Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Quigley, J. (2009). Genocide A Useful Legal Category?. International Criminal Justice Review, 19, 115–131.

Abstract: This article explores the utility of genocide as a vehicle for the prosecution of individual persons and legal action against a state. It is suggested in the article that for prosecution of individual persons, other categories of offenses may be more effective, hence that genocide may be superfluous. It is suggested that, even though the Genocide Convention (1948) aimed primarily at defining an offense for which individuals would be prosecuted, genocide is an act for which states as well are legally responsible. Legal action against states in the International Court of Justice may be a more useful application of genocide, particularly because such action may aid in stopping atrocities as they are occurring whereas, criminal prosecutions typically are brought only after the fact. Several technical impediments, however, restrict the Court's capacity to deal with genocide, and they, it will be suggested, limit the Court's effectiveness in this regard.

Journal Article 2: Smith, C. A., & Smith, H. M. (2011). Human trafficking: The unintended effects of United Nations intervention. International Political Science Review, 32, 125–145.

Abstract: International relations literature is well developed on the effects of United Nations intervention on the duration of crises. The global human rights community has on a case-by-case basis addressed some of the unintended effects of UN intervention, namely, substantial increases in the human sex trafficking trade into crisis areas. We bridge these two literatures and evaluate the effects of UN involvement in Kosovo, Haiti and Sierra Leone. We look beyond the intended effects of UN intervention and consider the unintended effects in a systematic and generalizable way. We argue that UN involvement has the unfortunate and unintended effect of increasing the rates of human trafficking in these crisis areas. Our work concludes that the UN should proceed with caution into crisis areas and have plans in place to avoid the potentially devastating externalities of otherwise well-intentioned efforts.