By Samantha J. Prince

Domestic violence is sadly and shockingly all too prevalent in the United States. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, more than one in four women and one in seven men in this country are subject to domestic abuse “affecting an estimated 10 million people every year.”  Finances and financial abuse play a significant role in 99% of domestic abuse cases. “[L]acking financial knowledge or resources is the number one indicator of whether a domestic violence victim will stay, leave, or return to an abusive relationship.”When abusers have control over financial assets, victims are monetarily paralyzed and have little ability to escape their situation. Additionally, abusers can engage in financial sabotage maliciously and intentionally ruining the victim’s credit scores, taking their earnings, or “harassing them at their workplace until they lose their job and their own source of income.”Some circumstances can make escaping one’s abuser even more financially challenging. When children are involved, escaping is even more critical but financially difficult for a victim to escape and stay free. Further, during high inflationary or economically volatile periods when expenses are higher and investment balances uncertain, it can be more financially challenging to break and stay free from one’s abuser. Such immediate financial constraints may influence the victim’s choice to stay in abusive situations, since victims may additionally consider the long-term economic impact that leaving these relationships may have.Giving domestic abuse victims financial empowerment so that they can both escape their abuser and be positioned to stay free is crucial First, this essay focuses on the statutory requirements of the newly permissible 401(k) domestic abuse victim distributions. It then proffers how employers can help employees who are in abusive situations through employee benefits like their 401(k) plans. Specifically, it addresses how employers can shift to a more compassionate position by supporting and assisting their victim employees through their retirement plans.

By Adam Baird

Globally, 90% of firearms homicides are committed by men, and men also make up the vast majority of the victims. The highest rates of homicide are mainly found in cities in the Americas (including the Caribbean) and southern Africa, mainly in cities. “Men killing men” disproportionately affects young people in the Global South who live in precarious economic circumstances. This has been the consistent demographic of lethal armed violence for decades.

If men are at the centre of the global armed violence epidemic, it clearly has something to do with their gender. The report explains that when frustrated young men in contexts of persistent poverty gain easy access to small arms and ammunition, it creates a significant risk of an epidemic of lethal violence. This prompts the question: What work is being undertaken with men using a masculinities focus to prevent armed violence? The answer, in short, is none. Efforts to reduce armed violence that do not consider masculinities  will only have a limited effect.

The report suggests that greater debate about this issue is required and that the United Nations can lead progress by developing initiatives in collaboration with Member States, academia and civil society partners. However, to achieve this goal, greater advocacy, political support and funding are vital. 

UNIDIR, Geneva, 2025. 36p.

By Agustina Del Campo, Nicolás Zara, y Ramiro Álvarez Ugarte

This paper discusses the risk-based approach of the Digital Services Act (DSA) of the European Union. By embracing open-ended standards instead of rules and by imposing broad risk-identification and mitigation obligations on private parties, the DSA pushes forward a form of managerial co-regulation that is a paradigmatic shift in platform regulation, that has already influenced other regulatory proposals around the globe. This paper argues that the move is consequential from the perspective of the role of human rights in Internet governance. We posit that the approach pose unique problems when seen from the popular three-prong test used by apex courts around the world to assess restrictions on freedom of expression. Furthermore, we argue that it pushes rights out of the center stage of Internet governance and may create a logic of "symbolic compliance" where governance role of rights is further diminished. Finally, this paper identifies opportunities to address or mitigate the challenges identified, especially in an enforcement stage that remains quite open to these kinds of efforts.

Forthcoming in the Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and Electronic Commerce, vol. 16, No. 2 (2025)

CELE Research Paper No. 64, 26p.