Education

Report on the Difficulties Faced by the Visually Impaired Students in the Evaluation Patterns Adopted by the National Law Universities

Guest post by Ananya Agrawal and Yathansh*

Ananya Agrawal and Yathansh co-authored a piece on challenges faced by Visually Impaired Students in National Law Universities in India, suggesting specific policy changes and reforms that promise to overhaul the overall experience in legal education.

Their paper, an empirical study, has been published in the prestigious Journal of Indian Law and Society Volume 10 (Special Issue), which focused on the theme of “Reforms in Legal Education in memory of Prof. NR Madhava Menon“.

Their report is dedicated to Prof. Madhava Menon, the father of modern legal education in India. Prof. Menon is the Founder Vice-Chancellor of National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata.

Read the full paper here: https://jils.co.in/wp-

*The authors were students of the National University of Juridical Sciences (NUJS), Kolkata, India and Associate Editors of the Journal of Indian Law and Society. Ananya is also the Founder and Editor-in-chief of Ex Curia International.

COVID-19 and Quarantine

CHADARI

Guest post by Hasina Ghafoori*

‘I know that if I am infected, I could infect more than one thousand people. Why, why are we not helping our health sector? Why don’t we care about our health, our family’s health and our society? These are the questions I want to ask all of those who are making excuses to break this lockdown.’

Read Hasina’s full story about how she spends her lockdown and what beneficial habits she has developed at chadariproject.com/2020/07/26/covid-19-and-quarantine/

#Chadari #ChadariCOVID19Story #ChadariProject #AfghanWomen

*Hasina Ghafoori is a 25 years old girl from Kabul. She graduated from literature faculty of Kabul university and currently working for Swedish Committee for Afghanistan as HR Officer.

Afghanistan fails to accord human rights to women a Guest Post by Atifa Amiri

Basically, women’s rights are the most ethical concern that has a lot of history and is also ringed by historical moral theories.images

  • For example, Aristotle (384 B.C to 322 B.C) believed that women were fit only to be subject of men and they are born to be ruled in a constitutional sense, as citizens rule other citizens.
  • He also mentioned in his book “POLITICS”: the salve is wholly lacking the deliberative element, the female has it but it lacks authority.
  • But Kant (1724-1804) on his moral works clarifies that all citizen including the women have the rights and should be encouraged to attempt towards an active condition.

Women’s rights in Afghanistan

The implication of human rights, especially Women’s rights is more complicated in Afghanistan than any definition by the ancient Greek and German, philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche and many more.

Under the Taliban’s regime, women experience indescribably worse conditions and were deprived of their basic rights and had no access to any facilities for better development but, women were given only the most primary access to health care and medical. But even had not freedom of decisions-making and still somehow.

For example, the Burqa is, in fact, a cloth prison that incarcerates not only as a psychological, but also and physical burden on some Afghan women. It was forced by the Taliban, and is another violence that took freedom of choice from women in terms of their lifestyle.

Recognition of women’s rights should be birthrights and fundamental rights everywhere.  However, in Afghanistan,  addressing women’s rights is more challenging thanin the private sphere, because of the customs and the traditions that most of the people follow. In Afghanistan in a huge extent, women have been discriminated against and are struggling every day of their lives.

Challenges:

There are many challenges in addressing the issues of women’s rights in Afghanistan. The three decades of civil war ruined all sectors in Afghanistan which damaged the most but especially the schools and educations center ruined and burnt in different parts of the country.

Education:

  • Literacy, although literacy measures are very high between both males and females in Afghanistan but there are more challenges in women’s primary education. However, annually, in Afghanistan, millions and billions are being spent on the development projects and humanitarian aids and educations is one of them that has very slow growth rates.
  • Lack of proper schools in so many provinces of Afghanistan and the quality of contents and textbooks are opprobriously bad, lack of science lab supplies, regularity of teachers and so on these issues are something so general between both men and women but women are being force from family side to do not go to school which are the main issues.
  • In so many places in Afghanistan, still, women are not allowed to go outside. Many women empowerment projects have been donated by the western countries but have less results in outcomes.

