Presentation: Reflections on women, men, sexual violence and #MeToo

(L-R) Police Commissioner Ian Stewart; Director, CJSDRC Professor Melissa Bull; Professor James W. Messerschmidt; Belinda Cox and Associate Professor Michael Flood

Last night QUT’s CJSDRC hosted two leading international scholars who reflected on the #MeToo movement and the promise and pitfalls of current efforts to end sexual violence, and the role of men in sexual violence prevention.

Distinguished University Professor of Sociology and Chair of the Criminology Department at the University of Southern Maine, USA, James W. Messerschmidt and our own Associate Professor Michael Flood drew on their experiences as scholars and activists in the gender violence field to lead a provocative workshop that asked,  What does #MeToo mean for men and women? How should men and women respond? What roles in particular can men play in building a community free of sexual violence and abuse? What does the research tell us is effective in engaging men in this work? More widely, what are the strengths and limitations of #MeToo as a way of organising against sexual violence?

Unsurprisingly this stimulated animated discussion between the presenters and the nearly 100 workshop participants who included practitioners who work with offenders and victims, legal advocates, police, academics, community members and white ribbon ambassadors. The workshop demonstrated that while #MeToo might not be the answer, it has simulated new and important conversations that could contribute to the prevention of a disturbingly prevalent and serious social problem.

CFP: Special Issue of Internet Policy Review on Power, Jurisdiction and Surveillance

Topic and relevance

The rise of digital technology has major implications for how states and corporations wield coercive regulatory power through the transnational administration of justice. Increases in data transmitted and stored by public and private actors across jurisdictions raise crucial questions about how individual rights and freedoms can be protected in an era of seemingly ubiquitous transnational surveillance. The expanded development and application of domestic and international law to address behaviour in digital spaces, includes existing law applied to online activities, and new law to cover a growing range of internet-specific conduct. A pertinent site of state and corporate power in the digital realm involves attempts to develop and enforce domestic laws, especially criminal laws, transnationally. These processes generally occur outside existing domestic legislative frameworks, and raises questions about how national sovereignty, extraterritoriality and state and corporate interests are expanding at the expense of individual rights and freedoms in digital societies.

Scope of the special issue
This special issue considers how the intersections between power, justice and space challenge existing conceptual and theoretical categories of contemporary law, that span the fields of criminology, international relations, digital media and other related disciplines (see e.g. Johnson & Post, 1996; Goldsmith & Wu, 2006; Brenner, 2009; Hilderbrandt, 2013; DeNardis, 2014). The legal geographies of the contemporary digital world require rethinking in light of calls for a more sophisticated and nuanced approach to understanding sovereignty, jurisdiction and the power to exercise control, yet still protect individual rights through law in the electronic age (Svantesson, 2013). These issues raise a host of additional contemporary and historical questions about the authority exerted by the US over extraterritorial conduct in various fields including laws relating to crime, intellectual property, surveillance and national security (see e.g. Schiller, 2011; Bauman et al., 2014; Boister, 2015).

Legal geography is an emerging multidisciplinary area of inquiry, concerned with interrogating how law is connected to, and interacts with, the social and physical worlds (Braverman et al., 2014). By emphasising how the legitimate exercise of power occurs in and through space, legal geography is of significant relevance to online environments. Initial arguments about regulating the transnational nature of the internet describe the notion of sovereignty becoming ‘softened’ (Culnan & Trinkunas, 2010), while emphasising the need to move beyond outmoded binary notions of extraterritoriality (Svantesson, 2013; 2014; 2017).

