Psychological Status, Compliance, Serum Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor, and Nerve Growth Factor Levels of Patients with Depression after Augmented Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy

Objective. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is a cost-effective psychosocial program that prevents relapse/recurrence in major depression. The present study aimed to analyze the effects of augmented MBCT along with standard treatment dominated by pharmacotherapy on psychological state, compliance, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), and nerve growth factor (NGF) expression levels in patients with depression. Methods. A total of 160 eligible patients with depression in The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University were included in this study. The study randomly assigned the patients to the experimental group (n = 80) and control group (n = 80). All participants were assessed with the questionnaires including the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17), Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (RSES), Self-Acceptance Questionnaire (SAQ), and Stigma Scale (Scale of Stigma in People with Mental Illness, SSPM). The serum levels of BDNF and NGF were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Results. After 8 weeks of treatment, the experimental group showed significant lower HAMD-17 score, higher RSES, and SAQ score, as well as lower SSPM score compared with the control group ( P < 0.01 ). Furthermore, ELISA revealed that the serum levels of BDNF and NGF remarkably increased in the experimental group after treatment ( P < 0.001 ). Conclusions. Our data showed that augmented MBCT combined with pharmacotherapy contributed to improvement on patients’ psychological state, compliance, and disease recurrence.

One Fish, Two Fish, Few Fish, No Fish: Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, IUU Fishing and High Seas Fisheries Management

<p>The World's fisheries are in a desperate state, they have been utilised to a point where a majority of the fisheries resources are fully exploited. In addition to overfishing, the responsibility of the sad state of affairs of the world's High Seas' fish stocks can be put down to inefficient management. The high seas fisheries regime is dominated by two powerful, tried, tested and consented to norms: the principle of freedom of fishing on the high seas and the principle of exclusive flag state jurisdiction over flagged vessels on the high seas. These Grotius norms (unintentionally) obstruct effective and meaningful high seas fisheries management, and have enabled unscrupulous states and actors to take advantage of the lacunae created by the UNCLOS High Seas fisheries framework and engage in IUU fishing which has resulted in a tragedy of the high seas commons. Furthermore these norms have a 'hobbling' effect on RFMOS and coastal states alike, and leave them almost powerless to ensure flag-state compliance with their sustainable fishing measures without the consent of the flag state, and totally unable to enforce its measures directly on that flagged vessel. Thus in the absence of an express reference to the superiority of coastal state rights over those of high seas fishing states, freedom of high seas fishing prevails. However the international community armed with weaker UNCLOS obligations of conservation and co-operation and have fought the good fight, and in lightening speed have constructed a normative framework that is additional to but consistent and complimentary with the UNCLOS regime. With the use of port state measures, voluntary instruments that codify responsible fisheries practice, surveillance and the denial of the right to land IUU fish – the fight is gradually beginning to turn in favour of the international community.</p>

One Fish, Two Fish, Few Fish, No Fish: Regional Fisheries Management Organisations, IUU Fishing and High Seas Fisheries Management

<p>The World's fisheries are in a desperate state, they have been utilised to a point where a majority of the fisheries resources are fully exploited. In addition to overfishing, the responsibility of the sad state of affairs of the world's High Seas' fish stocks can be put down to inefficient management. The high seas fisheries regime is dominated by two powerful, tried, tested and consented to norms: the principle of freedom of fishing on the high seas and the principle of exclusive flag state jurisdiction over flagged vessels on the high seas. These Grotius norms (unintentionally) obstruct effective and meaningful high seas fisheries management, and have enabled unscrupulous states and actors to take advantage of the lacunae created by the UNCLOS High Seas fisheries framework and engage in IUU fishing which has resulted in a tragedy of the high seas commons. Furthermore these norms have a 'hobbling' effect on RFMOS and coastal states alike, and leave them almost powerless to ensure flag-state compliance with their sustainable fishing measures without the consent of the flag state, and totally unable to enforce its measures directly on that flagged vessel. Thus in the absence of an express reference to the superiority of coastal state rights over those of high seas fishing states, freedom of high seas fishing prevails. However the international community armed with weaker UNCLOS obligations of conservation and co-operation and have fought the good fight, and in lightening speed have constructed a normative framework that is additional to but consistent and complimentary with the UNCLOS regime. With the use of port state measures, voluntary instruments that codify responsible fisheries practice, surveillance and the denial of the right to land IUU fish – the fight is gradually beginning to turn in favour of the international community.</p>