Poverty:

  • Although the Afghan government provide a free educations for all but still due to poverty the poorer families are prefer their son’s educations to daughters.
  • Poverty caused the dismissal of women’s rights in terms of their educations also poverty is the root of all the problems. As Kofi Anan, seventh Secretary-General of United Nations, rightly said “extreme poverty anywhere is a threat to human security everywhere.
  • The best policy to address women’s rights must be employment opportunities and networks for social services that support healthy families like, housing support, health care center, and child care.

Violence:

Violence against women is recognized as a major handicap to health and social development. Although this is a common concern in many geographical settings,  especially in the areas with a classic patriarchy. Women are facing challenges rights from their and fights against society at every point in time.

Violence against women in Afghanistan is so challenging, violence by the husband that is both physical and emotional like hitting, cheating, and violence by mother-in-law and other in-laws family is mostly physical violence. This a significant problem among the Afghan women in Afghanistan and I think is directly linked to poverty and economical problem.

Physical violence is one of the clearest and most serious forms of violence against women in Afghanistan and is not only limited to the aforementioned ways.  There other kinds of violence as well that its root can be sought in the culture, traditions and cultural practices like insulting women through harsh and abusive language. However, to a small extent, the prevalence of domestic violence decreased along with the increasing proportions of women to educations.

Women are considered as homemakers:

The other challenge that hinders Afghan women is that  are bound to remain within the framework of their home and the societal pressure demotivated them even before starting their path and most of Afghan men believes that women made to rise children and give birth to children.

Child marriage:

Basically child marriage is the violation of child rights and has a great negative impact on the health, growth, educational opportunities and mental development of a child.  Through child marriage, both girls and boys are suffering  strongly.

However on 9th April 2017, the Ministry of Women Affairs and Ministry of Culture and Information launched a national action plan to annihilate early child marriage but, we could not get a serious result due to lack of implementation of the law is much more important than making the law. So human rights commission and ministry of women affairs must pay attention to the preventions of violence and implementations of the law.

So, in conclusion, the only solutions to get out from the current situation is educations and educated people.

A short commentary view on Afghan women situations   by Atifa Amiri, student of MA political science at JMI University New-Delhi.Picture1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Theories of Change: a valuable new contribution to Dispute Resolution field made freely available

John Lande, University of Missouri School of Law, Isidor Loeb Professor Emeritus has painstakingly solicited, collected and organized the book in to an interesteing, far-reaching, and thought provoking book that asks each of us in the field to consider what we might be doing better. He has collected a series of essays from over fifty professionals in the field, taking on this assessment of what the future of our field may hold.

Feel free to share this book with others who you think might be interested. John has graciously invited all of us to do this, and has made it a free download. Here is the link to this valuable resource to add to your collection, Theories of Change for the Dispute Resolution Movement: Actionable Ideas to Revitalize Our Movement.

Image 2-7-20 at 8.32 AM

Students are the future of our field, and this may attract them to our community. So  the book should be shared widely with them as well.

The book is the result of the Theory of Change Symposium, organized by John in 2019. Here’s a post with an index of all the contributions to this symposium.

Included are several pieces describing important techniques to improve dispute resolution practice.  Rosa Abdelnour describes the importance of dealing with emotions in mediation, which may seem obvious, but it bears repeating as many mediators act as if emotions are irrelevant.  Noah Hanft argues that when businesses negotiate contracts, they should put the subject of developing good relationships on the agenda as an intrinsic part of the negotiation from the outset.  In one piece, Michaela Keet, Heather Heavin, and John Lande recommend that practitioners explicitly help parties consider valuable but hard-to-quantify intangible costs of engaging in the litigation process.  In another piece, they recommend a “planned early two-stage mediation” (PETSM) process to improve the quality of parties’ decision-making.  Laurel Tuvim Amaya describes the benefits of participating in reflective practice groups that challenge practitioners to seriously analyze difficult problems in their cases.