The nation-state can assert jurisdictional reach through the extraterritorial exercise of power. This is more likely to involve powerful geopolitical actors such as the United States, which has recently enacted the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data (CLOUD) Act, and the European Union, via its General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The emergence of large transnational corporations providing critical virtual and physical infrastructure adds private governance to this equation, which offers further new dimensions to the rule of law and also self- or co-regulation (see for e.g. Goldsmith & Wu, 2006; DeNardis & Hackl, 2015; Suzor, 2018; Brown & Marsden, 2013). Some of the ways jurisdictional tensions emerge in online spaces – with corresponding offline effects – occur through policing and law enforcement practices in the fields of criminal, intellectual property and corporate law. However, the lack of uniformity of these laws at domestic levels can lead to complicated and protracted legal disputes between nations, or amongst different agencies within nations (Palmer & Warren, 2013). Additional concerns arise regarding whether and how due process and human rights protections are maintained through the extraterritorial access to e-evidence (Warren, 2015; Svantesson & Gerry, 2015), the extradition of alleged offenders (Mann & Warren, 2018; Mann et al., 2018), and new and emerging powers many national law enforcement agencies now possess to engage extraterritorial surveillance and offshore government hacking.

Focus of the papers
Power and jurisdiction are central to understanding justice and regulating the contemporary digital environment. For this special issue, Internet Policy Review invites theoretical, empirical, and methodological papers from law, criminology, digital humanities, critical surveillance studies, and related disciplines on the following issues, which bear relevance to European societies and highlight policy implications or make a reference to regulatory debates:
• How the concept of legal geography can be applied to activities in, and regulation of, digital spaces;
• The impact of the expansion in domestic and international cybercrime, data protection and intellectual property laws on concepts of jurisdiction, sovereignty and extraterritoriality;
• The geopolitical impacts of domestic and international cybercrime laws such as the Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime (Budapest Convention), the recent United States CLOUD Act and other lawful access regimes including EU e-Evidence proposals;
• The application of due process requirements in the contemporary policing of digital spaces;
• The objectives of justice in the study of private governance in online environments; and
• The implications of these transnational developments for current and future policy and regulation of online activities and spaces.

A selection of contributions will be made from extended abstracts. Authors of papers selected for the special issue will be invited to present and discuss their paper at a workshop to be held in Brisbane, Australia, in late 2019 (aligned with the Association of Internet Researchers annual conference which will be hosted by QUT Digital Media Research Centre). The workshop will enable exchange of ideas on these timely issues, provide peer-feedback for the finalisation of the papers and promote the forthcoming special edition. A sub-selection of papers will be selected for the special issue based on regular peer review.

Special issue editors
Dr Monique Mann (m6.mann@qut.edu.au)
Vice-Chancellor’s Research Fellow in Technology and Regulation
School of Justice, Faculty of Law
Queensland University of Technology

Dr Angela Daly (angela.daly@cuhk.edu.hk)
Assistant Professor
Chinese University of Hong Kong Faculty of Law

Important dates
Release of the call for papers March 2019
Deadline for expression of interest and abstract submissions (500 word abstracts) 26th April 2019

Invitation to submit full text submissions May 2019
Full text submissions deadline August 2019

All details on text submissions can be found under http://policyreview.info/authors

Peer review process September 2019
Workshop in Brisbane 1st of October 2019 (attendance is not compulsory)
Resubmission of papers following review January 2020
Preparation for publication February 2020
Publication March 2020

References
Bauman, Z., Bigo, D., Esteves, P., Guild, E., Jabri, V., Lyon, D. and Walker, R.B.J. (2014). After Snowden: Rethinking the impact of surveillance. International Political Sociology, 8(2), 121-144. Doi: 10.1111/ips.12048.

Boister, N. (2015). Further reflections on the concept of transnational criminal law. Transnational Legal Theory, 6(1), 9-30.

Braverman, I., Blomley, N., Delaney, D., & Kedar, A. (2014). The expanding spaces of law: A timely legal geography. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.

Brenner, S. W. (2009). Cyberthreats: The emerging fault lines of the nation state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brown, I., & Marsden, C. T. (2013). Good governance and better regulation in the information age. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Clunan, A., & Trinkunas, H. (Eds.) (2010). Ungoverned spaces: Alternatives to state authority in an era of softened sovereignty. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.