Divided governmental structure and state compliance with international human rights law: A reputation-based approach

Previous research has analysed a range of domestic stakeholders that make national governments’ commitments to international human rights law credible, including an independent judiciary, legislative veto players, political opposition groups, and non-governmental organizations. But how do the power dynamics within the government affect state compliance with international human rights law? Building on the basic understanding that international human rights law needs to pass through domestic political and administrative processes before it can be implemented on the ground, this article articulates a reputation-based theoretical framework to explain how the lack of reputational mechanisms at the local level and national leaders’ shifting of blame for non-compliance to sub-national officials and the internal governance structure – two salient characteristics in a decentralized political system – make international human rights law less effective. A case study of US compliance with Article 36 of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations sheds light on how international reputational concerns interact with divided authority structure to shape national leaders’ and subnational authorities’ policy responses to the enforcement of international human rights standards.

Peer review and compliance with international anti-corruption norms: Insights from the OECD Working Group on Bribery

How can we make sure that states do not only sign international anti-corruption conventions, but also comply with them once the ink has dried? Peer review among states offers one answer to this question. This article develops a theoretical framework to study the different processes and mechanisms through which peer reviews can contribute to state compliance. It focuses on three processes: transparency, pressure, and learning. The article subsequently applies this framework to the OECD Working Group on Bribery (WGB) in order to identify how far participants in this peer review perceive the WGB as capable of organising these processes, and to what extent they consider these processes relevant for promoting state compliance. Data come from an online survey (74 observations) and 17 in-depth interviews. The findings reveal that this peer review exercise is perceived as effective in creating transparency about state behaviour, mobilising pressure, and stimulating learning. However, the extent to which these processes can promote compliance is more limited. For these processes to work, political will is crucial.

Impediments to the Advancement of Human Rights by the ZHRC in Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe as a member of the United Nations (UN) ratified a number of human rights treaties and the establishment of the much awaited Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission (ZHRC) which was long overdue was a generally welcome development in the human rights arena. The ZHRC is a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) established by the Constitution of Zimbabwe (No.20) Act 2013. The Constitution mandates ZHRC to promote, protect and enforce human rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined under the Bill of Rights. The operational legal framework of the ZHRC is provided for in the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission Act [Chapter 10:30]. In collecting data questionnaires, interviews and documentary review were used. Against this backdrop, the paper mainly seeks to explore and analyse the challenges faced by the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission (ZHRC) in executing its mandate. Methodologically, the study relied extensively on available literature and reports. The study revealed that the ZHRC has been impeded by resource constraints, absence of legally binding laws, hostile political environment and lack of state compliance experiencing impediments which have affected its operation. The therefore study made some recommendations to help fortify and reinvigorate the ZHRC.

Toward Rejuvenated Inspiration with the Unbearable Lightness of Anthropology

How might the connections between anthropology and international law become more dynamic? I reflect upon this question in this essay using ethnographic insights from the documentary cycles of the UN Human Rights Committee, the treaty body monitoring state compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Building on recent anthropological scholarship on international organizations, bureaucracy, and documents, this essay discusses the knowledge practices and legal technicalities that characterize the international community of human rights lawyers. In particular, I reflect on the legal fiction of difference governing UN treaty bodies’ operations and the empirical sameness of participants in different formal categories in the shared community of practice of human rights lawyers. I conclude by suggesting that anthropological insights could significantly enrich our shared understanding of the diverse and subtle effects of human rights monitoring. Simultaneously such insights may offer rejuvenated inspiration for those international lawyers tackling a sense of losing faith in their discipline, both as an influential tool of world improvement and an invigorating intellectual tradition.