Organizational Foundations

Author(s):  
Mary Ann Heiss

This chapter details the first of the three-year term of the Committee on Information from 1950 to 1952. It elaborates how activists were bypassing the Committee on Information and making their case in the Fourth Committee, where their numerical superiority afforded them power that they could not achieve on the balanced Committee on Information. It also describes the recommendatory nature of activists that allowed the administering states to ignore them without penalty, although the General Assembly had approved a number of measures for accountability by the end of 1952. The chapter highlights proponents of a more robust UN role in the Chapter XI territories that advanced a variety of proposals to effect more uniform treatment of the dependent territories, which eroded administering state authority. It mentions the UN role in the nontrust dependent territories that had expanded beyond the confines set in the Charter.

1996 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-275
Author(s):  
O. Lawrence ◽  
J.D. Gostin

In the summer of 1979, a group of experts on law, medicine, and ethics assembled in Siracusa, Sicily, under the auspices of the International Commission of Jurists and the International Institute of Higher Studies in Criminal Science, to draft guidelines on the rights of persons with mental illness. Sitting across the table from me was a quiet, proud man of distinctive intelligence, William J. Curran, Frances Glessner Lee Professor of Legal Medicine at Harvard University. Professor Curran was one of the principal drafters of those guidelines. Many years later in 1991, after several subsequent re-drafts by United Nations (U.N.) Rapporteur Erica-Irene Daes, the text was adopted by the U.N. General Assembly as the Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and for the Improvement of Mental Health Care. This was the kind of remarkable achievement in the field of law and medicine that Professor Curran repeated throughout his distinguished career.


2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 12-19
Author(s):  
Justin D. Beck ◽  
Judge David B. Torrey

Abstract Medical evaluators must understand the context for the impairment assessments they perform. This article exemplifies issues that arise based on the role of impairment ratings and what edition of the AMA Guides to the Impairment of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) is used. This discussion also raises interesting legal questions related to retroactivity, applicability of prior precedent, and delegation. On June 20, 2017, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania handed down its decision, Protz v. WCAB (Derry Area Sch. Dist.), which disallows use of the “most recent edition” of the AMA Guides when determining partial disability entitlement under the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act. An attempted solution was passed by the Pennsylvania General Assembly and was signed into law Act 111 on October 24, 2018. Although it affirms that the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, must be used for impairment ratings, the law reduces the threshold for total disability benefits from 50% to 35% impairment. This legislative adjustment benefited injured workers but sparked additional litigation about whether, when, and how the adjustment should be applied (excerpts from the laws and decisions discussed by the authors are included at the end of the article). In using impairment as a threshold for permanent disability benefits, evaluators must distinguish between impairment and disability and determine an appropriate threshold; they also must be aware of the compensation and adjudication process and of the jurisdictions in which they practice.


1996 ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Editorial board Of the Journal

GENERAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS Adopted and proclaimed in resolution 217 A (III) of the General Assembly of the United Nations of 10.12.1948


2018 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
pp. 140-155
Author(s):  
Dmitry A. Badalyan

“Zemsky Sobor” was one of the key concepts in Russian political discourse in the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries. It can be traced to the notion well-known already since the 17th century. Still in the course of further evolution it received various mew meaning and connotations in the discourse of different political trends. The author of the article examines various stages of this concept configuring in the works of the Decembrists, especially Slavophiles, and then in the political projects and publications of the socialists, liberals and “aristocratic” opposition.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document