Some pieces take on “big picture” issues in our field.  Charlie Irvine urges us to take seriously substantive justice – not just procedural justice or other goals of dispute resolution.  Grande Lum describes why negotiation is especially important to deal with the major social divisions.  Rachel Viscomi suggests that we can use online resources to help bridge deep differences in our society.  Woody Mosten describes several ways that mediation trainings can improve the quality of mediation and include more peacemaking in our work.  Chris Draper envisions possible future uses of technology to promote collaborative justice in dispute resolution.  Lara Fowler suggests ways that the dispute resolution community can help address the existential threat to our planet of climate change.

Two pieces are reminders to take advantage of the Stone Soup Project, geared to faculty resources. The Stone Soup website has everything faculty need to give students great learning experiences through encounters with the real world.  Another piece describes how, with a little bit of extra effort, speakers at educational programs can generate new knowledge by systematically tapping the experiences and perspectives of audience members.

This book has lots of ideas, but no specific plans or suggestions to take any actions. This is left up to the reader to consider and inplement. John does suggest that members of the ADR community would most likely need to undertake some collaborative actions in order to implement the collective suggested changes.

John kindly synthesized the many suggestions in the book into the following broad recommendations:

        • Develop clearer common language of dispute resolution
        • Redefine what we do and who we are
        • Integrate technology into all our work
        • Develop best practice standards
        • Redesign teaching and training curricula
        • Develop and implement a research agenda
        • Develop a searchable dispute resolution bibliographic database
        • Engage the major issues of our times with realistic plans and expectations
        • Attract “all hands on deck”
        • Unbundle and prioritize our lives

As you will see, there’s quite a range of people speaking with very different voices. They are Rosa Abdelnour, Ava Abramowitz, Jim Alfini, Cynthia Alkon, Laurie Amaya, Lisa Amsler, Peter Benner, Debra Berman, Russ Bleemer, Michael Buenger, Alyson Carrel, Sarah Cole, Ben Cook, Chris Draper, Noam Ebner, Deb Eisenberg, Brian Farkas, Lara Fowler, Doug Frenkel, Steve Goldberg, Rebekah Gordon, Michael Green, Jill Gross, Chris Guthrie, Noah Hanft, Heather Heavin, David Henry, Howard Herman, Chris Honeyman, Charlie Irvine, Barney Jordaan, Jane Juliano, Michaela Keet, Randy Kiser, Russell Korobkin, Heather Kulp, John Lande, Michael Lang, Lela Love, Grande Lum, Andrew Mamo, Scott Maravilla, Woody Mosten, Jackie Nolan-Haley, Lydia Nussbaum, Rebecca Price, Nancy Rogers, Colin Rule, Amy Schmitz, Linda Seely, Donna Shestowsky, Jean Sternlight, Donna Stienstra, Tom Valenti, Rachel Viscomi, Nancy Welsh, Roselle Wissler, Doug Yarn.

Finally, if you don’t already subscribe to the Indisputably blog, I encourage you to do so. It is intended to link Dispute Resolution Scholarship, Education, and Practice.  There, you will find a range of interesting posts about various aspects of dispute resolution.

Guest Post from Janene Tuniz: In Mediation Competitions: To Compete as a Mediator, Don’t Compete

76740566643093_1793720410773829_3189786036515373056_o

Competing as a mediator in a moot competition is a conundrum. What’s unique about selecting this particular puzzle is that you never meet your fellow competitors. You enter each session with fresh faces to your left and right and a row of important people in front of you, ready to judge your performance. Instead, unlike when you enter as a negotiator, it’s just you. There is no way to gauge how you are doing in comparison to the other mediators in the rooms next door and there is no way to know for sure if you are acting in the right way or saying the right things. You also only have some pieces of the picture, making it difficult to really know what’s going on from the onset. You may be tempted to speak loudly or ensure that your presence is felt but I assure you, that’s not the way.

