Toward A Human Right to Claim Innocence

Nov. 2, 3 and 4, 2022, all in US Eastern time

Day 1 (Nov. 2) 10:30 AM-noon *Note the time change

Day 2 (Nov. 3) 10:00-11:30 AM *Note the time change

Day 3 (Nov. 4) 9:00-10:30 AM

This conference will be held in English on Zoom

Register here

As the innocence movement expands beyond national boundaries and the number of exonerations increases worldwide, scholars and advocates have identified an “innocence gap” in international law. International law should play a bigger role in pushing nation states to ensure fair opportunities for wrongfully convicted people to have their cases reviewed for factual innocence. Speakers at the conference will analyze how to move towards recognition of an international right to assert a claim of factual innocence. International law experts who have played a role in gaining recognition for other “new rights” will share their insights into how it can be achieved.

This conference features three panels held on three consecutive days (Nov. 2, 3 and 4):

Panel One features research on the “innocence gap” and preliminary ideas for closing the gap;

Panel Two discusses lessons learned from the creation of other “new rights” and the controversy this has sparked;

Panel Three focuses on how the new right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment was established.

Panel I: International Law’s “Innocence Gap”

November 2, 10:30 AM-noon (Eastern Time)

About this panel:

Over the last decade, a growing number of countries have adopted new laws and other mechanisms to address a gap in national criminal legal systems: the absence of meaningful procedures to raise post-conviction claims of factual innocence. These legal and policy reforms have responded to a global surge of exonerations facilitated by the growth of national innocence organizations that increasingly collaborate across borders. These developments have occurred with little direct help from international law. Although many treaties recognize extensive fair trial and appeal rights, no international human rights instrument—in its text, existing interpretation, or implementation—explicitly and fully recognizes the right to assert a claim of factual innocence. This omission is international law’s innocence gap. This panel will present its analysis of the gap and discuss ways to address it.

About the speakers:

Moderator

Luca Lupária

Luca Lupária is full professor of criminal procedure at the University of Milan (Italy). He serves as director of the Italy Innocence Project and president of the European Innocence Network. He has written monographs on core issues of criminal justice and several international scientific publications. He is a visiting professor at multiple American and European universities. He is also a criminal lawyer admitted to the Italian Supreme Court and Court of Cassation.

Panelists

Brandon L. Garrett

Brandon L. Garrett is the L. Neil Williams Professor of Law at Duke University School of Law, where he has taught since 2018, and where he founded and directs the Wilson Center for Science and Justice. His research and teaching interests include criminal procedure, wrongful convictions, habeas corpus, corporate crime, scientific evidence, civil rights, and constitutional law. Garrett’s work, including six books, has been widely cited by courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, lower federal courts, state supreme courts, and courts in other countries. Garrett attended Columbia Law School, where he was an articles editor of the Columbia Law Review and a Kent Scholar. After graduating, he clerked for the Hon. Pierre N. Leval of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. He then worked as an associate at Neufeld, Scheck & Brustin LLP in New York City. Beginning in 2020, Garrett serves as the court-appointed monitor for the federal misdemeanor bail reform consent decree in Harris County, Texas.

Laurence R. Helfer

Laurence R. Helfer is the Harry R. Chadwick, Sr. Professor of Law and co-director of the Center for International and Comparative Law at Duke University. He is a permanent visiting professor at iCourts: Center of Excellence for International Courts at the University of Copenhagen, which awarded him an honorary doctorate in 2014. Helfer has authored more than 100 scholarly publications, including four co-authored books, two edited volumes, and numerous articles in peer review law and political science journals. He has lectured widely on his diverse research interests, which include international law and institutions, human rights (including LGBT rights), and international adjudication and dispute settlement. Helfer was nominated by the United States and elected as a member of the UN Human Rights Committee for 2023 to 2026. He recently completed a four-year term as co-editor-in-chief of the American Journal of International Law.

