“YOU NEVER GET TO PERFECTION.”

What could an heir to a billiondollar fortune, privileged with aneducation at Harvard LawSchool, want most in life? ForFinn M.W. Caspersen ’66, heir tothe chairmanship of BeneficialCorporation, philanthropy wasone of the most rewarding pur-suits available in a life of wealthand success. After the sale of Beneficial to Household In-ternational in 1998 for approximately $9 billion, Caspersenmanaged a private investment fund, Knickerbocker Man-agement, overseeing the assets of trusts and foundations.Outside of his business life, Caspersen was a selfless con-tributor to the success of HLS, including the largest dona-tion for the Northwest Corner Project, his chairmanship ofthe Dean’s Advisory Board, and chairmanship of the “Set-ting the Standard” campaign, which raised a phenomenaltotal of $476,475,707 for HLS.

According to Louis Kaplow ’81, the Finn M.W.Caspersen and Household International Professor of Lawand Economics, contributing to HLS provided Caspersenwith great personal satisfaction. “I tried to personally thankhim, but he was not an easy person to thank. He seemed notinterested, personally, in having praise bestowed upon him-self, and much more interested in participating in the de-velopment of the law school as a continuing enterprise.”Caspersen was tireless in his efforts to generate contribu-tions to the law school. In an interview with the HarvardLaw Bulletin after the conclusion of the “Setting the Stan-dard” Campaign, Caspersen said, “You always have to domore. You never get to perfection.”

It may remain a perpetual mystery why a man who ap-peared to have everything – wealth, a family, social notori-ety, and a generous philanthropic nature – would decide toend it all. The New York Times has indicated that Caspersenmay have been the subject of a Federal investigation. What-ever information comes to light in the future, the impact ofCaspersen’s contributions to the law school will secure theability of HLS to continue setting the standard for legal ed-ucation into the twenty-first century.

“CITIZEN WASSERSTEIN”

Described by his colleagues asa prodigy, Bruce Wasserstein ’70entered Harvard University as ajoint J.D./M.B.A. student at theyoung age of 19, and once armedwith an education in business andlaw, he took Wall Street by storm,quickly rising from a start at Cra-

vath, Swaine & Moore to a management role at First Boston

Harvard Law RecordOctober 22, 2009 Vol. CXXIX, No. 4www.hlrecord.org — twitter @hlrecord

The Independent Newspaper at Harvard Law School

News• Israeli Draft-Dodger Speaks• Law School Psyched for Psych

Opinion• Has Guinea Lost its Way?• Libson Treaty and the New EU• Inside the UK Supreme Court

Features• Are J.D.s Antisocial?• Cambridge’s Haloween Heaven

INSIDEThe HL Record

HLS’ LargestDonors Dead

CASPERSENANDWASSERSTEIN

TO BE MEMORIALIZED BYN.W. CORNER COMPLEX

Finn Caspersen Took Own LifeUnder Mysterious Circumstances

O B A M A ’ SN O B E LAfter Being Shocked, Awed,World Wonders: Why?

HLS Students FromAround the World React

BY CHRIS SZABLA

The announcement elicited audible gasps fromthe audience in Oslo, and visible gapes on facesworldwide. The White House Press Secretary,Robert Gibbs, whose job is to react to such de-velopments, was rendered practically speechless(the word "wow" was all he managed to emit, toone reporter). For many, the initial shock was fol-lowed by an immediate and obvious question:why? Scarcely a year into his presidency, BarackObama ’91 had won one of the most covetedawards on earth: the Nobel Peace Prize, and thefact that the prize committee seemed to placemore weight on the direction of his policies thanhis actual achievements thus far left manyscratching their heads.

The committee justified itself by citing theaward's mission, and precedent: it is to be givento an individual whose efforts bring the world inthe direction of peace. In 1971, it recognized suchefforts in the policy of Eastern Bloc engagement,or Ostpolitik, pursued by West German Chancel-

NEW! A BIGGER, BETTER HLRECORD.ORG

History Shows Precedent, Prescience of Obama’s PrizeS P E C I A L C O M M E N T

Bruce Wasserstein Went From NaderAcolyte to Wall Street Legend

Harvard Out of Flu VaccineOn Wednesday morning, Harvard Law School awoke to the

news that the clinic scheduled that day to administer the sea-sonal flu vaccine would be cancelled due to lack of adequatevaccine supplies. A later e-mail further stated that all HarvardUniversity flu clinics had been cancelled due to the shortage.According to University Health Services, over 15,000 vaccineshave been administered in the last month and a half, promptingUHS to close its seasonal clinics early even though a larger sup-ply had been ordered than in previous years.

UHS will be proceeding with scheduled clinics in under-graduate dining halls, but has encountered difficulty in receiv-ing its final shipment of an additional 1600 doses that wereneeded for the other clinics around campus. UHS advises stu-dents seeking vaccination to contact local pharmacies.

Although the supply of seasonal flu vaccine has been de-pleted, UHS anticipates providing H1N1 vaccines once a sup-ply becomes available. UHS has said that it will conduct thevaccination for H1N1 according to “guidelines established bypublic health authorities to prioritize distribution.”

BY MATTHEW W. HUTCHINS

Each year a committee ofNorwegians is convened to de-cide what person will receivethe prize endowed by AlfredNobel to recognize “the personwho shall have done the mostor the best work for fraternitybetween nations, for the aboli-tion or reduction of standing

armies and for the holding andpromotion of peace con-gresses.” Past Nobel PeacePrize honorees have rangedfrom visionary leaders likeMartin Luther King Jr. andLech Wałęsa to tireless but lessvisible diplomats and negotia-tors like Ralph Bunche andMartti Ahtisaari as well as in-spirational models of self-sac-

rifice like Mother Teresa andAlbert Schweitzer. Althoughthere have been strongly criti-cal reactions to selections likeHenry Kissinger and YasserArafat, the high esteem inwhich most honorees are heldhas prompted a world full ofwatchers to wait each year tolearn the next name lifted intothe pantheon of humanity's

BY MATTHEW W. HUTCHINS

The Record asked HLS students to submittheir views on President Obama’s Nobel Prizeand convened a forum on Tuesday, Oct. 20 forsubmitters to voice their opinions in public.Our panel included views from LL.M.s Mo-hammed S. Helal of Egypt, Alfonso Lamadridde Pablo of Spain, and Matthias C. Kettemannof Austria, and was introduced by Record Co-Editor-in-Chief Matthew Hutchins. During thediscussion, speakers elaborated on their writ-ten opinions, which appear on page three ofthis issue, with a comment by Prof. CharlesOgletree. A recording of the event will soonbe available at hlrecord.org.

Nobel, continued on pg. 2

Donors, continued on pg. 2

Comment, cont’d on pg. 2

Page 2 Harvard Law Record October 22, 2009

OBAMA’ S NOBELlor Willy Brandt. In 1990, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachevwas given the prize for his policy of greater social and polit-ical openness, perestroika, in much the same spirit.

Yet former President Jimmy Carter's efforts to bring aboutthe Camp David accords went unrecognized until 2002, afterthe peace he helped negotiate between Egypt and Israel wasrecognized as a durable one. Dissenters have pointed to for-mer President Bill Clinton's tireless efforts to bring about aMideast peace, in contrast to Obama's mere rhetoric, andZimbabwean opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai's coura-geous stand against the monopoly on power held by thatcountry's longtime president, Robert Mugabe. The "snub"against Tsvangiraiwas one of the mostc o m m e n t e d - o nitems on Twitter inthe hours after theannouncement thatObama had wonthe prize.

Comment hasalso focused on the effect the award might have on Obama'spolitical priorities. Critics believe it is likely to intensify crit-icism that the President has achieved little in the way of ac-tual foreign policy success, despite his lofty initiatives. Hispersuading the UN General Assembly to adopt a resolutionon the reduction of nuclear weapons has been a rare successin a year when multilateral overtures have failed to result inmuch coordinated action on the financial crisis or otherpressing global issues, such as climate change.

Obama has also been slow to change direction on manypolicies initiated by his predecessor, George W. Bush, apledge many have pointed to as the primary motivation forthe award. His January pledge to close the controversial de-tention facility at Guantanamo Bay, for example, remains un-fulfilled. Obama has also reportedly sparred with hisAttorney General, Eric Holder, over prosecution of U.S. of-ficials involved in torture.

But the Nobel might also be an intervention – an attempt

to right the course of Obama's policies by persuading thepresident to turn away from domestic political preoccupa-tions and focus on achieving results on matters of global con-cern. While some point to the contrast between the awardand Obama's potential escalation of the increasingly deadlywar in Afghanistan, the committee might have, in effect, beenforcing the juxtaposition with its announcement - forcingObama to rethink his strategy there.

Previous recipients of the award have led countries intoconflicts, however: critics of the award often cite the timeHenry Kissinger and Le Duc Tho shared the prize for whatturned out to be a short-lived peace in Vietnam, and Israeli

Prime MinisterMenachem Beginwon for signingthe Camp Davidaccords withEgypt, beforepromoting theconstruction ofIsraeli settlements

in Palestinian territories and involving his country in theLebanese civil war of the 1980s.

Whatever the award's implications or consequences, it re-mains a tremendous achievement for the young president,whose life has been marked by early triumphs and firsts. Thefirst African-American editor of the Harvard Law Reviewand the first black President, he is now the second HarvardLaw School alumnus to win the award, and the first to beable to claim it as his own right (David A. Morse '32 acceptedthe award on behalf of the International Labor Organizationin 1969). He will now be the third sitting U.S. President towin the award, after Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wil-son, and, with Carter, the fourth President to receive it.

Clearly surprised himself, the President brushed off anyspeculation he would not accept the award some have called"premature" during a Rose Garden press conference. “I amhonored and humbled," he said. “I will accept this award asa call to action”.

Obama will be the second HLS alum to accept thePrize. David A. Morse ’32 accepted it on behalf ofthe International Labor Organization in 1969.

S P E C I A LC O M M E N T

and the establishment of the mergers and acquisitions bou-tique, Wasserstein Perella Group. Over his several decadeson Wall Street, Wasserstein made history through his coor-dination of blockbuster mergers like the acquisition of RJRNabisco by Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co., the acquisitionof Warner Bros. by Time, Inc., and the merger of AOL andTime Warner in 2000. After the sale of Wasserstein Perella &Co., Wasserstein became the head of Lazard Ltd., where heorganized the investment bank’s 2005 IPO and where theWall Street Journal reports he was recently engaged in thebid by Kraft for Cadbury Plc.

Despite his phenomenal success on Wall Street, Wasser-stein’s beginnings as a law student were characterized by apassion for civil liberties. Mark J. Green ’70, who ran againstWasserstein to be the head of the Harvard Civil Rights-CivilLiberties Law Review, remembers a quiet genius who “basi-cally brained his way to success”. Green, who has had a longcareer in public advocacy, has written twenty-two books, andwas the Democratic candidate for mayor of New York in the2001 election against Michael Bloomberg, was a lifelongfriend of Wasserstein. “Looking back, I guess it was impos-sible to know that this fellow law student, who I would eatwith at Harkness 42 years ago, would end up the leading in-vestment banker of his era and one of the leading donors toHLS ever,” said Green in an interview with the Record. “Itwasn’t pedigree or GQ looks, or a Clintonian public person-ality. He added value, big time, to his clients and his friends.”

When Green won the place as editor-in-chief at CR-CL, hemade Wasserstein his managing editor, a partnership whichwould continue in their work for Ralph Nader ’58. Togetherthey authored the book With Justice for Some: An Indictmentof the Law by Young Advocates and worked together on“Closed Enterprise System”, a critical view of antitrust en-forcement. “He was always the smartest guy in the room,”said Green. “But by and large he was calm and quiet, sowhen he spoke, people listened.” Nader remembers Wasser-stein as a bright, ambitious man with a dream of being Chair-man of the SEC, but whose business responsibilitiesprecluded such a career. “If he had been Chairman ten yearsago, we might not have had some of this trouble,” said Naderin an interview for the Harvard Law Record.