DeNardis, L. (2014). The global war for internet governance. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

DeNardis, L. & Hackl, A. M. (2015). Internet governance by social media platforms. Telecommunication Policy, 39, 761-770.

Goldsmith, J. & Wu, T. (2006). Who controls the internet: Illusions of a borderless world. New York, Oxford University Press.

Hilderbrandt, M. (2013). Extraterritorial jurisdiction to enforce in cyberspace: Bodin,

Schmitt, Grotius in cyberspace, University of Toronto Law Journal, 63, 196-224.

Johnson, D. & Post, D. (1996). Law and borders: The rise of law in cyberspace,

Stanford Law Review, 48(5), 1367-1402.

Mann, M. & Warren, I. (2018). The digital and legal divide: Silk road, transnational online policing and southern criminology. In Carrington, Kerry, Hogg, Russell, Scott,

John, & Sozzo, Máximo (Eds.) Handbook of Criminology and the Global South. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 245-260.

Mann, M., Warren, I. & Kennedy, S. (2018). The legal geographies of transnational cyber-prosecutions: extradition, human rights and forum shifting, Global Crime, 19(2), 107-124.

Palmer, D. and Warren, I. (2013). Global policing and the case of Kim Dotcom. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 2(3), 105-119.

Schiller, D. (2011). Special commentary: Geopolitical-economic conflict and network infrastructures. Chinese Journal of Communication, 4(1), 90-107.

Suzor, N. (2018). Digital constitutionalism: Using the rule of law to evaluate the legitimacy of governance by platforms. Social Media and Society, 1-11.

Svantesson, D. (2013). A ‘layered approach’ to the extraterritoriality of data privacy laws. International Data Privacy Law, 3(4), 278-286.

Svantesson, D. (2014). Sovereignty in international law – how the internet (maybe) changed everything, but not for long. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 8(1), 137-155.

Svantesson, D., & Gerry, S. (2015). Access to extraterritorial evidence: The Microsoft cloud case and beyond. Computer Law & Security Review, 31, 478-489.

Svantesson, D. (2017). Solving the internet jurisdiction puzzle. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Warren, I. (2015). Surveillance, criminal law and sovereignty, Surveillance & Society, 13(2), 300-305.

Workshop – Bogota Universidad Catolica de Colombia – 6-8 November 2019

Conflict, Power and Justice in the Global South

Academic knowledge about conflict, power and justice has generally been sourced from a select number of countries from the Global North, whose journals, conferences, publishers and universities dominate the intellectual landscape. In the last decades, there have been substantial efforts to undo these colonized ways of producing knowledge in this field.

This three-day workshop in Colombia brings together scholars, practitioners and activists from across the globe to contribute to this task of southernizing and democratising knowledge.

The workshop aims to link northern and southern activists and scholars in a collective project to create globally connected critical and innovative knowledges. It builds upon the international workshop on Southern Criminology co-hosted by QUT and Universidad Nacional del Litoral, Argentina in November 2018; and seeks to combine presentations with group discussions around the theoretical and conceptual foundations of the Southern Criminology project.

This workshop will be co-hosted by Queensland University of Technology, Australia; Universidad Autónoma de México; Universidad Católica Colombia; University of Essex, UK; Universidad Nacional del Litoral, Argentina; University of Northumbria, UK; and, University of Oslo, Norway.

