This semester, our team worked on a project examining bail in Uganda’s domestic violence cases. We compared arguments for and against the admission of bail for these kinds of cases.

As of July 2023, prisons in Uganda are at a 367.4% occupancy rate. As of December 2022, 52.8% of those people are on remand, and only 47.1% have been convicted. The amount of non-convicted people in the Ugandan prisons is a big issue, especially regarding human rights. While the Ugandan Constitution supports the admission of bail and lays out guidelines for it, those guidelines are frequently ignored. While the occupancy and conviction rate statistics support allowing bail in domestic violence cases, the violence the perpetrator’s victims may face opposes allowing bail in those cases. One discovery our team made during our research was that there is almost no research on how the admission of bail affects the outcome of domestic violence cases.

Alternative measures to allow for the admission of bail are also available. For example, electronic monitoring mechanisms and global positioning systems can be used to ensure the accused will attend his hearing after posting bail. Local council courts also have the power to make various orders regarding domestic violence.

(Pictured on the left: Photo of Kampala, Uganda by Jonathan Ward on Unsplash).

Another area that we explored through research was the societal and cultural harm that results from domestic violence. A Ugandan woman being abused rarely receives the support of her family, and, more often than not, is told it is her duty to endure the abuse and make the marriage work, which nurtures the ongoing domestic violence problem in Uganda. After completing our research and writing, our team recommended a future project that would compare Ugandan domestic violence law to the law in other countries, particularly the Sub-Saharan African countries that surround Uganda.

The Center for Global Justice provides countless opportunities to students. One team member, Samantha Zenker, said, “[w]orking with the Center for Global Justice allows me to work on real situations and provide solutions. If I could sum up what the Center means, that word would be hope. The Center allows me to work and help in real situations, learning about how our work makes a difference, whether that is immediate or years down the road.” This research project is just one way the Center for Global Justice allows its students to make a difference.

This post was written by a Center for Global Justice law clerk. The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University, Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.

The post Bail in Ugandan Domestic Violence Cases appeared first on Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.

This semester, my team assisted Human Trafficking Institute, Uganda, by writing a memorandum on the use of child soldiers in Uganda. Specifically, we researched international human trafficking laws to show why the use of child soldiers is a form of human trafficking and how Uganda has responded to that argument. Our memorandum consisted of three parts: the laws on and history of Ugandan child soldiers, international law on human trafficking, and whether Ugandan law aligned with international law.

First, our team researched the legal definition of a child soldier in international law. We found that a child soldier is generally a child under the age of eighteen who takes part in any armed force or conflict. A child soldier can fight or work in another capacity, like a cook or messenger.

After defining the term, we researched Uganda’s historical and present use of child soldiers. Our research revealed that historically, from the 1980s to the early 2000s, Uganda routinely used child soldiers in the militia and rebel groups. While current reports are scarce, Uganda is actively fighting and taking steps to stop using child soldiers.

In the most significant portion of our memorandum, we compared international trafficking in person laws with respect to the meaning and use of child soldiers. International trafficking in person laws have three main elements: the means (recruitment/transfer), the act (bribery/force/threat/), and the purpose (exploitation). We also researched nuanced laws like consent of a minor and voluntary military recruitment of a minor, as both laws impact whether the use of child soldiers is considered human trafficking. Through various reports and stories, we found that the use of child soldiers meets the international elements to constitute trafficking. Not only did the legal definitions align, but facially, child soldiers exhibit many of the same traits as trafficking victims, including poor health, mental trauma, and loss of community.

When comparing the above findings with Uganda’s statutes and acts, we found that Uganda has legally defined the use of child soldiers and considers it a form of human trafficking. Compared to other countries that still actively use child soldiers and have defined such use as a form of trafficking, Uganda aligns well with international law. However, although Uganda aligns with the argument that using child soldiers is a form of trafficking, there is more Uganda can do. Thus, our memorandum concluded with recommendations for Uganda and other countries looking to prevent and combat human trafficking, specifically trafficking in the form of child soldiers.

This post was written by a Center for Global Justice law clerk. The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University, Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.

The post Is the Use of Child Soldiers Considered Human Trafficking? appeared first on Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.

Our team assisted the International Justice Mission (IJM), Ghana, by providing a comparative law memorandum on plea bargaining in cases where charges carry a mandatory minimum penalty. We sought to answer whether courts could circumvent mandatory minimums through plea bargaining by comparing the approach of the United States, Germany, and Uganda on the issue. The diverse legal traditions and plea bargaining statutes in these nations provided a rich research environment from which we discussed the policy advantages, disadvantages, and rationales for different plea bargaining regimes.