As a philanthropist, Wasserstein was a generous man, hav-ing recently made a major donation to HLS of $25 million forthe construction of the Northwest Corner complex. ButGreen remembers him for both his generosity and his loy-alty. “If he took you into his orbit of confidence at a personallevel, a company level, or an educational level, he stuck withyou in good times and bad.” In Green’s campaign to becomemayor of New York, Wasserstein acted as his campaign fi-nance manager, and though Green had a history as a populistconsumer advocate, Wasserstein was able to convince hisWall Street colleagues to support his campaign. In a remem-brance published to Bloomberg.com on October 20th, Greensaid that even after his defeat in the 2001 mayoral election hereceived encouragement from Wasserstein to “run for gov-ernor”. “The understanding was that I shouldn’t advise himon business, but he could counsel me on government.”

In addition to his investment banking activity, Wassersteincarried an interest in writing throughout his life, which Greendescribed in his Bloomberg.com remembrance, analogizingWasserstein to Charles Foster Kane. From his early experi-ence as editor-in-chief at the Michigan Daily, as managingeditor at the Harvard CR-CL Law Review, and his work withGreen and Nader, Wasserstein returned to publishing as anowner by purchasing American Lawyer and New York Mag-azine, partly with the goal of improving publication quality.“All his deals and billions notwithstanding, Wasserstein’s‘rosebud’ was journalism,” said Green.

With his untimely passage the HLS community can onlyimagine the accomplishments that may have been yet tocome. Nader looks back with certainty that the communityhas lost one of its most valuable citizens. “Bruce Wassersteinis heralded as a brilliant investment banker and financier whoavoided the egregious excesses of his speculative competi-tors. What is not known is his philanthropy, which was ac-celerating into imaginative dimensions. Philanthropically, itcan be said that the best of his past would have been the leastof his future, so tragically cut short.” Despite its early end,Wasserstein’s life will be remembered, in Wall Street andNew York for his legendary business acumen, and at Har-vard Law School for his generous contribution to the con-struction of the Northwest Corner.

greatest peacemakers.The selection of President Barack

Obama ’91 as this year's Peace Prize re-cipient was an incredible surprise and anotable event in the history of the Prizein being only the third time a sittingU.S. President has been so honored.Even the President himself was sur-prised by his receipt of the prize, re-portedly not even aware that he hadeven been nominated. The shock of thenews left commentators and the publicdisoriented, and as the novelty of theidea faded, the diversity of reactions tothe President's Nobel became crystal-ized in opinions with little correspon-dence to individual political alignment.

Arch-conservatives certainly did nothesitate to co-opt this latest honor as anew focal point around which to con-centrate their perpetual campaignagainst the President, asking the ques-tion, “What has Obama done to deservethis Prize?” and deriding it as a politicalmaneuver by a cadre of socialist Euro-peans who are more enamored withObama than his own American sup-porters.

On the other side of the aisle, manypraised the Prize as a stamp of interna-tional approval on a drastically re-designed American foreign policy andvision of the nation within the worldcommunity. Talk, they said, is no smallthing when it moves the world to for-give past failings and unite once againbehind the U.S. banner. But many of thevoices criticizing the Nobel commit-tee's selection came from supporters ofthe President, with a common chorussoon becoming, “Too much, too soon.”

As the present controversy fades intohistorical evaluation, President Obamawill be compared to other laureates notfor the actions of his first one hundreddays but for the lasting impact of histerm in office, but even from the mo-ment of its announcement, the historyof the prize reveals a range of figuresinto which the President already fits asa rising leader of efforts at internationalcooperation and the limitation of theweapons of war. To the rue of many Re-publicans, the conditions for Obama'ssuccess were made abundantly possibleby the policies of his predecesor,George W. Bush, but this should in noway diminish the significance of ac-tions that have changed the interna-tional tide of hostility against Americawhich was rising throughout the Bushera. The Nobel committee has given uscause to consider that the President hasthus far demonstrated a new vision ofinternational cooperation, a new com-mitment to multilateralism, and a nu-anced understanding of the give andtake that is necessary to coax his coun-terparts to depart from the inherentlystubborn and vindictive behavior of na-tional leaders and humans in general.

From the moment he took office, thePresident expressed a desire to end thewidely criticized conduct of the U.S.military at Guantanamo Bay, he beganthe acceleration of the draw down of

Nobel, continued from pg. 1

Donors, continued from pg. 1

Comment, cont’d from pg. 1

Comment, cont’d on pg. 11

October 22, 2009 Harvard Law Record Page 3

BY MATTHIAS C. KETTEMANN

Harvard should be proud. Its graduate, President Barack Obama is the firststatesman to prophylactically receive the Nobel Peace Prize (the most recentpresident to be strongly associated with Yale, George W. Bush, is rather unlikelyto receive any Nobel Prize in the immediate future). Unfortunately, this addsanother issue to the President’s to-do-list: (1) reform health care; (2) make peacein the Middle East; and (3) decide what to do with the $1.4 million Nobel Prizemoney. Space does not allow me to sketch out my solution to the Middle Eastpuzzle, and my European mind capitulates in face of the political flaying overObama's health care plan, but I am happy to help with regard to the third issue.Mr. President, here's a list of five projects you could spend the money on:

1) $680,000 to bridging the digital divide between Internet-haves and have-nots, by ensuring that developing states are better represented in the multi-stake-holder Internet Governance Forum in December in Egypt.

2) $680,000 to study the importance of “human security”, a new security con-cept that focuses on individuals and not on states, thereby providing new in-sights on how to combat sources of insecurity, including failing states andover-‘securitization’.

3) $30,000 for a study analyzing the effects of Harvard students’ air condi-tioner-induced colds and flus on the U.S. health system.

4) $9,000 to reintroduce warm breakfast in Harvard dining halls.

5) $1,000 to make sure Chauncy Street gets a bike path facing westwards.

Since this is settled, Mr. President, you can now channel your forces towardsmaking peace in the Mideast and having Congress pass health care reform.

Matthias C. Kettemann is an LL.M. student from Austria.

Obama’s Prize Money: Five Ideas

BY MOHAMMED S. HELAL

“Deeds are to be judged by their intentions”: this is an Arabic proverb that re-flects an ancient adage that intentions are just as powerful as deeds, and thatnotwithstanding the fact that not all good intentions lead to fruition they are stillworth recognition.

The Nobel Peace Prize should not be considered an award to President Obamaor for his limited achievements since taking office. Rather, it should be seen asan endorsement of a worldview. A vision of the world that realizes the dream ofMartin Luther King Jr. not to judge a human being by the color of his skin, a vi-sion where humanity does not live under the phantom of nuclear weapons, aview of a world where religions and cultures are reconciled and where diversityis celebrated, a global community that recognizes the dangers of environmen-tal degradation and is ready to unite to confront it, and a policy that understandsthat the challenges of today are global and require global responses.

As an Egyptian, Arab, African, Muslim and Mediterranean citizen of theworld, I do not see this is as tribute to the American President, but to humanism,multiculturalism, multilateralism, international cooperation and to humility.

Mohamed S. Helal is an LL.M. student from Egypt and a diplomat with theEgyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Judge Deeds by Their Intentions

BY ALFONSO LAMADRID DE PABLO

In the preface to her book Men in Dark Times (1968), Hannah Arendt wrotethat “even in the darkest of times we have the right to expect some illumination,and that such illumination may well come less from theories and concepts thanfrom the uncertain, flickering, and often weak light that some men and women,in their lives and their works, will kindle under almost all circumstances andshed over the time span that was given them on earth....”

President Obama has shed a powerful light of hope upon the dark times inwhich we live. His accomplishments in the pursuit of peace can hardly bematched: he has inspired millions all over the planet; he has gained back the re-spect and leadership with which the United States can make a difference on theglobal stage; and he has set the world on a different path and shared spirit.

Obama's Nobel Prize is an encouragement for all of us not to let this lightdim.

Alfonso Lamadrid de Pablo is an LL.M. student from Spain.

The Powerful Light of Hope

BY PROF. CHARLES J. OGLETREE, JR.

I was surprised and pleased to learn that President Obama had won the NobelPeace Prize. His humility and deference in receiving an award that has beenpresented to such luminaries as Mother Teresa, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., andNelson Mandela, among others, illustrates both his uncanny ability to focus noton awards but actual progress, and a commitment to work tirelessly to establisha safer and more collaborative world. His aspirations to close Guantanamo, ne-gotiate peace in the Middle East, talk with leaders of other countries even whenwe have massive differences in priorities and objectives, demonstrates his firmcommitment to continue working around the clock so that, in time, we will allsee what the Nobel Prize committee saw in honoring him now. The expectedcriticism, because he is so new in office, also ignores the almost immediatetransformation of global excitement concerning his election alone and it rein-forces a global commitment to end all forms of conflict and unite in a collabo-rative effort to pursue world peace.

It is hard to imagine anyone else with such a broad and deep commitment, andthe same Barack Obama who changed history here at Harvard Law School twodecades ago by being elected the first African American to be the President ofthe Harvard Law Review, is committed to doing the same on the world stage. Iapplaud him and Michelle Obama ’88 for their commitment to public service.It is a triumphant moment in Harvard Law School's history.

Charles J. Ogletree, Jr. ’78 is the Jesse Climenko Professor of Law at HLSand founder of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice.

A Triumphant Moment in History

OBAMA’ S NOBELR E A C T I O N S

CORRECTION:CORRECTION:Apologies to Profs. Elizabeth Warren and AllenApologies to Profs. Elizabeth Warren and AllenFerrell. Our front page caption last week failed toFerrell. Our front page caption last week failed tocorrectly identify them, and another caption miscorrectly identify them, and another caption mis--spelled Prof. Ferrell’s name. See our Web .pdf for thespelled Prof. Ferrell’s name. See our Web .pdf for thecorrect captions.correct captions.

The Record asked members of the Harvard Law School community to submitshort reactions to President Obama’s reception of the Nobel Peace Prize in

advance of our special forum on the issue. We have published them all, below.

Mohammed Helal, second from left, speaks during the Record’s forum onPres. Obama’s Nobel Prize. From left to right: Record Co-Editor-in-ChiefMatt Hutchins, Helal, Alfonso Lamadrid de Pablo, and Matthias Kettemann

DissentingOpinion?

EMAIL

RECORD@ LAW

Look for a

Podcast of our

Nobel Forum!Coming Soon on

hlrecord.org

Page 4 Harvard Law Record October 22, 2009

BY KATE SPENCER

The Reproductive Rights and theRight to Information event at HLS onFriday, October 9 was held to educateand inform its audience on the currentposition of information in relation to re-productive rights in the U.S. Panelistsdiscussed a number of current issuespertaining to the relationship betweenthe law, its interpretation, medicalproviders and patients, touching on top-ics ranging from minors’ rights to bod-ily integrity to the state legislation thatcommands ultrasounds for womenseeking a termination. Throughout, thefocus was on abortion and its surround-ing issues.

Helena Silverstein spoke on the re-quirement of parental consent and herresearch into whether courts actuallyknew that the judicial bypass processactually required them to relent fromasking for consent in certain situations.Unsurprisingly, many are completelyignorant of the procedure and minorsare not provided with the services theyare legally entitled to.