Jayne Huckerby

Jayne Huckerby is clinical professor of law and the inaugural director of the International Human Rights Clinic at Duke University School of Law. Huckerby focuses on fact-finding, research, and advocacy in the areas of gender and human rights, gender and national security, human trafficking, and human rights in U.S. foreign policy. She frequently serves as a human rights law expert to international and regional governmental organizations and NGOs, particularly on gender, human rights, and national security, and the nexus between trafficking and terrorism. She has written and co-authored numerous articles, book chapters, and human rights reports and she is editor with Margaret L. Satterthwaite, of Gender, National Security, and Counter-Terrorism: Human Rights Perspectives and of the Research Handbook on Gender Issues and Human Rights (forthcoming). 

 

Panel II: Strategies from Other New Rights Campaigns

November 3, 9:00 AM-10:30 AM (Eastern Time)

The concept of international human rights has greatly evolved over time and has expanded to incorporate new types of rights. Advocates, scholars, and human rights lawyers have gained invaluable experience in the course of promoting new rights and having them recognized as international human rights. In this session, two leading experts on human rights and the controversy surrounding the recognition of new rights will share their insights for the innocence community.

Moderator:

Jayne Huckerby


Jayne Huckerby is clinical professor of law and the inaugural director of the International Human Rights Clinic at Duke University School of Law. Huckerby focuses on fact-finding, research, and advocacy in the areas of gender and human rights, gender and national security, human trafficking, and human rights in U.S. foreign policy. She frequently serves as a human rights law expert to international and regional governmental organizations and NGOs, particularly on gender, human rights, and national security, and the nexus between trafficking and terrorism. She has written and co-authored numerous articles, book chapters, and human rights reports and she is editor with Margaret L. Satterthwaite, of Gender, National Security, and Counter-Terrorism: Human Rights Perspectives and of the Research Handbook on Gender Issues and Human Rights (forthcoming). 

Panelists:

Inga Winkler

Dr. Inga Winkler is an Associate Professor in International Human Rights Law. She takes a socio-legal approach to her research, which focuses on socio-economic rights, gender justice and sustainable development. Her work bridges institutional protection and socio-cultural dimensions of human rights, global policy and grassroots movements, and critical reflection and practical application. Issues that are considered taboo, in particular sanitation and menstruation, have piqued her interest. Inga is the founder and co-director of the Working Group on Menstrual Health & Gender Justice and the co-chair of the University Seminar on Menstruation & Society at Columbia University. She served as the Legal Adviser to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights to Water and Sanitation.

Her books include the first comprehensive monograph on the human right to water, the Handbook on Critical Menstruation Studies, and an edited volume on the Sustainable Development Goals

Mart Susi

Mart Susi is the professor of human rights law and is heading a law program at Tallinn University. Professor Susi has initiated and is leading several research and development projects funded by the European Commission and the Nordic Council of Ministers. He has edited and is currently editing several research books on the topics of new human rights, the digital dimension of human rights, and the controversy around the meaning of human rights. He is developing the Internet Balancing Formula and has lectured on the topic at various universities in Europe and South America. He is the Management Board member of the European Fundamental Rights Agency, the Chair of the Global Digital Human Rights Network and is involved as an expert for the European Commission and non-governmental organizations. He edited The Cambridge Handbook of New Human Rights and has held senior positions in several academic institutions.

Sarah Chu

Sarah Chu joined the Innocence Project in September 2008. As the Senior Advisor on Forensic Science Policy, she leads policy work that focuses on improving the valid, reliable, and just application of forensic science and police investigative technologies. She has served as a member of the Scientific Inquiry and Research subcommittee of the National Commission on Forensic Science and was received the Legal Aid Society’s 2021 Magnus Mukoro Award for Integrity in Forensic Science. Sarah graduated from the University of California, San Diego with bachelor degrees in Biochemistry/Cell Biology, Communication, and a Masters in Biology, and holds a Masters in Epidemiology from Stanford University. She is currently a doctoral student in the Criminal Justice program at John Jay College of Criminal Justice/CUNY Graduate Center.

