Expert evidence in asylum and human rights appeals: An expert's view

International Journal of Refugee Law

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 358-380

  Good, Anthony ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASYLUM SEEKER; HUMAN RIGHTS; LEGISLATION; REFUGEE;

EID: 7444250323     PISSN: 09538186     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ijrl/16.3.358     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Asylum Aid (1999). Still No Reason at All: Home Office Decisions on Asylum Claims. London: Asylum Aid.
2. Atkinson, Paul (1977). The reproduction of medical knowledge. Pp 85-106 in Dingwall, Robert et al (eds) Health Care and Health Knowledge. London: Croom Helm.
3. Barnes, John (2003). Expert evidence: the judicial perception in asylum and human rights appeals. Paper prepared for joint ILPA/IARLJ Conference.
4. Bloor, David (1976). Knowledge and Social Imagery. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
5. Carver, Natasha (ed.) (2003). Home Office Country Assessments: an Analysis. London: Immigration Advisory Service.
6. Cicchino, Peter (2001). Love and the Socratic method. American University Law Review 50: 533-50.
7. Clifford, James (1988). Identity in Mashpee. Pp 277-346 of his The Predicament of Culture. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
8. Conley, John M. & William M. O'Barr (1988). 'Fundamentals of jurisprudence: an ethography of judicial decision making in informal courts.' North Carolina Law Review 66: 467-507.
9. Conley, John M. & William M. O'Barr (1990). Rules versus Relationships: the Ethnography of Legal Discourse. Chicago: University Press.
10. Conley, John M. & William M. O'Barr (1998). Just Words: Law, Language and Power. Chicago: University Press.
11. Dworkin, Ronald (1986). Law's Empire. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
12. Foucault, Michel (1973). The Birth of the Clinic: an Archaeology of Medical Perception. London: Tavistock.
13. Giannelli, P.C. (1980). The admissibility of novel scientific evidence: Frye v. United States, a half-century later. 80 Columbia. Law Review 1197-1250.
14. Gluckman, Max (1955). The Judicial Process Among the Barotse of Northern Rhodesia. Manchester: University Press.
15. Good, Anthony (2003a). Acting as an expert: anthropologists in asylum appeals. Anthropology Today 19(5) 3-7.
16. Good, Anthony (2003b). Professional liars? Uses of anthropological 'objective evidence' in British asylum appeals. Paper delivered in panel on Anthropology, Medicine and Law: Notions of Evidence at Association of Social Anthropologists Decennial Conference: Manchester, July 2003.
17. Good, Anthony (2004a). 'Undoubtedly an expert'? Country experts in the UK asylum courts. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.) 10: 113-33.
18. Good, Anthony (2004b). Are women a 'particular social group'? A social anthropological perspective. Paper delivered at international conference on Developing Anthropology of Law in a Transnational World, University of Edinburgh, June 2004.
19. rd edn.) Chichester: Barry Rose Law Publishers Ltd.
20. Henderson, Mark (2003). Best Practice Guide to Asylum and Human Rights Appeals. London: ILPA/Refugee Legal Group.
21. th edn.) London: Butterworths.
22. Hodgkinson, Tristram (1990). Expert Evidence: Law and Practice. London: Sweet & Maxwell.
23. Immigration & Nationality Directorate (1998). Country Assessment: Sri Lanka, November 1998. London: Home Office.
24. Immigration & Nationality Directorate (1999). Country Assessment: Sri Lanka, March 1999. London: Home Office.
25. Immigration & Nationality Directorate (2002). Country Assessment: Sri Lanka, April 2002. London: Home Office.
26. Jarvis, Catriona (2000). For These Or Any Other Reasons: an Examination of Judicial Assessment of the Credibility of Asylum Seekers in the United Kingdom with Particular Reference to the Role of the Immigration Adjudicator. LLM dissertation.
