The significance of career choice in human life cannot be overstated. Many law students upon graduation do not proceed to mainstream legal practice. They pursue careers in public administration, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), as corporate secretaries, and so on. The aim of this study is to confirm the readiness of law students to proceed to legal practice upon graduation and to assess their level of career awareness in relation to law-related careers. The study also determined the areas of interest of law students in law-related careers. The study employed the survey research design in which questionnaires were used to collect data from the twelve universities that run the approved undergraduate law program up to 500 level in south-west Nigeria. Krejcie and Morgan's formula was used to select the sample size of 597. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The results showed that a majority of law students do not wish to proceed into mainstream legal practice. Law students’ career intentions are in a variety of legal careers.

Despite an ongoing drive by governments and law enforcers around the world to improve the sophistication of their risk mitigation measures, cyber-attacks are continually increasing. A study from Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) shows more than 4,000 ransomware attacks occurred daily in 2016. That's a 300 percent increase over 2015, where 1,000 ransomware attacks were seen per day. Cyber criminals are successfully penetrating even the most high-profile companies and governmental agencies. The breach at the NSA was truly alarming and just one recent example of the dire situation the country, and world, face as cybercrime intensifies and the cyber security talent shortage becomes more serious.

Accordingly, the purpose of this research is to focus on cyber education at the national, government, and law enforcement level examining the methodology to set the tone from the top ensuring alignment between governments, law enforcers, private sector, and academic level. It also examines the gaps in cyber laws and educational governance initiatives and their impact on efficient execution of cyber policies for various regions of the world with a focus on the United Arab Emirates and the United States of America.

Finally, this article recommends policy guidelines and a compliance manual framework for governments and law enforcers to consider ensuring that cyber risks are properly addressed and mitigated in a structured and coherent way.

The World Trade Organization was established in 1995 and brought together countries from around the world for the purpose of fairly regulating the trade of goods, services, and intellectual property between its member states. While treaties and other trade agreements have existed between countries for hundreds of years, the WTO's most significant innovation is its dispute settlement process through the Dispute Settlement Body. Countries agree to be bound to the decisions of the DSB upon their admittance into the WTO. The DSB is a two-tiered adjudicative system consisting of the lower panels and the higher Appellate Body.

The United States, under both the Obama and Trump administrations, has blocked the appointment of AB judges. This tactic has limited the number of active judges to three. The AB normally has seven members. The United States has listed a number of reasons for their boycott of the system, among them is that the AB is functioning as if its reports are to be binding precedent on the lower panel and to future DSB cases, in a manner similar to stare decisis. This issue has been observed over the years and there is conflict between interpretations of precedent under Article 3:2 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding and Article IX:2 of the WTO Agreement. Caselaw of the DSB from over the years has also raised interesting questions and the appearance of the use of precedent.

This article will be examining the historical fundamentals and use of precedent and the doctrine of stare decisis. It will then turn into an examination of the institutional and regulatory framework of the WTO, particularly Article 3:2 of the DSU and Article IX:2 of the WTO Agreement, and whether it allows or leaves room for a system of binding precedent. Finally, jurisprudence of the DSB will be surveyed for evidence of this system. Reports that will be examined are Japan-Alcoholic Beverages, India-Patents, India-Autos, and Australia-Plain Packaging Tobacco.

In 2017, several colleagues and I published a “Guide to Cuban Law and Legal Research” in the summer issue of the International Journal of Legal Information (IJLI) (Vol. 45, no. 2). Since then, much has transpired in Cuba, and much has happened vis à vis the island's relationships with the outside world. The following article highlights a number of these developments and notes several new resources related to Cuban law and politics. I drew some of the article's content from a contribution I penned for the blog of the International Association of Law Libraries (IALL) in July 2019.