Mong-hwa Chin

Mong-hwa Chin is an Associate Professor of Law at National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University School of Law. He is currently the Associate Dean of the NYCU Office of International Affairs. He holds an SJD and an LL.M from Duke University and an LL.M from National Chiao Tung University, double-majoring in foreign literature and law during his undergraduate study. Professor Chin’s areas of research encompass criminal justice, evidence, law and psychology, wrongful convictions, and gender and law. He is dedicated to the promotion of gender equality, campus safety, and criminal justice and has served in several governmental commissions. He is also a board member of Taiwan Innocence Project and actively engages in the research of criminal justice issues.

 

Panel III: A Case Study: The Human Right to A Clean Environment

November 4, 9:00 AM-10:30 AM (Eastern Time)

About this panel:

In July 2022, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution recognizing the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment as a human right. The UNGA called upon states, international organizations, businesses, and other stakeholders to “scale up efforts” to ensure a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment for all. It took five decades of advocacy to elevate the right to a human right of universal recognition. The distinguished panel of experts will walk us through the journey and highlight possible lessons for gaining recognition of a universal human right to claim innocence.

About the speakers

Moderator

Laurence R. Helfer

Laurence R. Helfer is the Harry R. Chadwick, Sr. Professor of Law and co-director of the Center for International and Comparative Law at Duke University. He is a permanent visiting professor at iCourts: Center of Excellence for International Courts at the University of Copenhagen, which awarded him an honorary doctorate in 2014. Helfer has authored more than 100 scholarly publications, including four co-authored books, two edited volumes, and numerous articles in peer review law and political science journals. He has lectured widely on his diverse research interests, which include international law and institutions, human rights (including LGBT rights), and international adjudication and dispute settlement. Helfer was nominated by the United States and elected as a member of the UN Human Rights Committee for 2023 to 2026. He recently completed a four-year term as co-editor-in-chief of the American Journal of International Law.

Panelists

John H. Knox

John H. Knox is the Henry C. Lauerman Professor of International Law at Wake Forest University. He graduated from Stanford Law School with honors in 1987, and worked at the U.S. Department of State and at a private law firm before joining academia in 1998. From 2012 to 2018, he served as the first UN independent expert, then the first special rapporteur, on the human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a safe, clean, healthy and sustainable environment. In 2018, in his final report to the Human Rights Council, he presented Framework Principles on Human Rights and the Environment. He is on the board of the Universal Rights Group and on the board of editors of the American Journal of International Law.

Sébastien Duyck

Sébastien Duyck is a senior attorney for the Climate & Energy Program at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), and is the campaign manager for the human rights & climate change portfolio. He is based in Geneva. His work focuses on promoting the integration of human rights and public participation in climate governance and strengthening accountability for climate harms. Prior to joining CIEL, Sébastien worked as a consultant on related issues for the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, the Mary Robinson Foundation for Climate Justice, the Heinrich Boell Foundation, Carbon Market Watch, the Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security Research Programme (CCAFS), and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Marc Limon

Marc Limon worked as a diplomat (rank of counsellor) at the United Nations Human Rights Council from the body’s establishment in 2006 until the end of 2012. This included participating in negotiations on the institution-building package (which determined how the Council would operate), on the Council’s mid-term review, and on a wide-range of thematic and country-specific issues over the course of twenty-on regular sessions and nineteen special sessions. Between 2006 and 2012, Marc prepared reports for and interacted with all UN human rights treaty bodies, drafted national reports under the Universal Periodic Review, and organized five Special Procedure country missions. He has first-hand knowledge of the international human rights system, how it works, its weaknesses, and the challenges it faces to improve its effectiveness. Marc was also a lead negotiator during the COP15 and COP16 climate change negotiations in Copenhagen and Cancun, securing the inclusion of human rights principles and safeguards in the Cancun Agreements.

