More from the Vatican

DSC_2552DSC_0197 In an earlier post on my participation at the Judges’ Summit held at the Vatican on Human Trafficking and Organised Crime, I promised to publish more pictures of the occasion.  These are some of the official photographs.  The one on the right shows me in contemplative mood.  To my right are Baroness Butler-Sloss and District Judge Christopher Prince.  To my left is a Japanese judge: if he appears to be young, that is because he is, a product of a career judiciary.

DSC_2583The picture on the left shows me signing the declaration deriving from the Summit.  All the British participants signed, but with reservations about two of the articles. The final picture (above right) is one of the official pictures of the participants.  It was a well attended summit, attracting judges and lawyers from around the globe.  As I mentioned in the earlier post, I was the only political scientist attending.  I think I can be easily spotted…



About Lord Norton

Professor of Government at Hull University, and Member of the House of Lords
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to More from the Vatican

  1. Glad for the glimpses…

  2. Tony Sands says:

    Congratulations on your participation in this worthy event. Thank you too for blogging about it. It is of interest to me and your blog continues to be informative and accessible on themes which I would otherwise not come across in my daily life. The event was not widely enough reported in the UK. Could I ask about your reservations about the second goal. I think I understand the other reservation.

    • If I felt the world was really moving on 7 alone I would be happier in life. Not to disparage the other causes. Difficult challenges all.

    • Lord Norton says:

      Tony Sands: Many thanks. If your query refers to article 2, it was the recommendation that prostitution be deemed ‘a crime against humanity’ that caused the reservation.

      • Croft says:

        I can’t decide if i’m more surprised or depressed that only a couple of ppl had reservations. Then perhaps that just says all about those who wanted to go/were invited.

  3. maude elwes says:

    Thank you for these great pics, LN. Interesting to see the young Judge appears fast asleep. Age wears you out I see.

    I have always felt that if one is unsure or not quite comfortable signing any document, then it should not be done, no matter what it may represent. It is the inner sense telling you something doesn’t add up. Instinct is a gift we have to ensure our survival.

    I would have to ask myself what was it I read that didn’t sit well and why was that? As that is the reason for our natural reluctance to raise its clever head.

    Love the pic of Pope and the gang. They look so very regular. However, Pope should be advised to wear white trousers under his vestments, as dark or black ones make the gown look as if it needs vanish in the wash.

    • Lord Norton says:

      maude elwes: Many thanks. I think Judge Honda was deep in thought! The participants from Britain did have a good discussion as to the articles in the declaration. I am always very careful about what I sign. As a general rule, I do not sign petitions.

  4. Tony Sands says:

    Thank you for the clarification. From the opening paragraph and the article, I had read “forced labour and prostitution” and understood “forced”to refer to both. I thought it very odd that you would regard forced prostitution as anything but a crime against humanity – but that wasn’t the point. I’m sure that you concur that any individual who forces another into prostitution is committing a crime against humanity.
    Did those delegates who signed without reservation then express the opinion that prostitutes are themselves the criminals? Surely not!! For what my lowly opinion is worth, neither the article nor the opening are clearly written! Or clearly I have probably misunderstood the text.

    • Lord Norton says:

      Tony Sands: You touch upon the salient point when you say that the document is not clearly written. That caused much of the problem.

      • Tony Sands says:

        Many years ago, I had a tutor at University who was a model of clarity and economy in writing English, who certainly wouldn’t have signed that document without reservations.

  5. maude elwes says:

    The document is naive and leaves ‘justice’ open to major exploitation.

    On the prostitution segment. Imposed prostitution, either physical or emotional, generally referred to as pimping, has been illegal for years. However, prostitution, in and of itself, is not related solely to the sex act. A client is a buyer of proffered ‘goods’ and therefore cannot be seen as criminal. It is a consenting business arrangement, neither party more culpable. Lawyers solicit for clients. A prostitute of either sex is no different in the offering of a desired trade. A client cannot be assumed to know the circumstance behind a proffered service. A person in heat is as vulnerable as the desired body. Often more so.

    Not a feminists approach I know. But ‘feminism’ is not equality. That is a philosophy which stems from the notion, ‘some are more equal than others.’

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s