Dean R. P. Edwards
Volume 3, Issue 10, (Originally Published on Monday 13 May 2013)
 
Despite setbacks and government interventions during the trial, newswires confirmed late last week that the 86-year-old former Guatemalan dictator Efrain Rios Montt had been convicted of genocide and crimes against humanity and sentenced to 80 years in prison.
 
His conviction marks the first time ever in modern history that a national leader has been convicted of human rights abuses in a domestic court. (Historical examples include British King Charles I’s and French King Louis XVI’s conviction and beheading for ‘human rights’ abuses.)
 
The charges laid against the former head of state, who came to power in 1982 in a US-backed coup, focused on the organised campaign launched against the indigenous Ixil people, who the Guatemalan government believed had been supporting a leftist rebellion.
 
Montt, who former US President Ronald Reagan said was ‘a man of great personal integrity’, faced accusations that under his leadership the Guatemalan forces killed at least 1,771 Mayan Ixils.
 
Montt’s defence attorneys have reportedly stated that they would appeal the conviction.
 
(Source: Reuters)
 
Dean R. P. Edwards 

Agony Aunt
Volume 3, Issue 10, (Originally Published on Monday 13 May 2013)
 
Dear Agony Aunt,
 
I want to hook up with one of my lecturers. They’re young, cute and seem receptive to the idea. Should I put something on the anonymous feedback forms and wait until marks come out to make a move?
 
Waiting for a Sign
 
Dear Waiting for a Sign,
 
If Catherine Zeta Jones and Michael Douglas have taught us anything, it’s that attraction has no bounds. And that Michael Douglas almost certainly saved the world from destruction in a past life. I am curious as to how your lecturer has seemed receptive, though. If you think they’re keen because they’ve stayed back to answer your questions, or given particularly kind feedback on an essay then it might be time to stop procrastinating with dreamy crushes. Except for Ryan Gosling, obviously, that makes time for itself.
 
If they’ve shown genuine interest, you don’t want to remind your lecturer of your age gap in your approach. Putting something in the feedback forms would ram your young years down their throat ‘til it bounces back up with a bile-ridden ‘no’. Much better, if you are going to make a move, to do it upfront, honestly, and definitely after marks come out. Something simple like a coffee, so you can see if you’re even interested in a social context before you risk having your heart trampled. Which I’m sure won’t happen. Well, it might.
 
But, hell, if Richard Gere can have a flirtation with a gerbil, than you’ve got a shot.
 
Sincerely, Aunt Myrtle
 
Agony Aunt

Dean R. P. Edwards
Volume 3, Issue 10, (Originally Published on Monday 13 May 2013)
 
A packed Room G08 last Tuesday heard
 
Dr Stewart Motha give a thought-provoking talk on ‘The Nomos of the Sea and People in Small Boats’.
 
The talk was hosted by the Melbourne Journal of International Law (MJIL) and by the Institute of International Law and the Humanities, and was chaired by Prof. Sundhya Pahuja.
 
Motha described the plight of the Chagos islanders, who were expelled from their homes on Diego Garcia in the 1960s. Though British subjects, they were relocated to nearby Mauritius, to make way for a strategic US air base on their former home in the Indian Ocean.
 
Motha drew comparisons from literature and philosophy, arguing that the Chagossians, like other ‘boat people’, have suffered at the hands of modern states’ concerns over sovereignty.
 
Dean R. P. Edwards 

Christine Todd
Volume 3, Issue 10, (Originally Published on Monday 13 May 2013)
 
1. Press all of the buttons.
 
2. Utter a few crude profanities.
 
3. Press the same buttons again, but better.
 
4. Panic.
 
5. Press the emergency button and speak to a frustratingly calm operator while you freak the hell out.
 
6. Respond to questions, including “Are you claustrophobic?” (Well, I am now), and “What is your mobile number?” (No, I do not come here often).
 
7. Contemplate which of your textbooks you’ll burn first to keep warm through the cold, lonely night (Admin, definitely Admin).
 
8. Kick yourself for that split second decision to not take the stairs, because you’re a lazy sod and books are heavy.
 
9. Take the opportunity to study, because since when do we ever stop? In any case, you can’t leave the room to get distracted.
 
10. Be patient...said no one ever to somebody stuck in a lift.
 
11. Live-tweet the experience.
 
12. Consider calling for a pizza. Wonder if their ‘Delivery in 30 minutes or your pizza free!’ policy applies if they physically can’t hand the pizza to you.
 
13. Bunker down and have a quick snooze. Get to know the security guy through the jammed door.
 
14. Contemplate eerie notes you could leave for other students on the walls of the lift, should things go pear-shaped.
 
15. Become attached to your new home. Consider ways to spruce up the place.
 
16. Having resigned yourself to becoming a full-time tenant of Lift 1, Level 3, have the doors suddenly creak open to a relieved security guy.
 
17. Take the stairs to the ground floor.
 
Christine Todd

Jessica Williams
Volume 3, Issue 10, (Originally Published on Monday 13 May 2013)
 
The film Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea is young Victorian barrister Jessie Taylor’s second foray into filmmaking. She produced her first film, We Will Be Remembered For This, another look into Australia’s detention centre policy, when she was still a law student at Monash University.
 
Taylor’s new film was recently screened at the first official event of Melbourne Law School’s new student group, the Public Interest Law Network (PILN).
 
Taylor herself came along to the event, introducing the film briefly before having to drive directly to Sale on a Tuesday night, in preparation for a court appearance in the town the following morning: illustrating the hectic life of a Junior Counsel in Victoria.
 