Khiara Bridges, a Columbia LawSchool fellow, made an interestingcomparison between the way the lawregulated securities information, man-dating “full and fair disclosure,” and thebiased information women often re-ceive when deciding on whether or notto undergo a termination. She main-tained that women should not be ex-posed to merely one philosophicalposition on the fetus. South Dakota, she

said, where declaratory statements tellwomen that abortion terminates the lifeof a “whole, separate, unique, living,unborn human being,” is doing explic-itly what mandatory ultrasounds and bi-ased counselling do implicitly.Columbia Professor Carol Sanger ex-panded on the issue of mandatory ul-trasounds, arguing that the measure wasdesigned to transform “an abstractioninto a baby” and gives a “visual con-struction of loss”. Professor Sangersuggested that the effect of the ultra-sound, through the image itself and theentire experience, was to turn all preg-nant women into “mothers-to-be” evenif they were undecided on an abortion.

A highlight at the event was thelunchtime talk by Reva Siegel, theNicholas deB. Katzenbach Professor ofLaw at Yale and an extensive publisheron constitutional law meets reproduc-tive rights. Entitled “Dignity and Deci-sion-Making in the Abortion Debate,”the premise of her discussion was thatwomen cannot be said to have “dignity”until they control their own reproduc-tive processes. Siegel culminated withthe observation that “dignity” can beconstrued as autonomy or “dignity” asequality and that U.S. case law suggeststhat meanings of dignity are plural andpotentially shifting.

The conference, which explored thecurrent issues prevalent in adoptionrights law, also provided insight into theacademic and activist work ongoing inthis area of women’s rights.

Academics Address ContinuingLegal Challenges Facing Abortion

BY ANTHONY KAMMER

In a recent New York Times column, David Brooksdescribed psychology as a field that was taking offamong young people, who were interested in probingfor more accurate answers to the mysteries of humanbehavior. That might help explain why audiencespacked the lectures of two Harvard psychologists whopresented their research at the law school this Sep-tember. Both talks, sponsored by the Student Associ-ation for Law and Mind Sciences (SALMS), raisedintriguing questions about the way our psychologicalintuitions are formalized in the law.

On September 8th, Daniel Wegner, author of TheIllusion of Conscious Will, presented several recentstudies that examine the mechanism by which indi-viduals come to identify their own and others’ behav-ior as intentional during his talk “PsychologicalStudies of the Guilty Mind.”

Wegner’s experiments suggest that people involvedin a common activity, such as using an ouija-board,are often unable to discern which actions they pro-duced themselves and which were caused by some-one else. He described several other studies in whichpeople misidentify behaviors as their own. It has beenshown in cases of facilitated communication, for ex-ample, in which a therapist helps an autistic patienttype out answers to a question, that the messagescommunicated actually originate from the therapistand not the autistic patient, although the therapist re-ports no awareness that he or she actually producedthe responses. This work suggests that while peoplefeel as if they are the authors of their choices, thisprocess is an evolved sensation and not the most

descriptively accurate account for our behaviors.On September 21st, Fiery Cushman, a newly-

minted PhD recipient and post-doctoral fellow at Har-vard’s Mind, Brain and Behavior Initiative, presentedsome of his recent research at an event titled “Out-come vs. Intent: Which Do We Punish, and Why?”Cushman’s work suggests that at a gut-level, peopleassess whether a behavior was morally right or wrongby looking at the actor’s intentions, but when assign-ing punishment, people are overwhelmingly inter-ested in outcomes, even if an outcome was accidental.

Cushman described several experiments where hewas able to look at a participant’s intentions in isola-tion from the actual outcome of the participant’s ac-tions. In one case, participants were given the choiceof dice that would later be rolled to assign rewards toa second, receiving party. When given the opportu-nity, the recipient would consistently punish moreoften when the dice produced less favorable rewards,even if the initial participant intended to provide re-wards generously. This work has interesting implica-tions for tort law, explaining in part why findings ofnegligence lead to large compensatory rewards evenin the absence of any intentional action.

As this article went to press, SALMS was planningfurther events, including an October 22nd, discussionby Goutam Jois ’07 entitled “Stare Decisis is Cogni-tive Error”.

Founded in the late spring of 2009, The Student As-sociation for Law & Mind Sciences (SALMS) is theoutgrowth of Professor Jon Hanson’s Ideology, Psy-chology and Law seminar course as well as his Proj-ect on Law and Mind Sciences. SALMS is the firststudent group at any law school merging law and

mind and sciences and is already working with stu-dents at other law schools to create similar organiza-tions around the country. Its speaker series is intendedto both introduce the legal community to relevantwork in psychology and the related mind-sciences andto encourage mind scientists to explore the implica-tions of their work for law and policy-making.

In recent years, the number of law review articlesciting to prominent mind sciences research has sky-rocketed, and most top-tier law schools now offercourses emphasizing relevant insights from socialpsychology and related fields. In fact, the course de-scriptions of nine courses in the 2009-2010 HLScourse catalog explicitly mention psychology. And inthe wake of the recent financial crisis, economists andlawyers have turned increasingly to behavioral eco-nomics and social psychology to understand the un-derlying cognitive mechanisms that shape andinfluence our institutions. Psychology and neuro-science are increasingly informing and challengingsome of the assumptions of the criminal justice sys-tem, and the mind science promise to help sharpenand clarify legal concepts.

In addition to co-sponsoring events with other HLSstudent groups, SALMS has already begun to forgeclose relationships with organizations across the Uni-versity, including graduate and undergraduate stu-dents affiliated with the Harvard Mind, Brain, andBehavior Initiative.

The group is hoping to start a journal next fall toexplore further interdisciplinary work in law and themind sciences. It would be the first academic journalof its kind in the world.

Meeting of the Minds: Law Students Flock to Psych LecturesNew Group Encourages Interest in Growing Interdisciplinary Work Combining Law, Mind Sciences

Amnesty Head Urges HumanRights Over Civil Rights in U.S.

Irene Khan LL.M. ’79, shown here addressing the World Economic Forum

BY JESSICA CORSI

As Congress continues to debatehealth care reform, and personal testi-monials about unemployment, bank-ruptcy, debt, and homelessness remainat the forefront of American con-sciousness, the Secretary General ofAmnesty International, Irene KhanLL.M. ’79, and that she had a messagefor the U.S.: ratify the InternationalCovenant on Economic, Social, andCultural Rights (ICESCR).

Khan explained that the U.S. viewshuman rights, like health care, asneeds to be met by markets as opposedto legal entitlements possessed by all.This approach leads to inequality, sheintoned, pointing to the U.S. experi-ence, in which the rich can purchasethe best health care in the world andthe poor and many of the vast middleclass face a diminished quality of life,

or death, because they are priced out.Turning a human rights lens on thehealth care issue, Khan continued, em-powers people to claim their rights andholds governments accountable for or-ganizing systems and markets in a waythat fulfills these rights.

Khan spoke at Harvard Law Schoolduring lunch on Monday, October 19,to a room comprised of students andof faculty and staff from Harvard’sbroader human rights community.Over plates of salad and vegetarianlasagna, she explained her personaljourney as a human rights lawyer andthe growth and new direction ofAmnesty International. She studiedtransnational law at HLS at a timewhen the Human Rights Program didnot exist and when internationalhuman rights law as a field would bebest described as nascent. Today, lead-ing human rights organizations such as

Amnesty, cont’d on pg. 11

October 22, 2009 Harvard Law Record Page 5

BY CHRIS SZABLA

The term refusenik used to refer toEastern Bloc Jews who were deniedpermission to emigrate. Over time, ithas morphed into a term for any pro-tester – including Netta Mishly. Nettais one of the shministim, literally“twelfth graders” – a term given to Is-raeli youth who have refused to per-form requiredmilitary serviceout of moralc o n v i c t i o n .During a recentevent sponsoredby Harvard LawSchool’s Justicefor Palestinegroup, sheshared her rea-sons for takinga stand.

“I was happyand proud to bea future sol-dier,” Nettasaid, recountingher youth. Atthirteen, however, she became politi-cally active, joining a social demo-cratic youth group, and volunteeringduring the elections of 2003. She saidshe moved between “all kinds of left-ist organizations,” supported by the“bubble” of relatively safe Tel Avivand parents who encouraged a criticalmindset. Soon she was taking part ina more radical group, which led her,for the first time, to the West Bank.After that, she recalls, she “could notdeny what was going on there.”

She still had difficulty with the ideathat she would not perform militaryservice, considered by many in thecountry to be an unquestionable duty.“Even when I was against the occu-pation,” she notes, “I wanted to be pa-triotic and join the army like everyoneelse.” When she finally made the de-cision, questions from friends and col-leagues were frequent. “I have toexplain over and over again why Ididn’t go. I feel I gave up my status,and my position on the inside,” shesaid. Her father accused her of point-ing her finger at him, and she lostfriends.

Netta also faced legal conse-quences: in Israel, refusal of compul-sory military service is a punishableoffense. Netta spent less than a monthin prison – other shministim spend upto three years. Trials for conscientiousobjectors are conducted by the mili-tary, since those whose draft numbershave been called up are considered al-ready soldiers. The charge: “refusingan order”. When released, the shmin-istim is told to join again, or face sim-ilar consequences – the process, Nettasaid, repeats itself until the refuser is

worn down. Those who do not finallygo into the military are usually sent tosee a psychiatrist, and released ongrounds they are mentally unfit.

The shministim are not the only Is-raelis who do not serve in the militarywhen they are of draft age. Around40% of Israelis are exempt from serv-ice for various reasons: they are Or-thodox Jews, married women, the

physically inca-pable. There is apanel that hearspleas of conscien-tious objection, butonly one-fifth ofthose who apply aregranted the status –and then only afteran interrogationmeant to test one’saptitude for vio-lence, inquiringafter an applicant’sattitude towardfamily memberssuffering harm.Most fail the evalu-ation process when

it emerges that a political belief moti-vates their desire to stay out of the Is-rael Defense Force, or IDF.

Political beliefs weren’t the onlyfactors motivating Netta’s decision torefuse to perform service. Women,she said, did not enjoy equal status inthe IDF, pointing out that the vast ma-jority of officers are men, and that thecountry’s first female pilot obtainedher position through a fairly recentSupreme Court ruling. She performsalternative civil service now, on a vol-untary basis.

Not all who oppose Israel’s militaryoccupation of the Palestinian territo-ries support the tactics of the shminis-tim. One Israeli officer who came toview Netta’s discussion called out thathe believed Israelis could do moregood from within the military thanwithout to change the occupation’scharacter. Netta disagreed, arguingthat service changes people, evenmembers of the radical youth groupsshe was part of, who come face-to-face with a Palestinian populationwho she said was understandably pre-disposed to hostility toward Israelisoldiers.

Netta concluded by observing that,beyond its effect on the lives of Pales-tinians, the occupation had turned Is-rael into a militaristic society: it was“not good that when I was 15 myschool took me to a shooting range.”Overall, she believed that Israel“could be in a much better place thanit is right now. Why in a normal worldwould an 18 year old have to sacrificehis life? Some are. Some are myfriends, and I don’t want them to haveto do that.”

Sheol No, She Won’t GoIsraeli Military Refusenik Speaks Out

NEWS@LAW? GET THE FULL STORY.NEWS@LAW? GET THE FULL STORY.

POLITICS@LAW, JOBS@LAW,POLITICS@LAW, JOBS@LAW,SPORTS@LAW, ARTS@LAW,SPORTS@LAW, ARTS@LAW,LIFE@LAW...RECORD@LAW.LIFE@LAW...RECORD@LAW.

BY REBECCA AGULE

American law students have longpuzzled over access to one of the mostcoveted – yet elusive – public interestcareer paths: a post at the United Na-tions. The most recent guest of the-Bernard Koteen Office of PublicInterest Advising’s Lunch Speaker Se-ries, Kaoru Okuizumi, recently arrivedat Harvard Law School to change that.

