Centre for Legal Research


Just showing posts from October 2014

Stand Up For Seating: Why All-Seated Football Stadia Should Be Reconsidered 

Posted by Lauren Rees | 0 comments

Marcus Keppel-Palmer (Law) has had the article “Stand Up For Seating: Why All-Seated Football Stadia Should Be Reconsidered” published in the journal Law In Sport. The article looks at the topical issue of the potential move back from all-seated stadia, implemented after the Hillsborough tragedy, to a re-introduction of standing areas. This is particularly important with mixed use stadia such as Ashton Gate, which forms a case study in the article. The Department of Media, Culture and Sport is considering introducing draft legislation in this area, the need for which is questioned in the article, and the re-introduction of standing is in the election manifesto of the Liberal Democrats for 2015.


Link to article : http://www.lawinsport.com/articles/item/stand-up-for-seating-why-all-seated-football-stadia-should-be-reconsidered

tags: none

Seminar on ‘Female Genital Mutilation: Where Culture Clashes with Security of Women and Girls’ 

Posted by Lauren Rees | 0 comments

On 24 September 2014 the International Law and Human Rights Unit organised a seminar on ‘Female Genital Mutilation: Where Culture Clashes with Security of Women and Girls’. Dr Aida Abzhaparova and Maryam Abdullah started their presentation by stating that they wished to examine female genital mutilation (FGM) within a security framework.
Dr. Abzhaparova explained that security is usually understood as relating to the State and more specifically to military security. However, increasingly security is considered as encompassing further issues such as the environment and individuals. Consequently the concept of a threat to security has been altered and so Dr. Abzhaparova argued that FGM should be viewed as a security threat. She noted that feminist approaches to security also assist in locating FGM within a security discourse largely dominated in a traditional approach focusing on public, rather than private, security. Dr. Abzhaparova raised the difficult question of whether making FGM illegal maybe creates more insecurities.
Ms Abdullah stressed that FGM must be understood as a deep-rooted cultural practice. FGM is in fact seen as a form of security as girls who have undergone FGM become accepted members of the community which creates social security, and can get married thereby ensuring them future financial and economic security. FGM is a process of community preservation, a form of self-identification. Ms Abdullah indicated that girls who have not undergone FGM are often rejected from parts of the family and community that have stayed in the home country. In other words the issue of FGM becomes entangled with wider migration issues. Yet Ms Abdullah also explained that FGM is physical and psychological harm. FGM must be viewed as a violent practice that leads to higher mortality rate during labour, post-traumatic stress disorder and various forms of physical ailments and diseases. It is estimated that about 100-140 million women and girls have had FGM performed on them. This clearly shows that FGM must be viewed as a security issue.
With regard to the UK Ms Abdullah underlined that FGM was a non-traditional cultural practice as it was not accepted by the wider society and only by the community in which it is performed. Estimations place at 60,000 the number of women who are in the UK and have undergone FGM. Ms Abdullah believes that whilst there is merit in having laws in place that criminalise FGM the campaign run by the UK disregards cultural sensitivities surrounding the FGM issue and is thus unlikely to have positive results. The media fails to refer to the cultural roots of FGM and seems to turn it into a religious problem, which clearly it is not. Combined with a Western approach to FGM, the top-down policies raise issues relating to who securitise FGM and who is best placed to do so. The campaign has also led to associating FGM with some groups which as a result have been marginalised when in fact they should have been integrated into the discussions.
The presentation was followed by a lively debate that raised questions relating to e.g. the position and voices of men in the discussion on FGM, the association of FGM with religion, and the ways FGM can be eradicated.

Noelle Quenivet

tags: none