Rebecca M. Bratspies

Rebecca M. Bratspies is a professor at the City University of New York School of Law. A scholar of environmental justice, and human rights, Professor Bratspies has written scores of law review articles, op-eds, four books, including Environmental Justice: Law Policy and Regulation, and three environmental justice comic books Mayah’s Lot, Bina’s Plant , and Troop’s Run (with Charlie LaGreca). She serves on New York City’s Environmental Justice Advisory Board, and the EPA’s Children’s Health Protection Advisory Committee, is a scholar with the Center for Progressive Reform and a member of the NYC Bar Environmental Committee. ABA-SEER honored her work with its Commitment to Diversity and Justice Award and the Centre for International Sustainability Law named her its 2022 International Human Rights Lawyer.

Asia-US Wrongful Convictions Roundtable

Members of innocence organizations and lawyers who represent wrongfully convicted persons in the US and East Asia gathered online on December 9, 2021 to share their challenges and achievements over the past year. It was the second year in a row that the U.S.-Asia Law Institute hosted an online wrongful convictions roundtable.

Event recap: Trends in the Innocence Movement in Asia and the U.S.

On December 8 2020, US-Asia Law Institute held an online webinar featuring the recent developments in the “innocence” work in both East Asia and the United States. This event invited experts from China, Japan, Taiwan and the U.S. to share with the audience the significant trends in exonerating the innocent, with special focuses on the exclusion of junk science and the positive and negative roles played by prosecutors.

Defense lawyer Wang Wanqiong’s account of the Chen Man exoneration case is published

A new book about the story of an exoneree in a high-profile wrongful conviction case, Chen Man has been published lately. The author, Dr. Wang Wanqiong who represented Chen Man during the petition procedure gives a detailed account of the journey between the initial wrongful arrest to the final exoneration, and touches upon systemic problems that lead to wrongful convictions.

Shangquan Law Office Celebrates Fifth Anniversary of Wrongful Conviction Legal Aid Project

shangquan legal aid.jpeg

The Wrongful Conviction Legal Aid Project was jointly founded by Shangquan Law Office and China University of Political Science and Law in 2015. Inspired by The Innocence Project in the US, the Legal Aid Project engages prestigious scholars, practitioners, the media, experienced criminal defense lawyers, and volunteer students in providing free legal assistance to actual innocent applicants who are wrongfully convicted of serious violent crimes. Over the past five years, the project has received more than 400 applications and taken on 15 cases. To date, 15 defendants in six cases have been exonerated.

The video below explains the goal of the project and highlights of its work.

Preventing Miscarriages of Justice in Asia

On April 1, 2020. Senior Research Fellow Ira Belkin and USALI staff Allen Clayton-Greene, Amy Gao, Yin Chi, and Eli Blood-Patterson introduce the U.S.-Asia Law Institute's (USALI) program: "Preventing and Redressing Wrongful Convictions." Through this program, international experts, including individuals who themselves had been wrongfully convicted and later exonerated, shared their experience and state-of-the-art expertise with the Asian criminal justice community concerning the root causes of wrongful convictions and measures that can be adopted to prevent them and redress them. Belkin discusses the project background, activities, and lessons learned, while USALI staff members share the long-term impact the program has had in Taiwan, China, and Japan respectively.

Over the course of the four year program, approximately 70 criminal justice experts from Asia participated in intensive month-long workshops at NYU and over 500 Chinese and Japanese experts attended lectures given by USALI-sponsored international experts in China and Japan, respectively. The use of social media expanded the audience in Asia to hundreds of thousands. The project has led to the expansion of Innocence work in Asia as well as more Asian experts joining the international community of lawyers doing Innocence work. Project participants published several books and numerous articles in multiple languages on topics relevant to Innocence work, from how common interrogation techniques can lead to false confessions to why prisons should have law libraries.

Event Videos

 

Part I: Senior Research Fellow Ira Belkin discusses the project background.

Part II: Senior Research Fellow discusses the project overview, including activities in New York and overseas.

Part III: Research Scholar Yin Chi discusses the project impact in China, especially its impact for Innocence Movement Groups.

