exhibit, which included an interview with Dr. Olivier Zunz, James Madison Professor of History at the University of Virginia, conducted by Dr. Kevin Butterfield, the Library’s Kluge Center Director, about the life of Alexis de Tocqueville;
A Live at the Library event with Dr. Butterfield, providing a lecture that highlighted the history and importance of voluntary associations in early America; and
Robert Putnam, the Malkin Research Professor of Public Policy at Harvard University (retired from active teaching in May 2018), and Shaylyn Romney Garrett, author, speaker, and changemaker, were our guests to discuss their book, “The Upswing: How America Came Together a Century Ago and How We Can Do It Again.”
Additionally, the Law Library’s Office of External Relations hosted many other virtual and in-person events, with a few selected mentioned below:
Dr. Jeffrey Stout (Professor of Religion, Emeritus, Princeton University) provided the Kellogg Lecture in Jurisprudence. Dr. Stout’s lecture was titled, “The Tree of Democratic Liberty.” It attracted 36 in-person attendees and 125 online attendees, and, since then, the event’s recording has been viewed over 17,000 times. The Law Library’s Kellogg Biennial Lecture in Jurisprudence presents the most distinguished contributors to international jurisprudence, judged through writings, reputation, and broad and continuing influence on contemporary legal scholarship.
The 2023 Law Day celebration with the American Bar Association (ABA) is a program that honors a longtime partnership between our two institutions. The event highlighted the Law Day theme, “Cornerstones of Democracy: Civics, Civility, and Collaboration,” by drawing on U.S. and international perspectives. The University of Jacksonville College of Law Dean and ABA’s Standing Committee on the Law Library of Congress Chair Nick Allard moderated the discussion. The event included an opening by ABA National Law Day Chair Sharon Stern Gerstman, and a panel discussion with ABA President Enix-Ross and the Law Library of Congress’s foreign law specialists Ruth Levush and Kayahan Cantekin presenting.
University at Buffalo School of Law Professor Samantha Barbas provided the Law Library’s Constitution Day lecture on the history of the New York Times. v. Sullivan case in the context of the civil rights movement.
Our efforts are being tailored to ensure the Law Library is the first choice for legislative, judicial, and executive agencies, as well as public users. We are also promoting our community engagement through initiatives focused on increased awareness of the Law Library’s collections, services, expertise, and events. Likewise, the Law Library is developing increased posts to social network sites, and you can find the latest news on Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and GovDelivery. Our X account @LawLibCongress has 73,400 followers, while @Congressdotgov has 71,800 followers. The Law Library’s Facebook page has 40,000 followers. The Law Library continued to offer RSS feeds and e-mail alerts to notify subscribers about selected resources, upcoming events, and training. Join us, follow us, and write to us, we look forward to hearing from you!
And, to end this narrative on a very high note, thanks to all of you, the Law Library’s In Custodia Legis patrons, we have recorded over one million visits and views to our blog in this year only. I feel proud and humbled to be part of such an amazing team and to be supported by our incredible partners and patrons. Thank you!
In the spirit of the season, I wish everyone the most pleasant, relaxing, and fulfilling of holidays, and a happy, healthy, and prosperous New Year. We look forward to serving your legal information needs in 2024.
Aslihan Bulut Law Librarian of Congress
Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government’s establishment of a religion and protects the freedoms of religion and speech. Blasphemy laws – laws restricting the act of insulting or showing contempt for religion, or lack of reverence for sacred things – are often seen today as a violation of the right to free speech and religion. However, for much of the nation’s history, this type of speech was “classed blasphemy with obscenity and libel, as speech unprotected by the First Amendment or its state counterparts.”
Laws banning blasphemy, specifically related to Christianity, were prevalent throughout the states around the time of America’s founding, even though most states had their own free speech and religious freedom protections in their state constitutions. For example, in the 1780s and 1790s, Massachusetts, New Hampshire (pp. 721-22), and New Jersey all passed blasphemy laws even though part 1, article II, part 1, article 5, and article 18 of their respective constitutions had religious freedom protections.
Screen capture of An Act Against Blasphemy passed in 1782 in Massachusetts. Courtesy of State Library of Massachusetts. http://hdl.handle.net/2452/103989
One of the first recorded instances of someone being convicted for blasphemy in the state of New York occurred in 1811. In People v. Ruggles, the New York Supreme Court upheld the conviction, saying that the crime of blasphemy is “independent of any religious establishment,” and that it affects “the essential interests of civil society.” In 1824, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court similarly upheld a conviction for blasphemy in Updegraph v. Commonwealth. That court also concluded that blasphemy laws seek “not to force conscience by punishment, but to preserve the peace of the country….” Two more similar cases came down in the 1830s, with State v. Chandler in 1837 and Commonwealth v. Kneeland in 1838. In these cases, the Delaware Supreme Court and the Massachusetts Supreme Court both upheld blasphemy convictions on the grounds that they were meant to preserve public peace rather than punish beliefs.
Following the Civil War, courts and legislatures continued to maintain similar views about blasphemy laws. For example, Maryland enacted a law in 1879 that punished blasphemy with up to a $100 fine and up to six months imprisonment. In the 1897 U.S. Supreme Court decision Robertson v. Baldwin, the Court mentioned in dicta that “the freedom of speech and of the press (art. 1) does not permit the publication of…blasphemous or indecent articles…” (p. 281) In 1921, Maine’s Supreme Court upheld a conviction against M.X. Mockus for committing blasphemy during his lectures in State v. Mockus. Even as recently as 1941, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an anti-blasphemy ordinance in Oney v. Oklahoma City.
M.X. Mockus. Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, //hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/ggbain.23461
Things began to change, however, in the period following World War II. After New York attempted to ban the showing of Roberto Rossellini’s film The Miracoe for being sacrilegious, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson that the underlying law being relied upon to support the ban violated the First Amendment. This trend continued, such as when Maryland’s Court of Special Appeals struck down a blasphemy law in 1970 in State v. West. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court struck down a law prohibiting companies from having blasphemous names in 2010 in Kalman v. Cortes. However, exceptions to this trend could be found in some court decisions. For example, in 1974, the Iowa Supreme Court upheld a blasphemy conviction and the accompanying $50 fine.
Although some courts have struck down blasphemy laws since World War II, several states still have them on the books today. Massachusetts, Michigan, Oklahoma, Wyoming, and South Carolina all have statutes that make some reference to blasphemy.
Subscribeto In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.
