Oxford Pro Bono Publico

Oxford Pro Bono Publico is a group of law post-graduate and Law Faculty members dedicated to the practice of public interest law on a pro bono basis. Specifically, the function of the OBPB is to assist in the preparation of research briefs, expert opinions, amicus curiae and policy submissions, generally under the direction of practicing solicitors and barristers who are themselves acting on a pro bono basis.

Oxford Pro Bono Publico
Oxford University
President :	Tolga R Yalkin

Overview

The Oxford Faculty of Law established the Oxford Pro Bono Publico to support and to foster pro bono legal research and in support of academic lawyers, practitioners, and policy-makers. Over the last six years, OPBP has worked on a number of diverse, high-profile human rights and public interests cases. These include providing an expert submission to the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights, Professor John Ruggie, on the ability to hold transnational corporations for wrongs committed in overseas jurisdictions, an expert opinion on the legality of the Israeli separation barrier, investigation into the legal status of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, and research on the treatment of homosexuals in the US military for litigation in the US federal courts. Most recently OPBP has recently drafted a submission to the Committee considering the Australian Charter of Human Rights, under the guidance of Lord Bingham of Cornhill. OPBP’s executive committee comprises a President and four Graduate Executive Committee Members, assisted by three Faculty Members. The 2008–9 President of OPBP is Tolga R Yalkin, a MPhil candidate at Wadham College, Oxford, whose research focuses on the international minimum standard in international law and international investment law and human rights.

Topics of recent reports

* Obstacles to Justice and Redress for Victims of Corporate Human Rights Abuse (November 2008)

OPBP prepared this submission to inform the mandate of Professor John Ruggie, the Special Representative of the United Nations' Secretary-General on business and human rights. It explores the obstacles victims of corporate human rights abuse face in accessing justice and obtaining remediation through domestic legal systems either in their own countries where the business operations and human rights abuse takes place or in the countries in which the alleged offending transnational corporation is registered or incorporated. It considers these obstacles in relation to 13 specific jurisdictions: Australia, Canada, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the European Union, France, Germany, India, Malaysia, the People's Republic of China, Russia, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States.

* Justice in Burma (April 2008)

This report was prepared by Oxford Pro Bono Publico for the Public International Law and Policy Group (PILPG). It contributed towards the PILPG's work in providing legal advice to the National Council for the Union of Burma (NCUB) to assist the NCUB in its efforts to support the pro-democracy movement among the Burmese populations inside and outside the country. In particular, this report considers what the law can offer the people of Burma in light of their ongoing political repression. It seeks to answer this question by examining international law violations perpetrated by the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), the potential consequences of such violations and the international mechanisms available to provide justice and redress in response. In light of current negotiations for democratic transition, the report also considers potential options for transitional justice to deal with past human rights abuse.

* David Hicks (Guantanamo Bay Detainee) Case (Oct. 2006 - March 2007)

Oxford Pro Bono Publico provided assistance to Major Michael D. Mori, the military lawyer representing David Hicks who was the first Guantanamo Bay Detainee to be charged before the Military Commissions created by the US Military Commissions Act 2006. OPBP prepared three memos dealing with (i) the indispensable judicial guarantees referred to in Common Art 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949; (ii) the extent to which the European Convention on Human Rights may be relied on challenging the revocation of Hicks' UK Nationality and (iii) a US Court of Appeals decision holding that the Military Commissions Act stripped federal courts of jurisdiction over habeas corpus and other claims brought by Guantanamo detainees.

* The Justice Project (January 2006)

The report evaluates the adequacy of the UK position on intercept communication through a comparative analysis of the use of intercept evidence in four jurisdictions namely New York (USA), Canada, South Africa, and Israel. The opinion examines the different legislative arrangements concerning intercept communication. In particular, the research focuses on the following questions: the circumstances in which interception of communication is allowed; the admissibility of such evidence in court proceedings; whether the admissibility of evidence depends on the legality of the interception of communication; means available to allow the defendant access to intercepted evidence at trial; and means available to protect the informants, police and secret methods.

* Submission for Joint Committee for Human Rights Call for Evidence in New Inquiry into Human Trafficking. (January 2006)

The Joint Committee on Human Rights (JCHR) has decided to conduct an inquiry into the human rights of people trafficked into the United Kingdom. OPBP submitted an opinion to the Committee in January, evaluating the adequacy of UK laws on human trafficking. The opinion analyses the legislation in three relevant areas: prohibition of human trafficking, prevention, investigation and prosecution and victim protection. To determine its adequacy, the legislation in force in each of these areas is compared to binding and non-binding international instruments. The analysis points to a lack of coherent policy and law on trafficking in the UK legislation. Especially problematic is the non-existent legislation for protection of victims of trafficking. The recommendation of this opinion is that the UK should either sign and ratify the Council of Europe Convention on Action Against Trafficking in Human Beings or adopt similar domestic legislation, which would resolve many of the problems that now arise in the UK.

External links

Oxford Pro Bono Publico Website (http://www.law.ox.ac.uk/opbp/index.shtml)