Plea bargains exist in three main forms: charge bargaining, sentence bargaining, and count bargaining. In each case, the defendant respectively pleads guilty in exchange for a reduced charge, lighter or alternative sentence, or fewer counts. Mandatory minimums are statutes that provide for sentences such as an imprisonment term “not less than” a certain number of years or a single sentence statute mandating a severe penalty such as life imprisonment.

We learned that the policy debates on plea bargaining and mandatory minimums are complex and nuanced. Plea bargaining increases judicial efficiency by allowing courts to process a high volume in a quick manner, rewards cooperating witnesses by reducing their sentences, and allows courts to individualize sentences based on the defendant in the case. However, plea bargaining may risk coercing innocent defendants to plead guilty or give prosecutors too much discretion in sentencing, a role traditionally reserved for the judge. Mandatory minimums provide advantages such as public deterrence and sentence uniformity. But some argue that they give too much prosecutorial discretion and cause consequential disadvantages like disparate racial impact, law circumvention, and guilty plea incentivization.

Our research revealed that courts cannot circumvent mandatory minimums through plea bargaining. In the United States, prosecutors and defendants must negotiate a lower charge in exchange for a guilty plea to avoid the mandatory minimum penalty (charge bargaining). In Germany, charge bargaining is precluded, and courts have a high degree of sentencing discretion. Therefore, rather than encountering a conflict between mandatory minimums and plea bargaining, Germany provides highly individualized sentencing in which the judge selects a penalty from a broad, statutorily-provided sentencing range. In Uganda, courts are also given broad sentencing ranges and laws often only prescribe a maximum penalty without a mandatory minimum. Like Germany, Uganda’s plea bargaining regime avoids a conflict between a plea bargain and mandatory minimums.

Regardless of the plea bargaining regime a country implements, we learned that courts must respect the rule of law by not sentencing below the mandatory minimum if a defendant is charged and convicted for an offense carrying such a penalty.

This post was written by a Center for Global Justice law clerk. The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University, Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.

The post Can Courts Circumvent Mandatory Minimum Penalties Through Plea Bargaining? appeared first on Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.

This semester, I worked on a project for Advocates International, an organization that pursues justice globally on behalf of the oppressed. My team and I drafted a memorandum for Advocates Africa regarding the state of religious freedom in Africa and how to obtain observer status with the African Commission of Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR). The ACHPR meets periodically throughout the year to discuss major issues within the continent. Certain NGOs can obtain observer status before the ACHPR to introduce and request that the Commission focus on certain issues during their sessions. Our team sought to answer the question of whether Advocates Africa and the Center for Global Justice could gain observer status before the ACHPR.

We discovered a relatively simple process. Organizations must share similar aims and goals as the Commission (the promotion of human rights), work in the field of human rights in Africa, and declare their financial resources. Once accepted, observers can attend the Commission’s opening and closing sessions, may be invited to be present at closed sessions, and can request that certain topics be placed on the Commission’s agenda.

We also examined the process of submitting communications to the Commission alleging human rights violations so that Advocates Africa and the Center for Global Justice would be better equipped to support future individuals suffering religious persecution in Africa. We learned that anybody can submit a communication to the Commission, even an unrelated party, on behalf of another whose rights are being violated.

Lastly, we reviewed all the communications the Commission has received so far to better understand their position on religious freedom and expression. Not many communications related to religious freedom. However, we were encouraged that the ones that had been received and the Commission’s findings and recommendations demonstrated a commitment to advocating for religious freedom and the right to exercise that freedom without fear of persecution. Thus, Advocates Africa has a great opportunity to continue presenting instances of persecution to a Commission that is ready and willing to engage with the issue.

This post was written by a Center for Global Justice law clerk. The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University, Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.

The post Gaining Observer Status with the African Commission of Peoples’ and Human Rights appeared first on Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.

This semester, I have been working on a project for the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (“NCOSE”) that analyzes the constitutionality of statutes that require age verification restrictions for all websites that distribute, stream, or allow access to pornographic material. Various states have already enacted legislation restricting pornographic websites to verified adult users. However, these statutes have received pushback from judges, the Free Speech Coalition, practicing attorneys, and professors.

The main issue NCOSE and the few states at the forefront of protecting minors from harmful sexually explicit content is whether age verification bills are constitutional. The argument against these age verification statutes is that they are an unconstitutional restriction on free speech. Those in support of these restrictions believe that requiring a simple age verification procedure such as facial recognition or scanning a form of government identification passes as the least restrictive means to promote the substantial government interest in protecting minors from the long-term adverse mental and physical health effects of pornography and other sexual content.