Part IV: Research Scholar Allen Clayton-Greene introduces the Taiwan Innocence Project, including the successful exonerations and capacity building in Asia.

Part V: Research Scholar Amy Gao introduces Innocence Project Japan (IPJ) and USALI’s impact in Japan.

Project VI: Research Scholar and Program Manager Eli-Blood Patterson discusses the impact that the project had in the United States.

Part VII: Senior Research Fellow Ira Belkin discusses lessons learned from the project.

 

40 Years Later: Members Supporting Retrial for the Osaki Case Demand Judicial Reform

Originally published: Nishi Nippon Shimbun
Publication date: October 16, 2019
Author: Daisuke Kono
Original article location

Abstract: In 1979 the body of a brutally murdered man was discovered in Osaki City, Kagoshima Prefecture. Ayako Haraguchi was charged with the crime but has always maintained her innocence. Recently, Haraguchi’s lawyer called together a meeting of researchers and wrongfully convicted individuals to demand judicial reform.

In Haraguchi’s third request for retrial, a district court and high court initially reviewed the case. In June of this year (2019) the court made the unusual decision to reject the request without returning it to the high court. The defense team has decided to make a fourth claim and is preparing to submit new evidence. “If possible, I would like to be charged within the year or at the latest within the year” says the lawyer.

Meanwhile, at the gathering which included about 110 people, Professor Kana Sasakura from Konan University reported on the situation in the United States in which the false accusations were revealed through DNA testing. “Societies believeing that there is no such thing as wrongful convictions has changed a lot,” she said.

In 2016, Keiko Aoki who was imprisoned for over twenty years for burning six small girls in Osaka in 1995, had his case reopened and was declared innocent. “What happened to me was unfortunate, but I won after my first retrial. It only took twenty years. Compared to Ayako, I had it easier.” The Osaki incident overturned the decision to start three retrials, and criticism has been raised in the prosecutor's appeal, which has been a factor for the lengthy process.

Related coverage and information from Japan Innocence and Death Penalty Information Center.

Library Access and Wrongful Conviction Rectification

Originally published: Library Access and Wrongful Conviction Rectification
Publication date: December 7, 2018
Author: Rongjie Lan

Abstract: China’s Public Library Law took effect on January 1, 2018. Not only to the general public, public libraries have a special role for inmates to educate themselves and even help them get exonerated. Some American exoneration cases indicated that prison libraries contributed to the success of innocent inmates regaining freedom. The author advocate for establishing libraries in prisons in China.

Read the original publication in Chinese.

Police Induced False Confession: Risk Factors and Prevention

Publication source: Journal of Evidence Science
Publication date: December 2018
Authors: Saul M. Kassin, Steven A. Drizin, Thomas Grisso, Gisli H. Gudjonsson, Richard A. Leo
Translators: Yuan Gao, Chao Liu

Abstract: Recent DNA exonerations have shed light on the problem that people sometimes confess to crimes they did not commit. Drawing on police practices, laws concerning the admissibility of confession evidence, core principles of psychology, and forensic studies involving multiple methodologies, this White Paper summarizes what is known about police-induced confessions. In this review, we identify suspect characteristics (e.g., adolescence; intellectual disability; mental illness; and certain personality traits), interrogation tactics (e.g., excessive interrogation time; presentations of false evidence; and minimization), and the phenomenology of innocence (e.g., the tendency to waive Miranda rights) that influence confessions as well as their effects on judges and juries. This article concludes with a strong recommendation for the mandatory electronic recording of interrogations and considers other possibilities for the reform of interrogation practices and the protection of vulnerable suspect populations.

