The Holodomor and the International Tribunal for Yugoslavia

Envisioning an Improved Hypothetical Tribunal

By Justin Aragosa

Justin Aragosa, a 2024 graduate of Albany Law School, did his undergraduate studies in criminal justice and philosophy at SUNY Oneonta. Additionally, he completed an associate’s degree in Intelligence Studies from Cochise College, Arizona, while stationed at the Army Intelligence Center at Fort Huachuca.
In law school, Justin twice served as a Competition Chair for the Anthony V. Cardona Moot Court Program, and he was active in the school’s Veterans’ Pro Bono Project and served on several Committees for the Student Bar Association.
In addition to his academic pursuits, Justin has served in the Army National Guard since 2015 in military intelligence. He recently graduated from Warrant Officer Candidate School and is currently back at the Army Intelligence Center for more training. In 2020, while deployed to the CENTCOM Area of Operations, he led an intelligence fusion center section, coordinated Special Forces reconnaissance missions, and supervised a team of over 20 soldiers in military intelligence operations. He earned numerous awards, including the Army Commendation Medal (x2), Army Achievement Medal (x2), Army Reserve Component Achievement Medal, and the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal.
In his free time, Justin enjoys hiking, sports, and recently, photography.

This paper juxtaposes the Holodomor, a catastrophic famine in 1930s Soviet Ukraine, with the formation and impact of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY).  It delves into the Holodomor's historical context and scholarly debates over its classification and assesses the ICTY's role in shaping international criminal law.

 Additionally, the study explores a theoretical tribunal for the Soviet Union's actions during the Holodomor, providing insights into the complexities of historical redress in international justice.

_________________

To read the paper, open HERE.

Justice Robert Jackson’s International Law Jurisprudence

Protecting Fundamental Rights through Procedural Due Process

By Ashley C. DeGennaro 

Ashley C DeGennaro is a 2024 graduate of Albany Law School. A native of the Capital Region, Ashley grew up in Clifton Park before obtaining her Bachelor of Science in Chemistry from Haverford College.

In her time at Albany Law, Ashley served as a Subeditor and Associate Editor of the Albany Law Review and participated in the Domenick L. Gabrielli Appellate Advocacy Competition. She served as both a Sponsler Fellow Teaching Assistant for Federal Civil Procedure with Dean Connie Mayer, and a Constitutional Law Teaching Assistant for Professor Vincent Bonventre. She also served as a Judicial Intern to the U.S. District Court Judge Mae A. D’Agostino, of the Northern District of New York.

Since her admission to the bar earlier this year, Ashley has been working as an Associate Attorney at Monaco Cooper Lamme & Carr in Albany.

Justice Robert H. Jackson served as an associate justice on the United States Supreme Court from 1941 to his death in 1954. In addition to his work on the Court, Jackson is widely known for his work as Chief Prosecutor for the United States at the Nuremberg Trial, which he regarded as the most important work he had accomplished in his life.

Throughout his career, Jackson was a champion for due process, an ideal that did not waver throughout his time on the Supreme Court, nor in his time as a prosecutor at Nuremberg. During his time on the Court, Jackson was able to recognize the tensions between the government’s interest in maintaining national security and the individual’s interest in preserving personal liberties. He was a zealous advocate of fairness in the legal system and desired to limit the imposition on individual liberties, despite the presence of both national and international issues which caused concern over national security. Throughout his lifetime of service, Jackson helped sculpt the future of international law as it is known today. 

This paper discusses Justice Jackson’s jurisprudence during his time as Chief Prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials and also as an associate justice on the Supreme Court. This paper begins by analyzing Jackson’s advocacy for fairness and due process on the international stage at Nuremberg, a historical landmark in international law. This paper then analyzes Jackson’s commitment to such ideals on the national stage during his time on the Supreme Court through cases such as Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer and Korematsu v. United States. As a whole, the paper will seek to explore the work of Justice Jackson and his commitment to ensuring due process for every individual in the court system, regardless of nationality. 

_________________

To read the paper, open HERE.

The Parsley Massacre and its Impact on Haitian-Dominican Relations

By Kimberly Bernard

Kimberley Bernard is a 2024 graduate of Albany Law School. A native of Westbury, NY, Kimberley was raised by Haitian immigrant parents. She completed her undergraduate studies at SUNY Albany, earning a Bachelor of Arts in English.

During law school, Kimberley gained diverse legal experience through internships with the Albany County Public Defender’s Office, the Honorable Richard A. Rivera, the New York State Attorney General’s Law Enforcement Misconduct Investigative Office, and the Family Violence Litigation Clinic. She also worked as a student assistant in the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion office and served as treasurer of the Black Law Students Association.

Following graduation, Kimberley joined the Franklin H. Williams Judicial Commission as a Legal Fellow.

Kimberley, a proud Haitian-American, is passionate about raising awareness of Haiti’s history, ongoing challenges, and, most importantly, its vibrant culture and richness. This paper was written for Professor Bonventre’s International Law of War and Crime Seminar.

This paper explores the historical complexities surrounding the Parsley Massacre, a brutal episode in the fraught relationship between Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Beginning with an analysis of the historical context, economic disparities, and factors leading to tension, the study delves into the rise of Rafael Trujillo and the anti-Haitian sentiments propagated by his regime. Focusing on the events of the Parsley Massacre itself, the paper examines the methods employed by Trujillo's government and the international community's response.