I have been able to explore the inner workings of free speech, the Constitution, and politics as I research and analyze this hot-button issue before many states have even confronted the topic. By comparing case law and the current statutes passed by a few states, such as Virginia and Utah, I have been able to learn about the complicated frameworks applied to free speech claims under our Constitution; I have developed a more profound passion for fighting to protect our nation’s youth and an appreciation for the endless work that NCOSE does to protect our citizens from the heinous effects of sexual exploitation.

This post was written by a Center for Global Justice student staff member. The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University, Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.

The post Does Age Verification Violate the United States Constitution? appeared first on Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.

This semester, I had the opportunity to help draft a Universal Periodic Review of Afghanistan for Alliance Defending Freedom’s (ADF) Geneva branch.

The Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a process by which the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) documents and evaluates how each member country has performed in safeguarding human rights over a four-and-a-half-year period. A key feature of this process is that non-governmental organizations like ADF are allowed and encouraged to participate in the process by submitting their own reviews to the HRC. This offers the HRC a more holistic view, since each NGO provides its own focus. The report I worked on focused on the protection of religious liberty, especially of religious minorities, in Afghanistan since the Taliban takeover in 2021.

The importance of this report can be seen in some of the effects of the last UPR cycle’s publication. To name just a couple of examples, Sierra Leone repealed its capital punishment less than three months after the publication of their UPR, while Mongolia similarly adopted new protections for advocates of human rights. While it is hard to know how effective this upcoming UPR will be, since it will be delivered to the Afghan government in exile rather than the Taliban, the UPR’s track record demonstrates that participation in the process is far from trivial.

Suffice to say, the human rights experience in Afghanistan has been nothing if not unique. Few countries experience radical shifts in governance that can be timed down to the exact day, but in the case of Afghanistan, everything changed August 15, 2021, the day the Taliban overthrew the previous Afghanistan government.

Religious tolerance has never been a strong suit for Afghanistan; in fact, it is a continued source of chastisement from ADF. Yet, the consistent report of individuals who have successfully fled Afghanistan all report that life became radically worse after the Taliban took over. There is not a religious minority group that escapes persecution in modern Afghanistan. The Taliban systemically persecute Shi’a Muslim minorities and fail to protect them from attacks by the Islamic State of Khorasan (an even more radical Islamic terror group). In fact, much of my report was the dreadful task of chronicling the attacks that occurred at Shi’a mosques, Sikh temples, and even Sufi services (despite Sufism being a tolerated practice among most of the Sunni community). As for Christians, the Taliban’s official statement that “there are no Christians living in Afghanistan” says it all.

Researching for and writing this report was an incredibly unique experience. Due to the restrictive and authoritarian nature of the Taliban “government”, finding updates and specific stories about life in Afghanistan was surprisingly difficult. There were multiple instances where I needed to translate news articles because they only appeared in Farsi. As a testament to the different priorities of the world versus those of the Church, Christian missionary websites often had more detailed reports and stories than generic news or human rights organizations.

My heart aches for the brothers and sisters in Christ who are suffering under the Taliban in Afghanistan, and I hope my team’s work can be used meaningfully to advance religious liberty to those areas of the world that need it most. If nothing else comes of this project, I’ve personally been made aware of how much Afghan Christians deserve our prayers.

This post was written by a Center for Global Justice Law Clerk. The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University, Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.

The post Three Years of Terror: Afghanistan’s Universal Periodic Review for ADF Geneva appeared first on Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.

My team’s project is to create a chart with all fifty states and the District of Colombia outlining whether each state has a victim services fund for child sex trafficking victims and a statute creating that fund. States with these statutes obtain the funding mostly from financial penalties, such as fees, fines, and forfeited assets from perpetrators convicted of sex trafficking crimes against minors. Other funding sources for these funds include donations, taxes, appropriations, grants, and more. Fifteen states have at least one victim services fund for child sex trafficking victims: Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Washington. These funds help provide the financial resources to fund essential victim services statewide.

This blog title is a line in the movie Sound of Freedom, which reveals the horrors of child sex trafficking and the need to support victims. One way to support child sex trafficking victims is through these funds. These funds help provide the financial resources to fund essential victim services statewide.

The Center for Global Justice was a significant factor in my decision to attend Regent Law. Before law school, I knew I wanted to become a lawyer to help victims of human trafficking. When Dean Walton called me to tell me more about the Center, I was excited about the opportunity to help victims now, even before entering my career. Working with organizations that help human trafficking and other victims has been a great networking opportunity. I am constantly reassured that God is in this work when I see the success stories the Center and our partners accomplish.