Abstracts of 250 words

Due 30 June 2019

Early submission advised as the workshop is limited to 100

Email to:  justice@qut.edu.au

The workshop will be convened in two languages: Spanish and English. Selected papers will be published as a Special Edition of Critical Criminology

 

Max Travers – Emerging Australian Scholar – 5th biennial Crime, Justice and Social Democracy International Conference

We welcome Max Travers as an Emerging Australian Scholar in the Southern Criminology Stream as part of our 5th biennial Crime, Justice and Social Democracy International Conference on the Gold Coast from 15-17 July 2019.  Max is a senior lecturer in the School of Social Sciences, University of Tasmania. He qualified as a solicitor in the United Kingdom before completing a doctorate in sociology at the University of Manchester. He has published ethnographies about legal practice, including The Reality of Law (1997) and The Sentencing of Children (2012), and is currently working on a project about bail practices and court reform. He has helped to establish the Asian Paradigm in criminology through co-editing Comparative Criminology in Asia (2017).

Further information about the conference, including how to register, can be found here. 

Jarrett Blaustein – Emerging Australian Scholar – 5th biennial Crime, Justice and Social Democracy International Conference July 2019

We are pleased to welcome Jarrett Blaustein, Ph.D. as an Emerging Australian Scholar for the Southern Criminology stream at the 5th biennial International Crime, Justice and Social Democracy Conference being held on the Gold Coast, July 2019.  Jarrett is a Senior Lecturer in Criminology at Monash University and is author of Speaking Truths to Power: Policy Ethnography and Police Reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Oxford University Press, 2015) and lead editor of the forthcoming Emerald Handbook on Crime, Justice and Sustainable Development(Emerald, 2020), His research examines the intersections between global crime and development governance within and beyond the United Nations system.

Further information about the conference including how to register can be found here.  

Migrant women and technology-facilitated domestic abuse 

Genders and Sexualities Research Forum invitation

Genders and Sexualities Research Forum invitation

Join us for our inaugural showcase of QUT researchers working in the area of diverse genders and sexualities. Five minute presentations will be followed by an opportunity for Q&A, with networking from 10:45am.

Thursday 14 March
10:00am to 12:00pm
The Cube, QUT Gardens Point Campus

Speaking program:
• Gender, Sexuality, and Digital Inclusion: Dr Elija Cassidy, Digital Media Research Centre, Creative Industries Faculty
• Genders and sexualities in education: Dr Lisa van Leent, School of Teacher Education and Leadership, Faculty of Education
• Queering Criminology: Associate Professor Matthew Ball, School of Justice, Faculty of Law
• Man, woman, “other”: Factors associated with non-binary gender identification: Dr Stephen Whyte, School of Economics and Finance, QUT Business School
• Teaching undergraduate health professionals empathy and strategies for engaging with gender diversity of patients: Associate Professor Deborah Starkey, School of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health

Please see the attached invitation for more information about each of our speakers.
Register now
This event is hosted by QUT Equity & Student Counselling

Shaping violence prevention practice and policy

Associate Professor Michael Flood gave three presentations, two as keynote speaker, on violence prevention practice and policy in November and December 2018.

Dr Flood provided a keynote address to the Connexions 15th Annual Domestic Violence Conference (Central Coast, NSW, November 26), titled “Engaging men in the prevention of men’s violence against women: How to get men in the door, inspire and mobilise them, and reduce resistance.” He contributed to a panel discussion on the role of men in ending violence against women at Griffith University’s conference, #Be someone who does something: MATE Conference (Gold Coast, November 28-29).

Michael also provided a keynote address to one of the major annual domestic violence conferences in Australia, STOP Domestic Violence Conference Australia (Gold Coast, December 3-5). His presentation was titled “Mobilising men to build gender justice: Strategies for effective movement-building”. Michael explored an important but under-utilised strategy for preventing domestic and sexual violence, community mobilisation. He assessed existing initiatives to mobilise men as violence prevention advocates and outlined the elements of effective community mobilising.

Dr Flood also gave further presentations to audiences of policy makers, including presentations to the Department of Child Safety, Youth and Women (Brisbane), the Domestic and Family Violence Community of Practice in the Department of Home Affairs (Canberra), and the Office for Women (Canberra).