Cognitive Bias and Blindness: A Global Survey of Forensic Science Examiners

Original publication: Journal of Evidence Science
Publication Date: December 2018
Author: Jeff Kukucka, Saul M. Kassin, Patricia A. Zapf, Itiel Dror
Translator: Jinxi Wang

Article Abstract: Exposure to irrelevant contextual information prompts confirmation-biased judgments of forensic science evidence(Kassin, Dror, &Kukucka, 2013). Nevertheless, some forensic examiners appear to believe that blind testing is unnecessary. To assess forensic examiners’ beliefs about the scope and nature of cognitive bias, we surveyed 403 experienced examiners from 21 countries. Overall, examiners regarded their judgments as nearly infallible and showed only a limited understanding and appreciation of cognitive bias. Most examiners believed they are immune to bias or can reduce bias through mere willpower, and fewer than half supported blind testing. Furthermore, many examiners showed a bias blind spot(Pronin, Lin, & Ross, 2002), acknowledging bias in other domains but not their own, and in other examiners but not themselves. These findings underscore the necessity of procedural reforms that blind forensic examiners to potentially biasing information, as is commonplace in other branches of science.

Evidence Science

Snapshot of the over of Evidence Science with highlighted articles from USALI’s Visiting Scholars

Snapshot of the over of Evidence Science with highlighted articles from USALI’s Visiting Scholars

The December 2018 issue of Evidence Science included several articles by former Visiting Scholars, including Weijing Huang, Jie Meng, Jinxi Wang, Xiaoyu Sun, Kuibun Zhu, and Yuejun Lan. Additionally, a translation from USALI staff Chao Liu and Yuan Gao was included in the publication.

Table of Contents

(Original Chinese language Table of Contents listed below)

Empirical Study of Police Fabricated Evidence in Wrongful Convictions in the U.S. by Weijing Huang

Induce or Prevent False Confession – A Study on Reid Interrogation Technique in the U.S. by Jie Meng

Cognitive Bias and Blindness: A Global Survey of Forensic Science Examiners by Jeff Kukucka, Saul M. Kassin, Patricia A. Zapf, Itiel Dror, Translated by Jinxi Wang

A Preliminary Study of the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission by Xiaoyu Sun

Police Induced False Confessions: Risk Factors and Prevention Recommendations by Saul M.Kassin, Steven A.Drizin, Thomas Grisso, Gisli H.Gudjonsson, Richard A.Leo, Allison D.Redlich, Translated by Chao Liu, Yuan Gao

Use Evidence Collected by the Supervision Agencies in Criminal Litigation by Yuejun Lan

Road-map for Application of Interrogation Recording in “Trial Centered” Reform by Kuibin Zhu

Evidence_Science_ToC.png

Prevention and Redressing Wrongful Convictions in the U.S.

Originally published: Journal of People’s Procuratorate
Publication date: 2017, Issue II
Author: Ira Belkin, USALI Senior Research Fellow

Abstract: Prevention and Redressing Wrongful Convictions is a common challenge faced China and the U.S. As a research subject, it covers almost every aspect of a criminal justice system. This article discussed in the context of American criminal justice system on how miscarriage of justice occurred, what the root causes are, who is responsible for rectifying these cases, as well as responses from the legislature and policy makers.

Read the original article in Chinese.

Reform and Development of Video and Audio Recording in Police Interrogation in the U.S. Published at: the Prosecutorial Daily

Author: Siyuan Wu
Published: May 23, 2017

Abstract: : Many states in the U.S. started to push for audio or video recording of interrogation after 2003. The main force for this reform is the innocence movement led by the Innocence Project. The article described how the Innocence Project found false confession is one of the leading contributors to wrongful convictions, and the DOJ’ measures on this in 2014. The article also put a great detail in New York State’s practice and regulation, as well as on how an interrogation room is laid out and operated in NYC.

Read original article in Chinese.

Mechanisms and Practices of Rectifying Wrongful Convictions in the U.S.

Originally published: Journal of People’s Procuratorate
Publication date: 2015, Issue XI
Author: Barry Sheck
Translator: Zheng Li

Abstract: This article introduced the establishment and operation of the Innocence Project of New York and how DNA exonerations promoted the judicial reform in more effectively redressing wrongful convictions in the U.S. the author stressed that miscarriage of justice is inevitable and there is no silver bullet. However, the author suggested that strict evidentiary review and seeking for root causes in sentinel events are critical in preventing mistakes.