27. Jasanoff, Sheila (1996). Research subpoenas and the sociology of knowledge. Law and Contemporary Problems. 59(3): 95-118.
28. Jones, Carol A.G. (1994). Expert Witnesses: Science, Medicine and the Practice of Law. Oxford: Clarendon.
29. Kandel, Randy Frances (1992). How lawyers and anthropologists think differently. Pp 1-4 in Kandel, R.F. (ed.) Double Vision: Anthropologists at Law (NAPA Bulletin, No 11.) Washington DC: American Anthropological Assocn.
30. Kennedy, Duncan (1976). Form and substance in private law adjudication. Harvard Law Review 89: 1685-1778.
31. nd edn.) Chicago: University Press.
32. nd edn.) Princeton: University Press.
33. MacCormick, Neil (1994). Legal Reasoning and Legal Theory (revised edn.). Oxford: University Press.
34. MacCrimmon, Marilyn T. (1998). Fact determination: common sense knowledge, judicial notice, and social science evidence. International Commentary on Evidence http://www.law.qub.ac.uk/ice/papers/judiciall.html.
35. McBarnet, Doreen (1981). Conviction: Law, the State and the Construction of Justice. Oxford: Macmillan.
36. Mertz, Elizabeth (2002). Performing epistemology: notes on language, law school, and Yovel's legal-linguistic culture. Stanford Agora 3 http://www.law.stanford.edu/agora/volume2/mertz.shtml.
37. Murphy, Kevin M. & Matthew J. Cuccias (1997). The application of Daubert or Frye analysis to expert testimony in the "soft sciences". Federation of Defense and Corporate Counsel Quarterly 47(3), Spring http:// www.thefederation.org/Public /Quarterly/Spring97/MURPHY.html.
38. Polanyi, Michael (1958). Personal Knowledge. Chicago: University Press.
39. th ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
40. Research Development and Statistics Directorate (2003a). Country of Origin Information: a User and Content Evaluation. (Home Office Research Study, 271.) London: Home Office.
41. Research Development and Statistics Directorate (2003b). Information on Asylum Seekers' Country of Origin: an Evaluation of its Content and Usefulness. (Findings, 211.) London: Home Office.
42. Redmayne, Mike (2001). Expert Evidence and Criminal Justice. Oxford: University Press.
43. Renaker, Teresa S. (1996). Evidentiary legerdemain: deciding when Daubert should apply to social science evidence. 84 California Law Review 1657.
44. Rigby, Peter & Peter Sevareid (1992). Lawyers, anthropologists, and the knowledge of facts. Pp 5-21 in Kandel, R.F. (ed.) Double Vision: Anthropologists at Law (NAPA Bulletin, No 11.) Washington DC: American Anthropological Assocn.
45. Roberts, Paul (1999). Tyres with a 'Y': an English perspective on Kumho Tire and its implications for the admissibility of expert evidence. International Commentary on Evidence http://www.law.qub.ac.uk/ice/papers/expert1.html.
46. Rosen, Lawrence (1977). The anthropologist as expert witness. American Anthropologist 79: 555-78.
47. Tambiah, Stanley J. (1973). Form and meaning of magical acts: a point of view. Pp 199-230 in Robin Horton & Ruth Finnegan (eds.) Modes of Thought: Essays on Thinking in Western and Non-Western Societies. London: Faber & Faber.
48. Tambiah, Stanley J. (1986). Sri Lanka: Ethnic Fratricide and the Dismantling of Democracy. Chicago: University Press.
49. Travers, Max (1999). The British Immigration Courts: a Study of Law and Politics. Bristol: Policy Press.
50. Underwager, Ralph & Hollida Wakefield (1993). 'A paradigm shift for expert witnesses.' Issues In Child Abuse Accusations 5: 156-67 http://www.tc.umn.edu/~under006/Library/Paradigm_Shift.html.
51. Unger, Roberto (1975). Knowledge and Politics. New York: The Free Press.
52. Weiner, James F. (1999). Culture in a sealed envelope: the concealment of Australian Aboriginal heritage and tradition in the Hindmarsh Island bridge affair. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S. 5: 193-210.
53. West, Robin (1988). Jurisprudence and gender. University of Chicago Law Review 55: 1-72.