Okuizumi is a Judicial Officer in theCriminal Law and Judicial AdvisorySection (CLJAS) of the Department ofPeace Keeping Operations (DPKO) atUN Headquarters. CLJAS contributesto the UN’s overall rule of law strategy,often by advising the DPKO on issuesrelated to the judicial and correctionsaspects of peacekeeping operations,many of which are conducted in theworld’s most volatile areas. When ana-lyzing and shaping policies to deal withjustice from the perspective of peace-keeping operations, Ms. Okuizumimust consider the UN’s major mission,as well as the immediate goals and locallegal structures and norms.

A 1995 graduate of NYU LawSchool, Ms. Okuizumi provided thosein attendance with general advice onworking in international human rights,as well as information regarding somethe less traditional means of gaining ac-cess to the UN. As a veteran of theUnited Nations system, she is wellversed in the organization’s often mys-tifying practices and explained some ofthe various hiring streams.

A short exchange between Ms.Okuizumi and several audience mem-bers underlined the complexity of theUN’s human resources system, whichfunnels applicants down several differ-ent avenues, depending on the agencyor function in question. In addition tothe traditional Galaxy staffing system,which recruits for the Secretariat, manyof the specialized agencies handle hir-ing internally. Merely determiningwhere to seek out positions or submitapplications seems daunting, and thehurdles of the actual hiring process fur-ther exacerbate this unruly task. Im-pediments highlighted by audiencemembers included positions thatseemed too specified, strict experiencerequirements, and a lack of lower levelpositions. Okuizumi confirmed some ofthese difficulties, but recommended al-ternative points of entry, such as the UNVolunteers program, as means of enter-ing the system for those who might nototherwise have UN connections.

Okuizumi also made clear that thevalue of language skills should not beunderstated and suggested using time ata university to take such courses, espe-cially French. She further remarked thatone must be willing and able to func-tion with little training or guidance.

“It’s very much about learning on thejob,” she said.

Having worked for the Center forStrategic and International Studies, aD.C.-based think tank, prior to lawschool, Okuizumi had already nar-rowed her focus to international humanrights. It only took one split summer,divided between the InternationalHuman Rights Law Group (now knownas Global Rights) and a law firm, to

confirm her career path.Of her time with the firm, Okuizumi

said, “I knew I didn’t want to do this!”Following completion of her J.D.,

Okuizumi went on to a Masters in Pub-lic Administration at the Princeton’sWoodrow Wilson School of Public andInternational Affairs. She found the pol-icy degree quite useful as a means ofbalancing out her legal education, interms of both theory and practical skillsets. “It’s not just about internationallaw and human rights, but also policyand international affairs.”

While at Princeton, she met MichaelW. Doyle, a professor who had recentlycreated a young professionals group todevelop careers in peacekeeping opera-tions. He asked Okuizumi to take part.This led to her first post-graduate posi-tion as a Human Rights Officer with theUN Transitional Authority in EasternSlavonia, Baranja and Western Sir-mium (UNTAES), where she workedon projects to promote the peacefulreintegration of the region into Croatia.

Okuizumi acknowledged the rolesplayed by fortune and chance in build-ing her career. “I was very lucky, [and]feel very lucky still,” she said.

The development of such relation-ships played an integral role in her ca-reer trajectory. “It’s a pretty smallcommunity, international human rightsand criminal law,” she said.

Okuizumi outlined the rather no-madic lifestyle of a UN employee. Inexplaining some of her frequent moves,Okuizumi said, “There aren’t that manyopportunities within the UN, so when aposition opens up...apply for it.”

While some students seemed visiblydismayed by such frequent moves, oth-ers clearly relished the idea of swappingduty stations every 18 months to twoyears. After moving to Bosnia in 1998,Okuizumi worked with a group ofjudges and lawyers, both national andinternational, at the Human RightsChamber for Bosnia and Herzegovina.Finding herself nostalgic for the UN,she transferred to the Human Rights In-vestigations Desk for the UN Missionin Bosnia and Herzegovina (UN-MIBH). Other duty stations includedSierra Leone, Kosovo, the DemocraticRepublic of the Congo and Nepal.

Having spent most of her career inthe field, Okuizumi experienced theother side of the fence from 2000-2002,when she joined the Registry Legal Ad-visory Section of the InternationalCriminal Tribunal for the former Yu-goslavia (ICTY) in the Netherlands.While initially reluctant to leave thefield, Okuizumi appreciated to oppor-tunity afforded by her time at TheHague, where she negotiated sentenceenforcement agreements with statesparties; developed internal rules andregulations, and crafted policy relatingto victims and witness protection.

Married to a fellow UN employee,and now with a young child, Okuizumiexpressed both the joys and frustrationsinherent in her line of work. Her con-tinued career seemed to suggest that thesatisfactions outweigh the difficulties.

One student in attendance – whoasked to remain anonymous – was“amazed her marriage has lasted!”

Peacekeeper ProvidesRoadmap to Jobs at UN

Page 6 Harvard Law Record October 22, 2009

HarvardLawRecord

Letters and opinion columns will bepublished on a space-available basis.The editors reserve the right to editfor length and delay printing. Allletters must be signed. Deadline forsubmissions is 11:30 p.m. Tuesday.

The Harvard Law Record is a publicationof The Harvard Law School Record Cor-poration. All rights reserved. The HarvardLaw School name and shield are trade-marks of the President and Fellows ofHarvard College and are used with permis-sion from Harvard University.

EStabLiShEd MCMXLViEditors-in-Chief

Matthew W. HutchinsChris Szabla

Staff EditorsNews: Rebecca AguleOpinion: Jessica CorsiSports: Mark Samburg

Contributing WritersMohammed S. HelalAnthony Kammer

Matthias C. KettemannAlfondo Lamadrid de Pablo

Titus LinKathryn Legomsky

Prof. Charles J. Ogletree, Jr.Jenny Paul

Jean-Louis Romanet PerrouxKate SpencerPeter Wickham

Submit Letters and Editorials to:record@law.harvard.edu

orHarvard Law RecordHarvard Law School

Cambridge, MA 02138-9984

Letters tothe Editor

Your article (Kate Spencer, “Re-Ex-amining Lockerbie,” October 8, p. 4)is quite sensational. It conatins thenew fact that a Hiz[b]ollah t-shirt wasfound at Lockerbie. That has never tomy knowledge come to light.

Did you speak to Robert Baer duringthe writing of it, perchance[?][Editors’ note - Baer is a former CIAagent who said there was evidencethat 9/11 was an “inside job”.]

Charles Norrie, brother ofTony, [who] died 19 Sept.1989, [in] a genuine atrocityproved to be Libyan.

Open reply letter to John F. and LynnA. Saverese, both ’81 soliciting fundsfor supporting financial aid and schol-arships at Harvard Law School.

Dear John and Lynn Savarese,

The letter I just received from the twoof you in your roles as Co-Chairs of theHarvard Law School Fund is the secondsuch plea. I don’t know how I am to in-terpret the shift from April to Septem-ber in the salutation from “Dear Mr.Fisher” to “Dear Frank”. As far as Iknow we have never met nor commu-nicated directly, but I am going to ac-cept the “Dear Frank” as an invitationto be as candid with you as if we didknow each other.

How am to interpret your letter?Surely, as a personal endorsement ofthe need for money to help finance stu-dent aid. But I wonder if you havegiven the matter the same review andattention you would give to the testi-mony of one of your clients in an im-portant law suit. For that matter, onwhose behalf are you writing, on behalfof our law students or on behalf of the

faculty and the school?On cross-examination you might

concede that the Law School could easefinancial strain on students without re-ducing the quality of the J.D. degree.One way would be to drop the thirdyear, or postpone it to mid-career.Most of our students intern with lawfirms after the second year, and if foundable are hired. But we then requirethem to return to Cambridge for a thirdyear in residence, adding to large stu-dent debt and, most significantly, toforego a year’s earnings. It is suggestedthat in the third year students can gainfrom “clinical” work, but “clinicalwork” sounds like what a young lawyercould do in a firm and be paid for. It isalso said that the third year permitstraining in a legal specialty. But at theoutset of a career a student can not besure about a specialty and in the thirdyear often ends up working on the spe-cialty of interest to a professor.

Northwestern University LawSchool now offers both three-year andtwo-year J.D. degrees. Let’s watch howthe market values the two. Clearly, thesavings to students of a two-year pro-

gram would dwarf any financial aidwhich might be received as a result offund-raising efforts such as yours.Would you agree that a two-year pro-gram is something Harvard should con-sider as a way to help students ?

Let me be clear. It does not make meless loyal to the Law School to wish itto consider changes. Since my greatgrandfather Henry Dummer attendedthe school (in 1829-30 as one of its firsthandful of students) the School haschanged in big ways. And changes wereexperienced by my father and his twolaw school-attending brothers as well.I simply wish the Law School mightnow lead the country to more cost-effi-cient legal education – as an alternativeto funding the status quo, or as your let-ter suggests the status quo with bellsand whistles.

Sincerely,

Francis Dummer Fisher ’51Senior Research Fellow,LBJ School of Public AffairsUniversity of Texas at Austin

www.hlrecord.org@hlrecord

Should HLS Consider a Shorter, Less Expensive Law Degree?

Lockerbie Story“Sensational”

Lisbon Treaty Points Way to a New EUMore Democracy, More Efficiency, More Power in Store for Union in 2010

BY MATTHIAS C. KETTEMANN

In seven days, the European Unionwill take a big step forward. After apainful process that overshadowed Eu-ropean policy debates for years, the Lis-bon Treaty, intended to overhaul theUnion’s institutional infrastructure, willmost likely be ratified by Vaclav Klaus,the Czech Republic’s Euroskeptic pres-ident, at the EUsummit in Brus-sels. Klaus is thelast one to holdout. 26 of the 27member stateshave already rati-fied the treaty,some of them asfar back as lastyear.

Faced withenormous pressurefrom other EUmember states, no-tably from FrenchPresident NicolasSarkozy, the un-predictable Czechleader indicatedhis willingness toratify the LisbonTreaty, providedthat the Czech Re-public is allowed toopt out of certainprovisions, including the binding Fun-damental Rights Charter (Slovakia’sPrime Minister Robert Fico has alsotaken up this idea). President Klaus ex-pressed his conviction that the treatywas not “a good thing in Europe – forfreedom in Europe and for the CzechRepublic”. When asked by a Czechnewspaper whether political considera-tions had influenced his behavior, Klausadmitted: “It is true that I have next to

me a personal letter written personallyby [British Conservative Party leaderDavid] Cameron from July which issuggesting [to hold out], but I cannotwait until the British election and I willnot.”

Provided they win, David Cameron’sConservatives have vowed to hold areferendum on the Lisbon Treaty, whichwould be a sure way of sinking it. But

as it stands now, the Lisbon Treaty willenter into force on January 1, 2009, de-spite a proliferation of myths on its con-tents. It is time to dispel some of thesemyths and to clarify its main points.

The Lisbon Treaty amends the cur-rent EU and EC treaties, but does notreplace them. It aims primarily at pro-viding a more democratic, transparentand effective decision-making frame-work.

Under the Lisbon treaty, the role ofthe European Parliament is strength-ened. The Parliament receives newpowers over EU legislation, includingthe EU budget and international agree-ments. The so-called “co-decision pro-cedure” will make the Parliament anequal partner of the Council, represent-ing Member States, for almost all of EUlegislation. National parliaments will

also play a largerrole in EU deci-s i o n - m a k i n gtrough a newmonitoring mech-anism to ensuresubsidiarity, orthe principle thatthe Union canonly act whenlocal action tosolve a problem isi n s u f f i c i e n t .Through the “Cit-izens’ Initiative”,one million citi-zens from a cer-tain number ofMember Stateswill be able to re-quest the Com-mission formulatepolicy proposals.The LisbonTreaty also rec-ognizes the right

of each Member State to withdraw uni-laterally from the Union.