The aftermath section assesses the enduring impact on diplomatic relations, human rights, and the socio-cultural fabric of both nations. Drawing parallels with similar historical atrocities, the paper underscores the importance of historical memory and commemoration. It scrutinizes the efforts towards reconciliation, both on a bilateral level and within diaspora communities.

The study concludes with reflections on the lessons learned from the Parsley Massacre, advocating for increased historical awareness, educational initiatives, and international cooperation to prevent future conflicts. Through this comprehensive analysis, the paper contributes to a nuanced understanding of the Parsley Massacre and its ongoing implications for the interconnected histories of Haiti and the Dominican Republic.

_____________________

To read the paper, open HERE.

The Defense of Following Superior Orders

A Complex Ethical Dilemma

By Patricia T. Whelan

Patricia Whelan earned her J.D. from Albany Law School in 2023 and was admitted to the New York State Bar in 2024. Before attending law school, she earned her bachelor’s degree from Penn State.  At Albany Law, Patricia was involved in various organizations including the Albany Law Review, Elder and Disability Law Pro Bono Society, and Student Bar Association.  She received the Outstanding Law School Chapter Justice Award as Chief Justice of Phi Alpha Delta Law Fraternity and previously served as the Editor-in-Chief of the Center of Judicial Process.  Patricia also enjoyed competing in Moot Court and was a finalist in the 2021 Donna Jo Morse Client Counseling Competition.  Patricia has interned for the Third Judicial District, Federal Public Defender’s Office, and served as the Law Student Liaison for the ABA Section of State & Local Government Law.

Currently, she is working as an Associate Attorney at Pierro, Connor & Strauss.

Two of Patricia’s law school seminar papers have previously been published on the Center for Judicial Process website. [One on Justice Thomas and one on the NY Court of Appeals.]

The defense of following superior orders is one of the most complex and controversial defenses in international criminal law that requires careful consideration of the moral, legal, and historical contexts.  The question of whether it is morally justifiable to follow orders, even when they conflict with one’s own sense of right and wrong, has been a topic of debate for centuries.  This ethical dilemma has been central to discussions surrounding war crimes, military obedience, and the responsibility of individuals within hierarchical organizations.  Generally, soldiers are duty-bound to obey the orders of their superior officers.  However, this becomes problematic when a soldier is ordered to perform an act which constitutes an act of war.  In such situations, the duty of military obedience conflicts with the need to maintain the supremacy of the rule of law.  

Historically, the defense of following superior orders previously allowed soldiers to escape culpability for their crimes.  However, the principles established during the Nuremberg Trials explicitly rejected the defense of following orders, stating that individuals are still responsible for their actions, even if they were acting under orders from a superior.  These Trials set an international precedent that war criminals cannot claim that they were following orders to escape responsibility.  Orders that involve war crimes, human rights violations, or actions that contravene international law are considered unlawful and must not be followed.  This moral duty is rooted in the principles of humanity and the protection of basic human rights.

This paper discusses the defense of following orders and its ban to prevent defendants from escaping liability for their actions during World War II.  Part II provides a brief explanation of the defense and examines the common justifications used to support it.  Part III explores the history of the defense and its relevance in the notorious Trials.  Part V considers the moral and ethical dilemmas surrounding the defense of following orders, and Part VI briefly concludes.

_____________________

To read the paper, open HERE.

International Law Studies Staff, 2024 - 2025

Director  
Vincent M. Bonventre

Student Editorial Board, 2024 - 2025
Editor-in-Chief

Rachael Brown is a third year JD candidate at Albany Law School.  She graduated from SUNY New Paltz where she majored in International Relations and minored in Disaster Studies.  She is the Managing Editor for Business and Production for the Albany Law School Government Law Review.  She spent the summer following her first year at Albany Law as an intern with the Honorable Daniel J. Stewart in the Northern District of New York.  She spent this past summer as a legal intern with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Operational Services Division.  She is still working for the Commonwealth and completing another internship in NDNY with Judge Stewart.  She is also a research assistant for Professor Hirokawa.

Executive Editor

Ethan Rotondi is a 3L at Albany Law School. He received his undergraduate degree from Le Moyne College in Syracuse, where he majored in Political Science and Pre-Law. During his time at Le Moyne, Ethan was invited to the New York State Political Science Association’s Annual Conference where he presented research focused on U.S. foreign policy as it relates to the conflict in Yemen. Ethan is currently a law clerk with Thorn Gershon Tymann and Bonnani, LLP in Colonie, and has previously interned at the New York State Office of the Attorney General and the Rensselaer County District Attorney’s Office. In his free time, Ethan enjoys skiing and watching the Chicago Cubs. 

Executive Editor

Connor Weingarten is a third-year student at Albany Law School. He graduated from Ithaca College, where he majored in Journalism. Before coming to Albany Law School, Connor worked as a sports radio producer and studio host for Learfield IMG College, and as a production assistant for NBA Entertainment.

He spent the summer following his first year at Albany Law as a legal intern in the Schenectady County Attorney’s Office, on behalf of the Department of Social Services. He has also completed a field placement in the New York State Senate with Senator Kristen Gonzalez, and he spent this past summer as a legal intern with the New York State Department of Labor.

Connor is currently working once again in the Schenectady County Attorney’s Office.

______________________

For previous years' boards, click HERE.