Review of Indigenous Policy in Cape York

A reduction in harmful alcohol consumption, drugs, violence and crime are among outcomes of 10 years of the Cape York Income Management program, a strategic review of the program by QUT School of Justice researchers, including John Scott, Angela Higginson and Mark Lauchs, has found.

Income management was one measure in the Cape York Welfare Reform (CYWR) initiative implemented in 2008 to address ‘passive dependence’ on welfare and improve social capital in Aurukun, Coen, Hope Vale and Mossman Gorge.

The review was conducted in the light of Cape York communities looking to make a decision about moving to new arrangements based on the empowerment/development model.

The review will help inform decisions on the future of welfare quarantining in Cape York and the role current income management practices could have in any future models.

The full report can be found at:

https://www.dss.gov.au/families-and-children-programs-services-welfare-quarantining-income-management/strategic-review-of-cape-york-income-management

 

Research: Young people with cognitive disabilities and their experiences with police

Young people with cognitive disabilities are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. While about 4% of young men and 3% of young women have a cognitive disability in Australia, a much higher proportion of young people in detention (about 14%) has some form of cognitive impairment.

To contribute towards understanding this problem, Dr Kelly Richards (School of Justice, Queensland University of Technology) and Dr Kathy Ellem (School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Queensland) recently undertook interdisciplinary research on young people with cognitive disabilities’ first point of contact with the criminal justice system: the police. Funded by the Queensland Centre for Social Science Innovation, the research drew on the disciplines of criminology, social work and disability studies, and involved interviews with service providers who work with young people with cognitive disabilities in south-east Queensland. The project also sought the views of young people themselves, and for the first time, gave voice to three young people with cognitive disabilities who had been in contact with the police.
The research yielded a number of key insights that make a significant contribution to this under-examined topic:

• Service providers identified the phenomenon of “escalation” – ie, that once in an interaction with police, young people with cognitive disabilities face a range of difficulties exiting or evading police contact in ways that other young people usually successfully manage. Young people with cognitive disability may become highly visible to police and are at heightened risk of cycling in and out of the criminal justice system as offenders.
• Service providers also identified that young people with cognitive disabilities often come into increased contact with police due to the complex constellations of disadvantage that this group commonly experiences, such as homelessness, being in out-of-home care, co-morbid mental health conditions, and poverty. Further, a young person with cognitive disability may present with complex behavioural issues that others close to them find difficult to manage. Parents of young people and youth residential workers have been reported to deliberately involve the police as a strategy to cope with a young person’s challenging behaviours, again leading to increased police contact.
Young people with cognitive disabilities themselves reported in their interviews that being treated by police in ways that are “procedurally just” (ie being able to have a say, being treated with dignity, respect and fairness) enhanced their interactions with police. For example, 18-year-old “Justin” appeared to have a positive experience of citizen participation in his interaction with police. He reported having being supported by his disability worker to make a statement to police about a physical assault he had experienced. He reported that the police were “nice”, gave him time to explain things and directed some questions to his disability support worker, which he found helpful.
Findings from the study underscore the urgent need for better non-criminal justice supports for families of young people with cognitive disabilities, skill development in staff of youth services to better respond to complex behaviours of young people, as well as improved police training on issues of both youth and disability. The authors have recently been invited to present their research to Queensland‘s Department of Child Safety, Youth and Women.

Publications from the research:
Richards, K., Ellem, K., Grevis-James, N. and Dwyer, A. (2017) Young people with cognitive impairments’ interactions with police in Queensland: A report to the Queensland Centre for Social Science Innovation. Brisbane: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/109470/

Ellem, K. and Richards, K. (2018) Police contact with young people with cognitive disabilities: Perceptions of procedural (in)justice. Youth Justice: An International Journal https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1473225418794357

Richards, K. and Ellem, K. (2018) Young people with cognitive impairments and overrepresentation in the criminal justice system: Service provider perspectives. Police Practice and Research: An International Journal https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15614263.2018.1473771