Adopting the tag line ‘The film Julia and Tony don’t want you to see’, the documentary illustrates the circumstances of UN High Commission for Refugees processing facilities in Indonesia and Malaysia, which lead some to the decision to undertake the alternative route and become the so-called ‘boat people’, bound for Australia.
 
In terms of production, Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea is an amateur film – shaky camera work and poor lighting make this obvious almost immediately. Yet the film succeeds in its mission of illustrating why the horrific circumstances of UN processing may make the deep blue sea appear to be the better, or only, option for many refugees.
 
Although the film is likely to leave you sad and angry, as many in the room felt following the PILN event, this is no reason to avoid the film. The film documents the often overlooked shortfalls of refugee status determination under the UN process, and for this, Taylor should be congratulated.
 
Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea can be purchased as a digital copy film on a ‘pay as you feel’ basis online at <http://deepblueseafilm.com/about/>.
 
Jessica Williams

Dean R. P. Edwards
Volume 3, Issue 10, (Originally Published on Monday 13 May 2013)
 
Students will have a chance to uncover the law’s attitudes and recent developments with respect to sexuality, gender identity and more at this week’s top billing, ‘Sex Talk: Bodies, Identity and the Law’.
 
The four-hour symposium tomorrow, Tuesday, 14 May 2013, has been arranged by members of the JD law subject, Current Issues in Gender, Sexuality and the Law, as part of their class assessment. Students will present their findings on a diverse range of subjects in panel discussions and poster and oral presentations.
 
The event kicks off at 1 pm in Room 920, with an introduction and brief comments from Master of Ceremonies Dean Edwards, who is also co-panelling a discussion on GLBTI rights with fellow student (and former LSS Queer co-rep) Oliver Cox and chair Professor Ian Malkin.
 
The introduction is followed by a one-hour sushi lunch and the first round of poster presentations, giving attendees the opportunity to mingle with poster presenters and inquire about their research.
 
Individual oral presentations and the first student panel, ‘Feminist critiques of the criminal law’, chaired by Professor Lisa Sarmas, will follow lunch and the first round of posters, concluding around 2.40 pm for afternoon tea.
 
Part two of the symposium resumes at 2.55 pm, with more oral presentations, a panel on recent gay/queer legal developments and a conversation on moving beyond the gender binary.
 
The full program for the ‘Sex Talk’ symposium is available online at <http://bit.ly/18CqFag>, and the event’s Facebook event can be found at <http://on.fb.me/10AD73X>.
 
 
Tuesday’s Symposium Program
 
• 1 pm: Brief introduction, outline of symposium structure and explanation of poster presentations. MC: Dean Edwards
• 1 – 2 pm: Lunch
Sushi (provided while poster presentations take place)
• 1 – 2 pm: Poster presentations
Group A (presenters available for conversation 1:05 – 1:30 pm)
Poster 1: Lucrezia Carnovale, Victorian law and consent in rape: Evaluating the law’s focus on the complainant
Poster 2: Kaitlin Hanrahan, The issue of consent in rape and Victorian law reform
Poster 3: Tessa Hilt, Legal narratives on gender and homicide after the abolition of the defence of provocation
Poster 4: Rachel Schechter, Prostitution and the Canadian Constitution: Contemporary challenges to the criminalization of sex work
Group B (presenters available for conversation 1:30 – 1:55 pm)
Poster 5: Tai Sayarath, Women beyond gender?: Feminism and international refugee law in the age of gender mainstreaming
Poster 6: Thea Gibson, Intersex: Disrupting the binary system of gender embedded in Australian law
Poster 7: Victoria Byrne, Company paid maternity leave: Working with feminism or against it?
Poster 8: Amanda De Guzman, A human rights analysis of the current practice of performing ‘corrective’ surgeries on intersex children
• 2 – 2:20 pm: Individual presenters MC: Dean Edwards (5-6 minutes presentation and 4-5 minutes questions each presentation)
Presentation 1: Anna Nodrum, Marriage Equality in Australia
Presentation 2: Sam Lovick, When Pete is Cheryl: the limits of the law in dealing with the workplace challenges faced by transsexuals
• 2:20 – 2:40 pm: Panel: ‘Feminist critiques of the criminal law’, chaired by Prof. Lisa Sarmas (panelists present 5 minutes each, then 10 minutes for questions)
Panelist 1: Amy Frew, Getting back together with feminism
Panelist 2: Joel Cooke, The construction and ‘gendering’ of the ‘ideal’ rape victim in Australian legal discourse
2:40 – 2:55 pm: tea break
Refreshments provided
• 2:55 – 3:15 pm: Individual presenters. MC: Dean Edwards (5-6 minutes presentation and 4-5 minutes questions (total 10 minutes each presentation))
Presentation 1: Leah Wickman, Sex sells: Human trafficking laws, prostitution and controlling women in the United States
Presentation 2: Chris Ambas, Is ‘discrimination’ coherent? A sceptical solution to a sceptical paradox
• 3:15 – 3:35 pm: Panel – ‘Recent gay/queer legal developments’, chaired by Prof. Ian Malkin (panelists present 5 minutes each, then 10 minutes for questions)
Panelist 1: Dean R.P. Edwards, Section 377A: the political economy of regulating (homo)sexual rights in Singapore
Panelist 2: Oliver Cox, Yogyakarta Principles 8 years on – A critical analysis
• 3:35 – 3:55 pm: Conversation - ‘Beyond the gender binary’, chaired by Prof. Ian Malkin (conversational style presentation 10 minutes, then 10 minutes questions)
Presenter 1: Alex Turnbull, A manifesto for gender revolution: social progression within legal frameworks
Presenter 2: Elise Cafarella, We still need to talk about Kevin: examining the rigid rules of gender recognition in Australian law
• 3:55 – 4 pm: Closing by MC

Dean R. P. Edwards