This post was written by a Center for Global Justice Law Clerk. The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University, Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.

The post God’s Children Are Not for Sale appeared first on Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.

The Clinic’s first client, Olivia, not only walked through the details of her story for her petition – the very first Vacatur granted in the Commonwealth of Virginia – but she has continued to share her story as a way of empowering other survivors and bringing awareness to the issue of domestic trafficking.

The 700 Club highlighted her story and the work of the Clinic in a piece that aired this week:

Also this week, Olivia joined CGJ Assistant Director Meg Kelsey and the Commonwealth Attorney for Norfolk, Ramin Fatehi, on a panel held at the Virginia Wesleyan University’s Robert Nusbaum Center. The event was titled “No Longer Seen as the Criminal: A Personal Story of Expunging Convictions from a Trafficking Survivor’s Record.” They shared about trafficking in Hampton Roads and criminal record relief for trafficking survivors and Olivia shared about her experience helping get the vacatur law passed and having her conviction vacated.

The event was covered by local news. News channel Wavy 10 interviewed Olivia for its local broadcast and published a corresponding article about the event.

In reflecting on the work of the Clinic, Meg said, “As Christian advocates, we are motivated by the compassion of Christ and our God’s love of justice. Proverbs 31 tells us to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, or to give a voice to the voiceless. In Olivia’s case, we get to help magnify her voice—to partner in highlighting a story of hope. I have been personally so inspired through getting to know her and see her strength and resilience. It’s an honor to work alongside her in bringing awareness about trafficking and working towards greater relief and support for survivors.”

Olivia is a pioneer. Please join us in praying that through the work of the Clinic we can continue to magnify the voices of many more survivors.

Read more about Olivia’s story, the Clinic’s first case in which Virginia granted its first vacatur petition for a trafficking survivor.

The post Magnifying Voices Once Silenced appeared first on Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.

During my Summer internship, I was in Rwanda for two months working with the Supreme Court, and in Uganda, I worked with local prosecutors and defense attorneys in plea bargaining. Writing this blog made me realize how great of an experience it was, and words do not do it justice.

First, being of African descent and being on the continent gave me the urge to learn more about the countries, the history, and everything in between. With Rwanda, specifically, it was fascinating to learn how they rebuilt their country within less than 30 years after what some refer to as the worst of crimes, a genocide.

On my first day, I read through their constitution and was mesmerized by its simplicity; it is very clear and precise. From my interaction with the locals, there is always a sense of nationalism, the need to do good for their country, the willingness to serve, and the accountability everyone must abide by.

Working with one of the judges of the Supreme Court and realizing how humble he is, despite all the hard work he had to accomplish to earn this title, inspired me. He takes such great pride in serving and servicing his country and community.

It reminded me of one of the reasons I went to law school in the first place. I am a first-generation immigrant from Haiti, and if you are not familiar with our history, let’s say we have had some very dark days. Since I left Haiti eight years ago, I knew I wanted to find ways to help my country. Seeing so many people with this exact expression gave me a sense of belonging; it felt like home.

Through my first project, the primary skill I took the time to improve was research because I had to present on the prosecution of international crimes to a class of judges and attorneys. By the end of my presentation, not only was I able to have a knowledgeable conversation about the subject, but I was also able to assist the judge in finding cases for his students to work on and help him grade their presentations.

My second and third projects primarily focused on conducting research and drafting judgments. I also visited some of their governmental agencies to learn about their processes and how they rebuilt the country and continue to do so. Additionally, the Judge was kind enough to plan cultural activities for us, such as attending a cultural wedding, visiting the King’s palace, and so much more.

Working with Uganda’s advocates and prosecutors, some of whom I am building life-long friendships with, I got so much hands-on experience by talking to clients and negotiating plea agreements. I thoroughly enjoy client interaction, and the biggest lesson I learned is that early client control and trust can save you so much down the line.

I also knew that I did not get to be the judge as an attorney. I had some awful cases where I struggled to represent the clients effectively. Still, it led me to realize that one of the most important things to emphasize in the legal profession is surrounding yourself with the right people.

While working in the prisons representing the clients, I had colleagues I could talk to and seek their prayers and wisdom, which made a huge difference. Being a good advocate was not just about reading and analyzing the law; it was about connecting with the client, connecting with the prosecutor, trusting and relying on my peers.

