Lacuna magazine is back in 2017 with a special issue on business and human rights:

• In our lead article, Taking human rights and business seriously, Kendyl Salcito talks about her work as a pioneer of human rights impact assessment. She tells us about her investigations; from gold mines in Indonesia to oil fields in Uganda. She explains what doing good human rights work entails, and why she is concerned that such work is the exception rather than the rule in the ‘human rights and business’ world.

• In the Purchasing Power of Public Authorities, Marie Pillon talks explains how a symposium in Greenwich made her reflect on the efforts of public bodies who use their purchasing power to tackle corporate abuses in supply chains. From the city of Madison, in Wisconsin to local councils in Sweden there are organisations using their financial clout to make a difference to the lives of workers in industries like clothing and electronics. But she also examines the challenges to making this change more widespread.

• In Smuggled and Exploited: Human Trafficking and Refugees  Gurpreet Dhaliwal looks at the story of Nadia and Adrian, how they were brought to the UK by their employers’ on ‘tied visas’ and how they become victims of human trafficking. She finds inspiration in charities like the Adavu Project, who are working to help the survivors of trafficking and modern slavery, but finds fault with the UK Parliament for failing to close a ‘loophole’ in the Modern Slavery Act that would have ended the practice of tied visas.

• Finally, in Human Rights and Business: Is the United Nations Helping? James Harrison reflects on his time at the Annual United Nations Forum on Business and Human Rights. He finds inspiration in the work of dedicated individuals fighting bravely and creatively for change, but leaves the Forum concerned about the role being played by the United Nations. And in his editorial for the edition, James asks whether we should be paying more attention to the actions of inspirational individuals who are making change happen in the human rights and business field, and ensure that we build successfully on their efforts.

Centre co-director Prof Andrew Williams publishes 'Forgotten trials: the other side of Nuremberg' in History Extra, based on research for his recent book A Passing Fury: Searching for Justice at the End of World War II.

"A landmark in the history of international criminal justice, the Nuremberg Tribunal saw 24 major Nazi criminals brought to trial, with judges from the Allied powers presiding over the hearings. Eleven prominent Nazis were sentenced to death, while others received short prison sentences or no penalty at all. But, says Orwell Prize-winning author AT Williams, while the Nuremberg Tribunal became a symbol of the ‘free world’s’ choice of justice in the face of tyranny, aggression and atrocity, it was only a tiny fragment of a whole system of largely forgotten war crimes trials organised by the Allies across Europe".

Centre co-director Prof Andrew Williams recently published an article on Chilcot Report: Law in The Political Quarterly based on his ongoing research on the Iraq investigations.

---

Questions of law permeate the Chilcot Report. All are shrouded in uncertainty. From the constitutional relationship between Prime Minister, Cabinet and Parliament to the legality of going to war, the Inquiry presided over by Sir John Chilcot touched upon many controversial legal issues. It resolved none. But then, it was not a court of law or a judicial inquiry, and never pretended to be. No one could have reasonably expected it to pronounce with conviction any judgement on the lawfulness of acts and decisions made by those who took the UK to war in Iraq. Instead, the Report provides information useful for those who wish to reach such judgements. Lawyers are already searching the vast document to inspire possible litigation, though that was not the concern of the Inquiry. It was supposed to determine what happened and learn lessons. Those were its very broad terms of reference.

But did the Inquiry deal effectively or properly with the legal issues which framed many of the decisions and actions it examined? In this article I look briefly at two key areas where law had particular relevance but, it is argued, received insufficient attention: the legal basis for going to war; and the conduct of the occupation after the initial hostilities were concluded. Both involve the application of international legal standards—a slippery subject for those seeking exactitude, but valuable for judging the political and military leaders nonetheless.