Importantly, the Treaty of Lisbongives binding force to the provisions ofthe Charter of Fundamental Rights,which includes innovative economicand social rights provisions and coversall EU actions, including member statesimplementation legislation.

The treaty also provides for more ef-fective and efficient decision-making in

ABRIGHTER FUTURE? | After it being signed by the last holdout, CzechPresident Vaclav Klaus, the Lisbon Treaty appears set to make Europe stronger.

Photo: Flickr user Vlastula

Lisbon, continued on pg. 8

BY PETER WICKHAM

If it ain’t broke, they say, don’t fixit. So why the need for a UK SupremeCourt? The claim that there was aneed to supplant the House of Lords’hundreds of years of tradition asBritain’s highest judicial body merelyto create a court with the same pow-ers and membership as the old oneseems like a lot of fuss about nothing.To some, it even seemed like thewhole proposal was the result of a po-litical dispute between Tony Blair, thePrime Minister who proposed thechange, and the head of the formerLaw Lords, the Lord Chancellor. Per-haps, though, we should not be soquick to condemn.

Aside from political arguments,the main impetus for change wasthat no one other than lawyers re-ally understood what the final courtof appeal was or who the elusivejudges were; it existed in theshadow of the much more visibleRoyal Courts of Justice. Althoughit shared its name with the upperhouse of Parliament, the Law Lordsconsisted of 12 judges, and since1945 had not heard cases in thechamber itself. The problem wasthat the Law Lords were still mem-bers of the legislature, with theLord Chancellor in fact being thespeaker of the upper house as wellas a cabinet minister and the most

October 22, 2009 Harvard Law Record Page 7

Guinea: Has a Nascent Democracy Lost its Way?

BY JEAN-LOUIS ROMANET PERROUX

On September 28, thousands of Guinean citizensgathered in the national football stadium in their coun-try’s capital, Conakry, to voice their protest againstCaptain Moussa Dadis Camara. They were met by amilitary that did not hesitate to open fire on them, norto loot and rape during the ensuing chaos. The ap-palling toll of this short but brutal repression is esti-mated at 157 killed and 1250 wounded.

For now, violence and unrest do not seem to havespread in the country. In a phone call hours after theevent, the President of MDT1, alocal NGO for the defense and pro-motion of human rights and therule of law, confimred that vio-lence was mostly contained to thestadium and that it did not spillover in the rest of the capital, butthat brutal and widespread viola-tions of human rights had takenplace there. He stressed that all ef-forts would be taken in order topress the government to investigatethese events and to bring the per-petrators of human rights abuses tojustice.

There is no doubt: Guinea is at acrossroads, and both its citizensand the international communityshould carefully consider the re-cent appeal by Lawyers WithoutBorders Guinea to become con-scious of the situation. An account ofhow Guinea got to this point should help.

A brief history of power in GuineaThe stadium where these sad events took place, the

“stade du 28 Septembre”, is named for the date ofGuinea’s independence from France, which it gained51 years ago. At the urging of Sékou Touré, Guineawas the only French colony to voluntarily renounceits colonial status when given the option to do so byFrench President Charles de Gaulle in 1958. This wasa source of great national pride and was followed bypolicies enshrining the place of local languages andcultures, as well as attempts at economic autarchy.

Unfortunately, as Lansiné Kaba painfully pointedout in his book Le ‘non’ de la Guinee à De Gaulle(“Guinea’s ‘no’ to de Gaulle”), the results was slowerdevelopment, no unifying national language or edu-cation, and difficulties modernizing public adminis-tration. All these aspects pose serious politicalchallenges in a country with eight administrative re-gions, seven main languages besides French (none ofwhich spoken country-wide) and twenty-four ethnicgroups, all within a territory the size of the UK or Ore-gon.

This diverse population of over ten million wasruled over with a strong hand by Sékou Touré fromindependence till his death in 1984, when power wasseized through a military coup by Lansana Conté. Thenew dictatorship, which retained its predecessors’policies regarding economic development as well asits characteristic brutality against any political oppo-sition, lasted until the death of President Conté, onDecember 23rd of last year.

Power was promptly seized by a military coup ledby a largely unknown army captain. But in responseto the long frustrated popular expectations for democ-

racy and respect for human rights, Captain MoussaDadis Camara promised a peaceful handover ofpower after free and democratic elections, in whichhe solemnly foreswore taking part. The citizens ofGuinea reluctantly accepted this promise of a peace-ful transition among fears of civil war. But the bar-gain was clear: Captain Camara would hold electionsbefore the end of 2009 and would not run for office,playing a role similar of that of Obasanjo in Nigeria.

How did we get to this bloodshed?After seizing power, Captain Camara suspended the

constitution, banned political and union activity, anddeclared that the government and the institutions ofthe Republic had been dissolved. In return, he de-clared his intention to fight corruption, straighten pub-lic expenditure and fight criminality. Camara’spopulism gained support with the indictment of thelate President Conté’s son, currently detained inConakry’s central jail. Citizens accepted this delay todemocracy in order to assure stability and the peace-ful organization of free and fair elections, which werenot something to be taken for granted in the region.

But when “arbitrary arrest and detentions, restric-

tions on political activity, and unpunished criminalacts by the military” were not met by efforts to set adate and prepare the elections, this conditional sup-port started to wane.

Over the summer, people in the streets of Conakrywould confess their fears about unmet promises, andsome would swear they would even risk their lives toprevent the coup from transforming, once more, intoa dictatorship. Camara’s recent allusions to the possi-bility of running for office proved unbearable.

The crossroads aheadIn the months after the coup,

lively discussions dividedboth internationals and localsin Guinea as to whether elec-tions ought to be held imme-diately, or after a few monthsof transition. Advocates ofwaiting argued that the coun-try has no history of democ-racy, little political activity,and fragile parties whichstruggle to gain consensusacross the country’s many eth-nic and linguistic divides.Those that wanted immediateelections, however, said thatthe power of the military inGuinea coupled with its disre-spect of human rights repre-sented a danger even when itwas out of power, let alone

when it was not. Moreover, his-tory proves, not just in Guinea, that power tends to beincredibly “sticky”, and the longer one holds it, theharder it is to separate from it.

The late events seem to put an end to the debate:nine months after the military coup, elections are nownecessary if not urgent.

If Captain Camara decides to hold on to power, ei-ther through the semblance of an election, or all-to-gether without holding any, there will be bloodshed,and his regime will transform into a brutal dictator-ship in order to maintain its grasp.

If elections are held, and Captain Camara does notrun, many challenges lay ahead for Guinea’s democ-ratization. The country will require the assistance ofthe international community to hold off the influenceof neighboring states, and to hep jump-start the pros-perity of a country that has one of the world’s lowestrankings on the Human Development Index. At anyrate, a nascent democracy should not be left alone atnight in the middle of a crossroads.

Jean-Louis Romanet Perroux is a M.A.L.D.candidate at the Fletcher School of Law and

Diplomacy. He has lived and worked in Guinea.

After the Brutal Repression of a Protest in the Capital, Questions Loom About the Country’s Future

Guinean soldiers in Conakry. Photo licensed under Creative Commons 2.0 by Flickr user missbax.

The UK’s New Supreme Court: Much Ado About Nothing?

Middlesex Guildhall, home of the newUK Supreme Court, in LondonSCOTUK, cont’d on pg. 8

October 22, 2009 Harvard Law Record Page 8

EU institutions. What is known as “qualified majority vot-ing” will be extended to cover most policy areas governed bythe Council. This will mean that, after 2014, the passage ofa legislative act will require a “double majority” of MemberStates and EU citizens. Thus 55% of the Member States rep-resenting at least 65% of the Union’s population will have tounite behind an act to for it to be passed in the Council.

Importantly, the Treaty of Lisbon ensures institutional sta-bility by creating the function of President of the EuropeanCouncil. The President will be elected for two and a halfyears (Tony Blair is the current front-runner) and will be theone to pick up the proverbial red phone, should PresidentObama decide to call.

The Treaty also extends the Union’s competences to cer-tain sensitive policy areas including combating terrorism andtackling crime, and, to some extent, energy policy, publichealth, civil protection, climate change, services of generalinterest, research, space, territorial cohesion, commercialpolicy, humanitarian aid, sport, tourism and administrativecooperation.

The Lisbon Treaty will also ensure that the role of the EUas an actor on the global stage is enhanced. A new High Rep-resentative for the Union in Foreign Affairs and SecurityPolicy, who is – at the same time – Vice-President of theCommission, will ensure the visibility of EU external action,even though his interaction with the EU President is yet tobe defined. The High Representative will be supported by anew European External Action Service, an EU diplomaticcorps.

Contrary to some popular myths, especially rampant inIreland before the its first referendum on the Treaty, and inthe United Kingdom, the new Treaty does not impinge onthe neutrality of member states, does not put public servicesat risk, does not weaken the social achievements of memberstates, does not change Irish or Polish laws on abortion, nordoes it take away the British pound, change Czech laws onGerman-held property after WWII, change tax laws, or cre-ate a European super-state, or a European army poised tostrike in conflict zones, take away member states’ right toformulate their foreign policy within the framework of priortreaty commitments, or aim to take away Security Councilseats of Permanent Members.

Unfortunately, the Lisbon Treaty will also not make theEU treaties easier to read. But, if they were, who would needlawyers?

Matthias C. Kettemann is an LL.M. student from Austria.

senior judge. The old system was aloof and, likeso much in a system without a written constitu-tion, offered great (if, as it turned out, only the-oretical) potential for abuse.

The new Supreme Court firmly establishes ju-dicial independence. It is now housed close to,but separate from the Houses of Parliament.Most importantly though, members will nolonger be elevated to the peerage, and, thus, be-come members of the legislative House ofLords. At the same time,the substance of the courtwill not change. It willcarry on the all the workof the House of Lords aswell as some functions ofthe Privy Council. Thesame Law Lords havebeen transformed into thenew Justices and differonly in name, and it ishoped the same high standard of legal analysisand detachment from politics will remain.

This all sounds pretty good, save for the newcourt’s £90 million start-up check. Still, the oldLaw Lords maintained their judicial excellenceby remaining rather aloof from the politicalscene. The danger is that with live TV feeds anda more public profile, the new court might losethis and become more like the U.S. SupremeCourt. Deadlock in a partisan court is not goodfor the law. Politics harms legal reasoning, it sti-fles judicial law making and at its worst leads toinjustice. The creation of a Supreme Court is toensure that there can be no interference from thepoliticians. Thankfully, the appointment processgives the executive, and the legislature virtuallyno say, so the problems of the U.S. seem un-likely, and the same high calibre judicial mindswill still be present. If the court is to be a suc-cess, though, the justices must remember that,first and foremost, they are lawyers. They shouldnot be swayed by public opinion; a court basedon this is no court at all.

The need to follow the law rather than the ebband flow of the public mood should not meanthat the court is dissuaded from developing the

law. At present there is no jurisdiction to strikedown statute yet many ask whether the newcourt might over time move in this direction.This would be a constitutional enormity, de-stroying the concept of parliamentary sover-eignty, yet in days of little legislative scrutiny itis not a wholly bad thing. Our system has almostcomplete fusion of executive and legislature, thevoting system leaves us with huge majorities,and the rule of law is often left in a precarious

position. If the newcourt were to step intothis accountabilitybreach they should bewelcomed, not casti-gated. Those who callfor judges to apply thelaw, rather than to saywhat it should be, areat odds with the verynature of the commonlaw and seem con-

sumed in theories of mob justice rather than inlegal reasoning. Judicial activism does not meanthe end of the rule of law; in fact, a strong judi-ciary is necessary to give it effect. Given thechoice of a judge or a politician, I know whichone I’d pick.