I learned so much from this internship, and I am certain that God has led me there to acquire all this knowledge in preparation for the places he will lead me to. I would participate in this externship repeatedly if I could, I still think about it now, and as much as it feels surreal, I cherish the memories and knowledge daily.

This post was written by a Center for Global Justice intern. The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University, Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.

The post Rwanda Supreme Court & Plea Bargaining in Uganda—A Mesmerizing Summer appeared first on Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.

“The more I learn, the more I break.”

I wrote these words in my journal, praying to the Lord after an emotionally hard week at my internship. I had just finished working on an assignment, spending time delving into some difficult topics for a potential lawsuit. The information I learned and sorted through made my heart hurt for the survivors. The more I learned, the more my spirit wept, the more my heart broke.

This summer, I held the privilege and opportunity to work with the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (“NCOSE”). NCOSE seeks to stop sexual exploitation in all its forms, both in the United States and internationally. I helped the legal team by accomplishing legal research, writing memos, and assisting in a host of other tasks. The legal team exhibited such passion for their work, and I could tell they cared about their clients and cared about enacting justice through the court system.

NCOSE deals with difficult topics; sexual exploitation is not a subject you would normally bring up at a dinner conversation. The topics caused me to question a lot this summer, but through my questions, I learned more about the heart of God. I cannot share what I worked on this summer (for confidentiality purposes), but what I can share is how the Lord refined my understanding of His heart and His calling for my life.

When you hear stories about children or adult survivors of sexual exploitation and then hear how many times justice on earth never comes, it is enough to send your thoughts spiraling. Is God a protector? Does He even care? What does justice even mean? I was angry a lot this summer. Angry at the world, at a broken legal system, and at myself for not being able to protect people in the way I thought I should. I felt helpless in the face of the stories I heard. I ran to the Lord a lot, journaling until 1 a.m. in the morning sometimes, often questioning Him on His care and the lack of care that I perceived on His end.

He answered my questions during a worship night in a way I didn’t expect. I didn’t feel like worshiping that night, didn’t feel like praising a God whose goodness I was questioning. Yet, I sang anyway, a part of me begging God to remind me of truth because everything seemed so clouded. It happened in an instant. I felt a deep depth of love toward me in a way I cannot explain.

Then, He spoke. “Do you feel that love right now? That is only a taste of the affection I have toward you. If I were to allow you to feel all that I feel toward you, it would overwhelm you. That feeling is merely a taste of the affection I hold toward all of my children. I love them so much. You think I do not see, and I do not care. But, I see. I love them more than you could ever possibly love them. I see them, and I protect them, for I am their protector.”

The Lord did not speak to me that night about justice. He did not answer the questions of why He allows suffering in the world, but He did share a small piece of His heart. He reminded me how He is good, how He cares, and how He is still protecting, even if it may not look the way I think it should.

I cannot answer why sexual exploitation occurs. I am still wrestling with understanding the goodness of God in the face of horrific stories. However, I trust that God is good, in ways I cannot fully comprehend. I am not the ultimate protector. He is, and I can rest in that truth.

His words gave me the strength I needed to continue working, to continue pressing forward in my internship. Did my heart stop breaking? No. Yet, I would not change that. What I felt was merely a reflection of how the Lord feels about His creation. He fashioned and molded each individual person and loves them in a way I could never understand. When my heart breaks over the suffering of those whom I do not know, it is only a small taste of how the Lord’s heart breaks for those He loves and knows deeply and intimately.  

Each memo I wrote, each case I researched, stood as bastions of justice in my mind. The Lord was allowing me to partner with Him to play a small part in helping bring about justice in the world. I could not have asked for a more fulfilling summer. Was it hard? Yes. Yet, it was worth every tear and every stressful moment. NCOSE gave me an opportunity to help them find justice for survivors, and for that, I am grateful.

I started my law school career intent on not pursuing a career in litigation. I hate public speaking, and the idea of speaking in front of a judge terrified me. However, my first year at law school began stirring a curiosity within me, an inclination to take a deeper look at civil litigation as a means of finding justice for sexually exploited survivors. After watching the lawyers at NCOSE and working on assignments for them, I felt a sense of belonging, like this was the type of career I needed to pursue. I am not sure what it all means yet, but I know my Lord will guide me.  

I am thankful for the opportunity that NCOSE provided me and look forward to seeing what cases they win in the future. Because of NCOSE, I am entering my 2L year more confident in my legal skills and ready to continue learning so one day I can be an attorney fighting for the rights of others in the courtroom.

This post was written by a Center for Global Justice intern. The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University, Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.

The post Interning With the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) appeared first on Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.