Although I have never been in a real commercial mediation, I imagine there are ways in which a competition and real life are fundamentally different. For instance, in real life there is real money, real problems and ordinarily a real urgency to reach a settlement. In such instances people don’t necessarily behave in the way that we would like or need them to in order to find a party-driven solution. They may use positional bargaining or withhold information and they may not be sincerely seeking to re-establish trust and open communication. In the CDRC Mediation and Negotiation Competition it’s totally different. There may be some semblance of mistrust but since competitors are judged on their trust building and communication skills they are prepped to use information strategically and with all their might, share and identify real interests.

 

There are, however, many ways in which a competition and real life are exactly the same. At CDRC this year I learnt that it is in these areas the role of the mediator is paramount. To put it simply, like in real life, participants of a mediation competition are nervous and unsure. After training for months, it all culminates in that moment, face to face with the other party, ready to negotiate. The tension in the room before the timer starts is palpable and as a mediator, that’s your moment. What’s perplexing about that moment, however, is the fact that while you are in it, you are not competing.

 

I know it sounds contradictory to enter a competition to be an anti-competitive at the pinnacle moment, but since there are no other “opponents” in the room you are not contending against anyone else. Your job in that moment is not to outshine the negotiators by saying the most impressive things or flamboyantly flaunting the rules and regulations, check-listing through caucus guidelines or confidentiality requirements. It’s important to cover these things, of course, but as the mediator you need to do it in such a way that you address the tension in the room. You alleviate worries and make sure that those who are in direct competition, trust the process and trust you. The moment you open your mouth to speak, you need to settle nerves and establish certainty.

66766342_1792288687583668_3107737631287410688_o.jpg

Trusting the mediation process is something that happens automatically in a competition but getting parties to trust you is something different. Sitting at the head of the table it’s a challenge to take a step back and guide the process instead of leading it, but it is the best way to create an environment of trust. I found the training sessions prior to the competition to be incredibly useful in highlighting this fact. I remember writing down that I should listen for (and respond to) emotions in Tom Valenti’s session entitled “Mediator Tools and Behaviors.” Being able to gauge what people in the room are feeling and validating those feelings is a fundamental step towards developing that trust. I’m not saying that every emotion should be brought under the spot light and observed by everyone at the table, but as the mediator it is imperative that you are able to note changes in body language or tone and react appropriately.

 

It’s impossible to note how people are feeling without being present. Active listening and sincere, honest feedback are imperative in this regard. Summarizing and telling the facts back to the parties in a neutral way is also a great way to show progress and create consensus but proceed with caution – it’s also risky business. Personally, I’m guilty of putting a positive spin on just about everything anyone at the mediation table says. While reframing is a good tool, using it too frequently can quickly backfire if it’s the wrong moment or if the parties are angry and frustrated.

 

Competing as a mediator is riddle worth riddling. It involves a multitude of different skill sets and an ability to know when you are needed and when you are not. It’s also something that to a large extent is based on self-confidence. I learnt so much at the CDRC competition but the message that resonated most was the importance of being true to yourself. There are so many styles and ways of mediating that it’s easy to fit a mould but once you do, it’s difficult to have the flexibility and reactiveness that’s required of you when mediating. Make a concerted effort to be the best version of yourself when you are sitting in the mediator’s seat. If you don’t feel like the best version of you that day, there are a range of things you can do to get to that point – you can give Sabine Walsh and Aled Davies a call for power stance tips and loud clapping tactics.

 

One thing I can say for sure, or rather, one piece of advice I could give to future competitors in the mediator category is that you shouldn’t compete. Obviously don’t treat the mediation like a ping pong match, acting only as an observer (remember to listen for and respond to emotions) but don’t treat it like a competition and don’t treat the people in the room as your competitors. How do you do that in practice? It’s puzzling, I know.

 

*Janene Tuniz is an LL.M Sustainable Development candidate and mediator in the making. She won first prize in Mediation at the CDRC Mediation and Negotiation Competition in 2019 and is the Co-founder and Communications Director of Diciassette which is part of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network. She is also the Content Manager and Executive Editor for online publication, The Sustainable Development Watch and is currently completing an internship at the United Nations in Nairobi.