Despite its garish emblem, its hideous buildingand its astonishing price tag, the new SupremeCourt should be welcomed. It ensures true sep-aration of powers. It buttresses judicial inde-pendence while offering the possibility of a moreaccountable executive. After the swearing in, asthe Justices take off their new black and goldrobes, they should be proud of themselves. Intheir own, relatively understated British way,they have created a truly independent final court,which became largely of their own design oncethe politicians became bored with the project.The name grates, parts of the court are rathertacky, and some of the old world charm hasgone, but behind this we are left with a true andindependent instrument of justice, and that’ssomething with which we shouldn’t quibble.

Peter Wickham is an LL.M. student from theUnited Kingdom.

BY NICHOLAS JOY

Not long ago, “the idea of an interna-tional criminal court was goofy,” ac-cording to Jeremy Rabkin. The creationof the International Criminal Court(ICC) has not changed his position. OnThursday, October 8, Professor Rabkindebated the future of U.S. policy to-ward the ICC with Prof. Lori Dam-rosch in an event hosted by theFederalist Society.

A decade after the Rome Statute en-tered into force, creating the ICC, theUnited States is one of few westerncountries that has not acceded to theCourt. Rabkin, who teaches at GeorgeMason University School of Law,hopes it stays that way. “It is importantfor us to say that we don’t think [theICC] has any legitimacy,” he said. “Wewill be better off having a policy of sus-picion and disdain. We should hope theICC goes bankrupt.” To Rabkin, theICC has proven to be ineffective andunbalanced, involving itself with a se-ries of relatively small African nationswhile taking little action against theworst human rights offenders. “Thewhole institution is an exercise in sym-bolism.”

Damrosch, who is visiting from Co-lumbia Law School, was more opti-mistic about the potential of the ICC.Although she stopped short of recom-mending accession to the RomeStatute, she said that the “somewhatblunderbuss way” that the UnitedStates has engaged the ICC has beencoun te rp ro-ductive. Dam-rosch says thatthe AmericanServicemem-ber’s Protec-tion Act,which pro-hibits theUnited Statesfrom provid-ing militaryaid to coun-tries that have ratified the RomeStatute, sends a counterproductive mes-sage. “[The ASPA] included severalsteps widely perceived as bullyingmeasures,” she said. According toDamrosch, American opposition to theICC has created a backlash and limitedthe United States’ ability to influencethe ICC. “The U.S. has been shootingitself in the foot,” she said.

Rabkin cast dispursions on the his-torical roots of the ICC and the tri-bunals established for Yugoslavia andRwanda. For Damrosch, the ICC’s ori-gins date back to World War II and theU.S. involvement in the NuremburgTrials and the International MilitaryTribunal for the Far East. “Most Amer-

icans are proudof those accom-plishments. Theeffort that isgoing on now[extends] thelegacy ofNuremburg.”

Rabkin viewsthe tribunals thatcame afterWorld War II ina very different

light. “We should not be proud of thetribunals, but the war effort that de-feated” the Axis powers, he said. Hepointed out that the United States hadnegotiated the London charter, whichset up the Nuremburg Trials, with theother occupying powers, who stipu-lated that only members of the Axispowers would be put on trial. Rabkinsaid that, “If you could assure me that

the rules would be drafted in Washing-ton and the trials would be conductedby officials responsible to the U.S.President,” he would be more inclinedto support the ICC. Rabkin expressedconcern that if the United States joinedthe ICC it could lead to Americantroops in the field being second-guessed by an international prosecutorwith no military experience, enforcingan unestablished and vague body oflaw. “It is crazy while conducting warsto have an international diplomat look-ing over your shoulder,” he said.

Damrosch took issue with the asser-tion that the ICC would operate in alegal vacuum. “The laws of war tookhold in the late 19th Century [and the]Geneva Conventions recodified them.”Damrosch admitted, however, that,“This crime of aggression, which is notyet defined, is problematic,” she said.

At one point, Rabkin expressed con-cern that the ICC “is going to be [...] alynch mob for Israel.” He also arguedthat the ICC’s exclusive involvementwith African countries is demeaningand a poor substitute for real action.“Why did we have a tribunal inRwanda?” he asked. “Because we did-n’t want to stop them.”

Will America Fiddle as the ICC Shapes International Law?

“The danger is that with liveTV feeds and a more publicprofile, the UK Supreme Courtmight lose its judicial excel-lence, becoming more like itsU.S. counterpart.”

Lisbon, continued from pg. 6 SCOTUK, cont’d from pg. 7

“If you could assure me that therules would be drafted inWashington and the trials wouldbe conducted by officials respon-sible to the U.S. President,”[I would] be more inclined tosupport the ICC.

- Prof. Jeremy Rabkin

Send Us YourComments and Opinions!

EMAIL RECORD@ LAW

CAMBRIDGE, U.S.A.: ARE J.D. STUDENTS ANTISOCIAL?Recently returned from a year abroad in the otherCambridge - the limey one - Record editrix JESSICACORSI brings anthropological insight to bear on theperplexing question of just why J.D. students seem sounfun - and why, despite studying in the same envi-ronment, LL.Ms. have them beat.

Allow me generalize and stereotype for a minute,and to say, Harvard Law School is not the friendliestplace in the world. I’m not saying it’s a hostile envi-ronment, where people rip the pages out of books.And I’m sure many people meet their lifelong bestfriends here, as well as happily marry their classmates(happy anniversary, Barack and Michelle). But ifyou’re coming from somewhere else,you can’t help but notice that, whilecivil, its neither a particularly warmnor a particularly social environment.

Lately I have gotten into the habitof saying hi to everyone, includingrandom people that I don’t reallyknow. And my new building ischock-full of law students, who arepretty easy to spot. So I felt evenmore comfortable smiling and intro-ducing myself to these classmateswhen I met them in the elevator or onthe stairwell. Apparently this is notthe right approach, because the con-versations immediately stalled. “Hi,I’m Jess, I just moved in. I’m at theLaw School, how ’bout you?” If I waslucky I received a tight smile in re-sponse. Sometimes, people re-sponded with, “Hello.” Getting basicinformation from them—like, oh,their names—was like pulling teeth.

After a few days, I stopped smilingat the people in my building. Itbrought me back to 1L actually, when,just as in Legally Blonde, people wouldcreate closed study groups and actually tell people“No you can’t join” to their face in front of othermembers of the “group.” Other classmates would de-clare (in private of course) that they had already cho-sen their friends and that they didn’t want any more.So then, if both your study group and your social cir-cle are full, why bother smiling at someone in yourelevator? This might be called Theory #1 of why Har-vard J.D. students seem so antisocial: the “my dancecard is full” theory. But for schmoozy future lawyers,you’d think they could at least view these as net-working opportunities. We’ll have to pursue othertheories.

Theory #2: HLS students are inherently sociallyinept. I have never had so many awkward conversa-tions in my life as at HLS. I have also had the pleas-ure of overhearing many a ridiculous one. Favoriteencounters of mine from the past: “You know whatseersucker is; you must have a house in Nantucket.”My response: “No, I’m just into fabrics”. Sectionmate overhearing a friend who had visited my apart-ment and who had liked it: “Oh? Do you have a bigapartment?” Me: “Well no not really but—“ Cuttingme off: “Yeah, so do I. I have a really big apartment,too.” Well—thanks. Awesome. Happy to hear that.Amazing conversation we’re having here. Next youcan ask me how big my bank account is. My first daysitting in the Hark café, I was lucky enough to listenin on, “And then her parents gave a menorah. A meno-rah! Can you believe it? I mean, other people gavelike, $1000.” Not much to say in response to that.

But its been my LL.M. friends that have reallysummed it up the best. My favorite LL.M. story wntlike this: an LL.M. student walks into class on thefirst day, sits down, and turns to the person next tohim. He smiles, sticks out his hand, and introduceshimself with his name and where he’s from. TheJ.D.’s response: blank stare, followed by, “Hi.”LL.M. waits. Maybe she’s going to offer some simi-lar information, like, oh I don’t know, her first name,something really deep like that. No; it doesn’t come.

Not wanting to fall into the “What’s your name?”conversation reserved for small children (to be fol-lowed with “And how many years are you?” and afew fingers held in the air), he asks her what class

she’s in. “2L.” Blank stare; you can practically hearthe “plink plink” of their eyelids as they awkwardlylook at each other. And that, my friends, was the closeof their conversation. LL.M. friend: “The thing is, it’snot like she didn’t want to talk to me. She didn’t turnaway; she stayed engaged. It was just that she could-n’t manage to say anything.”

But not everyone is so tongue tied, nor is every con-versation boring or pompous. Our school is heavilydiverse, and we do have a fascinating student body.So where then are all of these charmers, these sociallyskilled extroverts who don’t feel like they can have,max, five friends?

Theory #3: they’re either too busy, they think thatthey’re too busy, or are convinced that they have topretend that they’re too busy. In my opinion, HLSwas a lot worse in this respect when there were stillreal grades; it put more pressure on us to work harder.But even without numerical GPAs, HLS is still a pres-sure cooker of expectations and demands. And sincethe economy has tanked and firm jobs are no longerhanded out on a silver platter, all sorts of new andquite serious pressures have reared their ugly heads.Even if you have a job, there’s still the pressure to beup at 6AM jogging, working on a journal, doingsomething else impressive, finding your future hus-band/wife (if you’re one of the ten people who arrivedunmarried), and so on. To hedge your bets, you’d bet-ter apply to 40 jobs, ten clerkships, 15 fellowships,and attend all sorts of lunch time lectures, weekendtrainings, research for your favorite professor, and so

on. If you have free time, you’ve screwed up.It’s just too busy here. Its one of my least favorite

aspects of life at HLS, and results in people prefer-ring to wave to you as they pass by then stop andspeak to you for 5 minutes. If they do stop and speak,their likely answer to “how are you?” is either “busy”or “tired.” Fun bunch we are when we’re pulled in somany directions at once. The faculty and staff cer-tainly seem to encourage this. At Cambridge, the firstthing I heard was to make sure not to overdo it, and totake the time to engage in fun activities. Here, thereare high expectations from every camp, without muchallowance for other coursework or outside commit-ments. But it can’t all be chalked up to outside pres-

sure: HLS students are the typewho constantly drive them-selves, and that can add up to atense and hurried social setting.

And yet we’re not the onlyhigh-powered law school outthere. Why is it that they seemto have more fun at Stanford orNYU? Theory #4: New Eng-land is not such a barrel oflaughs. Let’s be honest: it’s re-ally cold here. The bars andclubs only stay open ’til 1AM.Again, it’s really cold. NewEngland is not known for itshospitality, and Harvard is notknown for its party people.Also, it’s really cold.

Still, law students in Stock-holm seem to know how tohave a good time. Boston onthe other hand is known as a bitof a tough town. With its mob-ster heritage and diehard sportsfans, it’s not a soft and squishy

place. If we all went to lawschool in Rio, on the other hand,

we might be more apt to blow off studying to meetour friends at the beach or skip out for the entire weekof Carnival. In other places, the pressure runs in theopposite direction, and you’re chastised if you’re toomuch of a workaholic. If only HLS were that place.