Due to new technologies, the speed and volume of disinformation is unprecedented today. As seen in the 2016 US presidential election, especially with the conduct of the Internet Research Agency, this poses challenges and threats for the (democratic) political processes of internal State affairs, and in particular, (democratic) elections are under increasing risk. Disinformation has the potential to sway the outcome of an election and therefore discredits the idea of free and fair elections. Given the growing prevalence of disinformation operations aimed at (democratic) elections, the question arises as to how international law applies to such operations and how States under international law might counter such hostile operations launched by their adversaries.

From a legal standpoint, it appears that such disinformation operations do not fully escape existing international law. However, due to open questions and the geopolitical context, many States refrain from clearly labelling them as internationally wrongful acts under international law. Stretching current international legal norms to cover the issue does not seem to be the optimal solution and a binding international treaty would also need to overcome various hurdles. The author suggests that disinformation operations aimed at (democratic) elections in the context of public international law will most likely be regulated (if) by a combination of custom and bottom-up law-making influencing and reinforcing each other.

Weaponization of state-backed, foreign investments by China is an emerging national security threat in the United States and the European Union. The U.S. and E.U. have espoused similar policy goals—to address the threat without closing their markets to foreign direct investment—while fostering increased cooperation between allied partners in screening transactions.

On the surface, the recent, China-specific measures taken by the U.S. and the investment screening framework adopted by the E.U. appear reflective of an alignment of those policy goals. Indeed, many commentators have suggested that is exactly what is happening. However, closer examination reveals a stark divergence. The U.S. has a robust screening mechanism that has evolved into a weapon of economic warfare. The E.U. meanwhile, remains a patchwork of conflicting—or nonexistent—national regulations overlaid by a comparatively toothless investment screening framework.

There is a tendency to attribute this divergence to structural differences between the United States and European Union. This in-depth comparison of U.S. and E.U. investment screening mechanisms exposes a split that goes beyond application and into actual policy. This revelation should temper expectations that the E.U. is equipping itself to block transactions that are of concern to the U.S.

This presentation draws on my doctoral research, which was conducted on traditional cultural expressions in international law. This subject still fills me with passion even after having spent many years studying it. To sum up my Ph.D. thesis in a sentence, I studied how international law embraces traditional dances, songs, handicrafts, designs, and rituals. Very diverse fields of laws were relevant for this research, but in the framework of this presentation, the focus was kept on intellectual property. The goal of this presentation was to provide answers to two essential questions. The first question relates to the definition of traditional cultural expressions (I), the second one concerned the reasons underpinning the introduction of this concept in international law (II).

The primary duty of library and information professionals is to render information services to their patrons. Although the information provided often shapes public opinion and could help in making informed decisions, librarians and other information professionals often steer clear of politics and the processes that lead to emergence of leaders, even though their activities could be greatly affected by the nature of those who emerge as political leaders. It is against this background that this research sought to take a look at the issue of political restructuring, which has been a burning issue within the Nigerian political space, and what roles Nigerian librarians could play in the realization of the demands of restructuring in Nigeria. This article is of the view that besides being perceived as relevant in the scheme of things in Nigeria, librarians’ engagement could further positively impact on the condition of service of librarians and their public perception.

Early last summer, I received a phone call from a law student in the litigation department of a large firm. He was working with a team on a case involving Czech law and, as part of a due diligence review, he was seeking an English translation of a piece of Czech legislation before the firm outsourced the bulk of the foreign legal research to Czech attorney-experts. Although it was easy to find the Czech legislation in Czech from a Czech government website, we could not find an English translation – official or otherwise – from any of our free or subscription-based databases. In the end, we relied on the flawed magic of Google Chrome's translate feature to “translate” the Czech legislation from the Czech government website into English. Despite my protestations and disclaimers, the student was thrilled with our results and insisted he had satisfied his due diligence duties. I hung up the phone and thought to myself: certainly, other American litigants have taken cases involving Czech law. What happens to the foreign law and legal analysis they obtain from their Czech attorney-experts? Assuming they submit some of it to our U.S. courts in the course of litigation, why can't we easily retrieve it?