But we’re not a homogenous crowd, or at least,there is another group lurking amongst the J.D.s:they’re the LL.M.s, and they seem to have much morefun. I’ve been studying them to find out why. In thefirst place, they can savor the shortness of their stay.Their year long course incentivizes them to really liveit up, whereas looking out across three years can feelprettybleak for a J.D. The other secret of LL.M.s:they mostly hang out with each other. Out at dinnerwith a handful the other night, this group told methey’d given up on J.D.s. “Its not worth the effort!”they said, since J.D.s never made the effort in returnand continually “blanked” them: UK speak for whenyou walk right by someone you know without evenbothering to acknowledge their presence, let alone sayhi. J.D.s note this too; I remember a friend com-plaining to me about this phenomenon and how he’dgone to a dinner party with a guy he’d met no lessthan five times, and who still insisted that they didn’tknow each other. Maybe this person was too stressedout to remember; or maybe he was on a power trip ofacting like he was too important to remember. What-ever the case, it stinks.

So what’s a frustrated J.D. to do? My advice: infil-trate the LL.M. class. And if that fails, head to the Edschool: teachers are nicer than lawyers, hands down.

J.D. student on a typical Saturday night?Photo licensed under Creative Commons 2.0 by Flickr user umjanedoan.

October 22, 2009 Harvard Law Record Page 9

Next Record:November 5

October 22, 2009 Harvard Law Record Page 10

BY JENNY PAUL

Are you rushing to cobble together a costume for nextweek’s Halloween party? Whether you need to find anentire costume or just need to add the finishing touch toyour outfit, look no further than The Garment District,a Cambridge Halloween hotspot with two floors full ofcostumes and accessories. Thestore carries an array of ready-to-wear costumes, ranging fromGrecian goddess outfits to pirateget-ups to flapper dresses. Cus-tomers on a budget can checkout the Garment District’s sec-ond floor, where the store sells avariety of vintage clothes thatcan be paired together to make aretro Halloween costume.“We have a bunch of used

clothing that we have in a bigcostume room, which is mix andmatch,” Garment District assis-tant manager Ryan Olenick said.“You can make something from the 50s to Space Agestuff.” Olenick said he encourages customers who askfor his advice to put together their own costumes. “I saymake your own for the most part, because it’s more funthat way,” he said. “You won’t be walking downComm. Ave. [in Boston] wearing the same thing as agirl 15 feet away from you.”

Costume rentals are available through Boston Cos-tume, located within the first floor. The selections arepricier, but more elaborate, and customers can even

choose to rent matching his-and-her costumes, such asthe Cinderella and Prince Charming set or the medievalRomeo and Juliet ensemble. Boston Costume has 5,000costumes available for rental, manager Terry Andersonsaid. “They go anywhere from Roman and Egyptian tomascot type ones, like grizzly bears and lions,” Ander-son said, noting the rentals range in price from $45 to

$175, with an average cost of $95.This year, the store took its first

Halloween rental order in Februaryand probably will take its last the dayafter Halloween for parties beingheld on Sunday, he said. This year,the most popular rental choices havebeen storm trooper, Batman and griz-zly bear costumes, he said. Because itis late in the Halloween season, An-derson urged costume seekers tokeep their options open.

“The easiest thing is to come inwith a couple of ideas, not just oneset idea,” he said. “If you can leaveyour field open a little bit, you’re

going to have a much better time and not stress in thecrowds.”

Be prepared to encounter crowds during the weekleading up to Halloween — The Garment District doesdouble to triple its usual business in October, saidOlenick, the assistant manager. The store is open from11 a.m. to midnight Sunday through Friday and from 9a.m. to midnight on Saturday through Oct. 31. The Gar-ment District is located at 200 Broadway, four blocksfrom the Kendall-MIT T stop on the Red Line.

Other Halloweencostume Hot spots:

DDoorrootthhyy’’ss BBoouuttiiqquuee 190 Massachusetts Ave., BostonMon - Sat: 10 a.m. - 6:30 p.mSunday from 12 to 6 p.m.T Stop: Hynes Convention Center(Green Line)

GGooooddwwiillll RReettaaiill SSttoorreess520 Massachusetts Ave., Cam-bridgeMon - Sat: 10 a.m. - 7 p.m.Sunday from 12 to 6 p.m.T Stop: Central Square (Red Line)

965 Commonwealth Ave., BostonMon - Sat: 10 a.m. to 8 p.m.Sunday from 12 to 6 p.m.T Stop: Pleasant Street (Green Line)

The Garment District: It’s Not a District, it’s a Store (and it’s Halloween Heaven)

BY KATHRYN LEGOMSKY

On a dismal and snowy Sunday afternoon, students andfaculty trekked over to the Newton home of Professor BenSachs for warm fall treats and informal discussion about thesocial change community at Harvard Law School. This“Soup & Cider” retreat was hosted by the Program of Studyon Law and Social Change, one of the five programs of studythat offer “pathways through the HLS curriculum.”

The event was the first of its kind since HLS launched Pro-grams of Study, meant to serve as communities of academi-cally and professionally like-minded students, two years ago.Its goal: to unite the social change community at HLS.

The philosophy behind the social change program is thatlaw is deeply implicated in our economic, political, and so-cial worlds. The pursuit of social change, then, invariably in-volves an engagement with law. The program helps studentsunderstand how law can be harnessed for social change, andhow they can pursue careers as social change agents, in areasranging from health care to immigration, criminal justice andinternational human rights, by engaging in, for example, lit-igation, electoral politics, and organizing. The intent is toenable students to develop a rich understanding of the prom-ises and limitations inherent in the various modes and areasof work that are of interest to the student.

Via a bouncy school bus, fifty brave students – not entirelysure what to expect – arrived at Sachs’ home en masse. Theywarmed up with hot cider, toasty fall pies, and home-madesquash and tomato soup. Soon, the breakout discussion ses-sions – the core activity of the retreat – began. Faculty ad-visors, including Dean Martha Minow and Professors DavidGrossman ’88, Deborah Anker LL.M. ’84, Gerald Frug ’63,and Ben Sachs led informal, small-group discussions aboutlaw and social change at HLS. Two common themesemerged from many of the discussion groups: first, how 1Lscan interact with and benefit from the (alleged) wisdom ofupper-class students, and second, how to build a communityof like-minded social change people at HLS – across sub-stantive legal areas of interest, between students and faculty,and with the other Programs of Study.

Several ideas for community building emerged from the

event, and plans are already underway to host a weekly drop-in table in Harkness Commons where students and facultyinterested in social change could meet for lunch on an im-promptu basis to discuss topics related to social change. Atleast until the new Northwest Corner complex opens, thelunch tables will provide a critical physical space to gatherand organize. Other ideas included study groups to bring outthemes of social change in the 1L curriculum and allow so-cial-change-minded students to connect the 1L curriculum totheir reasons for coming to law school, an annual weekendretreat for current students and faculty as well as alumni, andunity around events scheduled in diverse substantive lawareas. Illustrating the interconnectednes of diverse legalareas, Dean Minow told a fascinating story about a projectshe led to overhaul special education legislation. The proj-ect involved not only education law and education groups,but also – to her surprise – such diverse and unexpected areasof law as copyright, anti-trust, and others.

Faculty later spoke with students especially interested intheir own areas of law. Prof. Anker spoke about immigration,Dean Minow about education and civil rights, Prof. Sachsabout labor and employment law, Prof. Grossman about legalservices, and Prof. Frug about local government.

Despite the miserable weather, students and faculty wereoverwhelmingly positive about the retreat. Sandra Ray, a 1L,exclaimed that “everyone I talked to who went really enjoyedthe whole day!” The 1Ls in particular reminded upper-classstudents about how isolated the 1L experience can be, andthey especially appreciated this opportunity to come togetherand get the inside scoop about the HLS experience, clinicalopportunities, professors and classes to watch, and studentactivity opportunities. Many 2Ls were similarly inspired totake their involvement to the next level. Leah Watson andSakisha Jackson, for example, wanted the Program of Studyto form small committees to allow many students to takeleadership roles in building the community.

The event was held on October 18 and organized by facultydirectors Ben Sachs, David Grossman, and Martha Minow,and student fellows Joy Wang and Katie Legomsky, with as-sistance and support from Nancy Thompson, Lisa Sachs,OPIA Director Alexa Shabecoff and Shonu Gandhi ’09.

With Soup and Cider, HLS’ New Social Change Study Program is Just Getting Warmed Up

BY TITUS LIN

In an attempt to break stereotypesabout Asian-American sexuality, Dar-rell Hamamoto, a professor at UCDavis, created a pornographic film. Itwas recently screened for the Asia-Pa-cific Law Students Association as partof a monthly series of discussionsaimed at encouraging frank discussionof Asian American identity issues, en-titled RACE (Raising Awareness forCultural Equality). So far, it has ex-plored stereotypes of Asians as “per-petual foreigners” and “modelminorities”.

Hamamoto wants to revolutionizemainstream perceptions of Asian Amer-icans, particularly males. The docu-mentary attempts intellectual rigor byincluding comments from Asian-Amer-ican actors, playwrights, and academ-ics, but for many who attended thescreening, his attempt at a revolutionfell short. For one, the porno his proj-ect produced was just bad. More im-portantly, though, the actors’Asian-American identity does not comethrough. “Japan already produces Asianpornography,” one viewer complained.Another suggested, “it would have beenmore revolutionary if he had paired anAsian male with a non-Asian female.”

Others said the film did little tochange Asian-male stereotypes, andmay have even reinforced them. Themale lead was described by some view-ers as “meek and unassertive”. More-over, the plot of the porno involved themale lead seducing the female lead byteaching her how to play a video game.Criticisms were raised around the ironyof attempting to use pornography tobreak stereotypes of Asian females,given pornography’s propagation ofoversexualized female stereotypes. Yet,while falling short of Hamamoto’s in-tentions, the film succeeds in provoca-tively drawing attention to insidious,widely accepted stereotypes.

Film: Hamamoto’s“Masters of the Pillow”

October 22, 2009 Harvard Law Record Page 11

What do you think of our new website?Vote now at hlrecord.org!

BY JENNY PAUL

At first glance, Aaron Rosenberg ’02,a bespectacled, self-described “Jewishguy from Kansas City,” doesn’t looklike the type of guy who spends hisdays brokering deals for hip-hop bigshots like Three 6 Mafia – the group of“It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp” fame.But Rosenberg’s knack for finding un-signed, fresh talent, coupled with luckand a few pivotal entertainment indus-try mentors, catapulted him into a bur-geoning hip hop and R&B practice, inwhich he has repre-sented Three 6 Mafia,John Legend, LaurynHill and other artists.

Current Harvard Lawstudents looking to fol-low in his footsteps needto take advantage ofalumni networking op-portunities, hone theirnegotiating skills and es-chew the traditional re-cruiting track, he told agroup of about 100 stu-dents interested in break-ing into the niche field ofentertainment law.

“It’s just a matter ofpersistence,” Rosenbergsaid Monday at theevent, which was sponsored by theCommittee on Sports and Entertain-ment Law and the Recording ArtistProject. “When you’re here, it’s veryeasy to get lost in this soup. Everybodyis focusing on the traditional recruitingtrack, and it’s a lucrative track, and peo-ple have loans. There are all of theseother pressures. It requires some sacri-fice.”

Rosenberg said a bit of luck jump-started his career during his third yearof law school when he met John Leg-end, then an unsigned artist still knownas John Stephens. Legend becameRosenberg’s first client when he startedwork as an associate at the New Yorkoffice of Greenberg Traurig after grad-uation.

“You can say I had a little bit – no, alot – of beginner’s luck,” said Rosen-berg, now a partner at the boutique firmMyman, Abell, Fineman, Fox,Greenspan and Light. “It’s one thing tobe able to spot talent. It’s another thingjust through all kinds of circumstancesfor that talent to have the opportunity toshine.”

But Rosenberg said students shouldalso take advantage of various re-sources at the law school to help themget experience and hone the skills theywill need to be successful entertainmentlawyers. The negotiation workshoptaught him how to effectively commu-nicate and broker with people from allwalks of life, he said, while the clinicalprograms can help students “to get in

the habit of talking directly withclients.”

Rosenberg encouraged students to at-tend speakers’ events and try to estab-lish relationship with Harvard Lawalumni working in the field.

“I feel like Harvard Law School pre-pares you in that it exposes you to anamazing alumni network…who, for themost part, really enjoy helping studentsout,” he said. Rosenberg met StraussZelnick ’83 – then CEO of BMG En-tertainment – at a law school event,kept in touch, and spent his 1L summer

at the company after Zelnick offeredhim a $10-an-hour internship.

“It was barely enough to cover myexpenses that summer,” Rosenbergsaid. “I lived in a really crappy apart-ment with four of my friends, but it wasgreat. I was in the business.”

Rosenberg said students interested inthe entertainment business should un-derstand they also won’t be making themoney that other students who followthe traditional recruiting path will makeafter graduation.

“The people who get those jobs [atboutique entertainment firms] are thepeople who are willing to work forpeanuts,” he said, noting the startingyearly salary for associates is usuallyaround $40,000. “It’s not glamorouswork, but that’s a part of paying dues,because every profession in the enter-tainment business has an element ofdues paying to it. But it gives you atremendous platform, so it’s what youmake of it.”

And paying dues has its perks. Whenhe was fairly new to the business,Rosenberg said he got a call saying thatrecording artist Lauryn Hill – one of hisfavorite artists in college -- wanted himto represent her. She called him at 4a.m. to discuss the deal.

“It was her – that voice I had heard somany times rapping. It was so exhila-rating,” Rosenberg said. “[I thought]‘I’m so excited to be representing her.This is why I’m here.’”

Entertainment LawyerReached for the Stars – Now,They Reach Out to Him

On Monday, for once, Aaron Rosenberg ’02 didn’tjust help the show go on – he was the star attraction

Amnesty have embraced the indivisi-bility of all human rights to move be-yond the narrow focus on civil andpolitical rights that dominated duringthe Cold War era, and continues to gripthe U.S. in a limited “civil rights” ap-proach to human rights legal entitle-ments.

Khan advocated instead for an expe-rience based approach to human rights.Beyond legal texts, she explained, wemust focus on the lived experience ofthe poor and the marginalized. This ap-proach is strikingly relevant to theAmerican experiences that have cometo light in the recent financial crisis.While U.S. law does not provide for aright to work or a right to health, thecountry is gripped by record unem-ployment and a staggeringly damaginglack of health care. Reflecting on whatthe U.S. needs most now, and startingfrom this experience, our right to accesshealthcare and to just end equitable re-muneration can be seen not as a social-ist construct or a fantastical anti-marketidea, but as a necessity for the func-tioning and flourishing of the country.Khan noted that making health care aright empowers people, creates an ac-countability framework, and provides aremedy, outlining a legal orientation tohealthcare that would move the U.S.debate in a different direction.

At the international level, Khancalled for U.S. ratification of the ICESRto create a unified vision of human

rights among the G-20. Moving aheadin the global fight against poverty, shesaid, requires this ratification, andChina’s ratification of the InternationalCovenant for Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR). Both the U.S. and Chinashould be leaders in linking economicgrowth to human rights standards, par-ticularly the need for full democraticparticipation in economic developmentstrategies.

She pointed out Brazil, China, andIndia as examples of growth that hasleft the poorest segments of society be-hind. But data also show the stark in-equalities of American life as well andthe developed world consequence ofletting the market rule without a humanrights based floor for goods such asheath care and education.

As Khan traced Amnesty’s path overthe years, she argued that its missionhas been quite consistent. While it usedto focus primarily on political prison-ers, it has expanded to focus on prison-ers trapped by poverty and other humanrights abuses. Ironically, Khan com-mented, addressing poverty and issueslike health care often leaves groups ac-cused of wading into the “political,”and yet Amnesty focused on politicalprisoners for years without receivingthis criticism. This anecdote should beinstructive as Americans watch the ideaof health for all devolve into partisansquabbling..

the American presence in Iraq, and he began an extensive review of the country'sgoals in Afghanistan, a conflict which appears to have continuing importance inthe effort to establish stability in a troubled region. In the course of his first yearhe has delivered speeches around the world – including his noted address in Cairo– that have laid out a vision of peaceful coexistence between Western nations andthe Islamic world. President Obama has initiated summit-level talks by the UN Se-curity Council on the subject of nuclear weapons reductions, leading to a bindingresolution expressing a commitment to a nuclear-free world. And he has backedup this commitment by listening to the intense Russian criticism of the missileshield plans orchestrated by President Bush, redeploying the American presencein a way that is less threatening to Russian interests, and by expressing a desire toenter dialogue with North Korea and Iran regarding their nuclear programs. Hehas, finally, taken significant steps in the involvement of the United States inhuman rights through "experimental" membership in the United Nations HumanRights Council.

Looking back to the history of the Nobel Peace Prize, it seems likely that Pres-ident Obama's selection will come to be viewed as sharing characteristics withmany of the previous American laureates. Martin Luther King Jr. was a young,passionate, and charismatic orator whose words drew the attention of the nationand the world, moving forward an already mounting effort to bring about genuineracial equality. Obama, too, has made moving speeches and great strides towarddemonstrating the equality of races and the capacity of Americans to recognize in-justice at home and in the world. Ralph Bunche, the Harvard educated professorand diplomat, whose tireless efforts brought about a significant agreement in theMid-East conflict, demonstrated intellectual nuance and faith in the ability of con-flicting peoples to resolve their differences. Obama, too, brings a sophisticatedmind to bear on seemingly intractable problems, showing resolve in the face ofcriticism and determination that good people can produce good in the world.Henry Kissinger was the architect of policies in Vietnam and Latin America thatextended the geopolitical influence of the United States in an often shadowy bat-tle to curtail the influence of the Soviet Union, but he was honored in 1973 for hisconclusion of the Paris agreement to bring about an end of American involvementin Vietnam. Obama too will carry forward a legacy of conflicts in far-flung re-gions of the world, embarked upon to extend U.S. influence against a vague yetdangerous threat, but his expressed commitment has been to use force judiciouslyin only such places as it can lead to protection of peace and democracy. TheodoreRoosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Jimmy Carter, the three prior President-Laure-ates, were all involved in their own military pursuits, but each made strides towardsecuring peace for humanity, Roosevelt through the end of the Russo-Japanesewar, Wilson through the creation of the League of Nations, and Carter through hisparticipation in numerous negotiations in North Korea, the Middle East, Africa,and the Americas. Given time and continued persistence, Obama's acheivementsmay come to encompass similar accomplishments.

Comment, cont’d from pg. 2

Amnesty, cont’d from pg. 4

Record Sports Editor MARK SAMBURG refused to give apostseason forecast last issue out of a deep conviction that theRed Sox would be eliminated in the first round by the Angels.This article was held for publication after the Sox eliminationfrom the playoffs.

The Steal. Mr. October. The Big Red Machine. The un-forgettable plays, the heroes, and the legends have always beenborn in October. Magic dominates from the first pitch until asingle victorious team drips with champagne and cheap beer.

Baseball cannot be reduced to the page. Many have tried,and none have yet succeeded. I have no illusions about myown ability to capture baseball in mere written words. Base-ball must be lived, breathed, and loved.

At its worst, in meaningless games played in forgotten townsin the last week of June, baseball is a game of irresistible per-sonalities. At its best, with the finest closer in history stand-ing four outs from another World Series and an unknownspeedster hovering off first, it is an immortal collection of im-ages and stories. October baseball is effortlessly immortal.

I tried to write a preview of the weeks to come—an inade-quate effort to predict the unpredictable. Even if I could, (andI can’t), even if I wanted to (and I don’t), I wouldn’t. Themagic of October baseball is inextricably tied to not knowing.The truth? Nobody knows what October will bring. We canguess, and we do, but balls will take bad hops, pitchers willfind one final masterpiece in arms believed to be out of gas,and doctors will stitch tendons together, leaving the hopes ofmillions in a blood-soaked sock. Any claim of October clair-voyance is an affront to the majesty of the playoffs, blasphemyagainst the interminable tension of the game’s greatest month.

The moments are here, the heroes waiting in the wings. InNew York, a third-baseman waits in pinstripes, eager to provehis October chops, desperate to leave behind autumn failures.Last year’s champions wait in Philly to do what few havedone. An old ballpark, beloved by its players and fans, hatedby those who journey to play beneath its billowing roof, waitsdefiantly, not yet ready to say farewell to Minnesota baseball.A brilliant manager—maybe the best ever, stands on the brinkof another St. Louis October. The hero of two Boston au-tumns, exiled and nearly forgotten, waits with New York’sown abandoned legend, both awaiting redemption in southernCalifornia. In a moutaintop humidor, leather and twine soakin moisture to hamper their flight—to level the most unlevelfield. Three thousand miles away, a seemingly unstoppablelineup carries the memory of a lost tenth man as they face an-other inevitable tangle with their classic October nemesis. Farcloser, just across the river, an eternal underdog, newly ac-

Page 12 Harvard Law Record October 22, 2009

Professor Alan Dershowitz andRed Sox CEO Larry Lucchinopose with the World Series tro-phies and with the students inthe Dershowitz/Lucchino firstyear reading group on Sportsand The Law.

“Professor” Lucchino invitedthe class to conduct one of itssessions at Fenway Park and toattend the Red Sox game fol-lowing class. The Red Sox lostto the Blue Jays 8-7 after an 8thinning rally, but went on toclinch the wild card spot in thepostseason when the Rangerslost later that evening.

The Red Sox postseason endedjust a few weeks later when theywere eliminated by the Los An-geles Angels in a first-roundsweep.

From Classroomto Clubhouse:Dersh in theDugout

ENDGAME

THE IMMORTAL ESSENCE OF OCTOBER BASEBALL

Photo: Siyuan Chen

quainted with the bliss of victory, places its hopeson the shoulders of a diminutive second basemanwith drive unseen outside the greatest of cham-pions and a dominating closer who has yet toallow a run in any of his Octobers.

Nobody can know who will emerge victorious,or which seven will face the long walk back to aclubhouse unprotected by plastic sheeting, emptyof champagne and newly opened boxes of capsand t-shirts. All we can know is that October isupon us, and that it has brought the best of base-ball with it. There is nothing like October base-ball; even on television, the dirt is drier, the grassgreener, and the intensity palpable. Baseball siz-zles in the playoffs. Listen to your television oryour radio. If you’re lucky enough to make it toa postseason game, close your eyes for a momentbetween pitches. You will hear baseball, and youwill hear the intensity of these games and the men

who play each game as if there are no moregames to be played. For some, this will be true.

For those lucky few who will set their cleats onthe dirt of a field over the next four weeks, thepressure is never higher than October. For themillions of us who live and die with each pitchfrom their ace, each swing from their #9 man, thenext month is the pinnacle of sports fanhood—amarathon at a sprint’s pace. Enjoy the games.Suffer through the horrible play-by-play com-mentators that national networks shove down ourthroats, replacing our own beloved broadcastteams. Marvel at Craig Sager’s postseason“wardrobe” (and your ensuing epileptic seizures).Hang on each pitch. Love the heroes. Remem-ber the moments. Take this month to experiencebaseball at its finest. And yes, of course, GOSOX!

Making Waves in Treacherous TemperaturesLL.M. student Siyuan Chen, from Singapore, braved chilly weather to photograph the Harvard LawSchool crew team as they raced at the Head of the Charles Regatta on Saturday. The HLS team per-formed strongly, under the guidance of coxswain and MVP Kate Walro ‘12, securing a victory in theLaw School division with a time of 17 min. 47 sec. on the three-mile course.