Geijera Schott is a plant genus of the Rutaceae Juss. (rue and citrus) family, comprising six species which are all native to Oceania. Of the plants belonging to this genus, the most significant species that has a customary use is Geijera parviflora, which was used by Indigenous Australians, primarily as a pain reliever. Herein, a comprehensive review of the literature published on the genus Geijera from 1930-2023 was conducted. This is the first review for this plant genus and it highlights the chemical constituents reported to date, together with the range of pharmacological properties described from the various species and different parts of the plant. These properties include anti-inflammatory, anti-microbial, anti-parasitic, insect repellent, analgesic, neuroactive, and anti-cancer activities. Finally, a reflection on some of the important areas for future focused studies of this plant genus is provided.

Land management and community involvement are two main elements in ensuring the absence of conflict between landowners and agencies. Disputes between owners and agencies will be the biggest obstacle in the land development effort. Therefore, this article aims to address the cause of landowners’ objections against land alienation using the institutional approach. To enable the researchers to understand the root causes of landowners' objections against the alienation of land using the Communal Grant method, the institutional approach has been adopted to identify the issue of the objection. Therefore, questionnaires for 100 landowners were distributed in two villages in Semporna district in Sabah. The purpose is to obtain their views on the cause leading to the dispute of land alienation using the Communal Grant method. The Likert scale was used to enable community rankings on issues that can be understood according to the level of seriousness of the population's views on the issue of using Communal Grants in native customary land alienation. The study results explain that there are four factors that drive objection of the Communal Grant land alienation which involves the formal factors. The findings explained that there are 4 formal provisions which lead to the community's objection against Communal Grants, namely the native customary lands (NCR) act, provision of Communal Grants, provisions in the land ownership and land allocation in Sabah Land Ordinance.Due to numerous objections among native customary peoples concerning the native customary land alienation using Communal Grants, the government has acted in substitution with a fair method of individual ownership for the native customary peoples. This situation explains that disputes in land ownership can be a threat to the country if it cannot be resolved in ways and methods acceptable to the native customary community. This study will benefit the government and NGO’s to alert and focusing on barriers in the context of local community land laws. Communal grants are intended to address land issues in Sabah.

Despite the ongoing land administration reforms being implemented across sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), including Ghana as viable pathway to achieve tenure security and greater efficiency in land administration, the subject of land dispute resolution has received relatively less attention. Whereas customary tenure institutions play a central role in land administration (controlling ~80% of all land in Ghana), they remain at the fringes of the formal land dispute adjudicatory process. Recognizing the pivotal role traditional institutions as development agents and potential vehicles for promoting good land governance, recent discourse on land tenure have geared towards mainstreaming traditional land disputes institutions into the architecture of formal judicial process via alternative dispute resolution pathways. Yet little is known at least empirically as to the operations of traditional dispute resolution institutions in the contemporary context. This study therefore explores the importance of traditional dispute resolution institutions in the management of land-related disputes in southcentral and western Ghana. Drawing on data collated from 380 farming households operating 746 plots. The results show that contrary to the conventional thinking that traditional institutions are anachronistic and not fit for purpose, they remain strong and preferred forum for land dispute resolution (proving resilient and adaptable) given the changing socio-economic and tenurial conditions. Yet these forums have differing implications for different actors within the customary spheres accessing them. The results highlight practical ways for incorporating traditional dispute resolution in the overall land governance setup in Ghana and elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa. This has implications for redesigning context-specific and appropriate land-use policy interventions that address local land dispute resolution.

Bangladesh is recently prosecuting and punishing the perpetrators of crimes against humanity and genocide committed in the Liberation War of 1971 via a domestically operated International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh (‘ICTB’). Though the Tribunal is preceded under the municipal law, it's material jurisdiction, i.e., crimes against humanity and genocide are originated from international criminal law. Therefore, this study purposes to examine several legal obligations of the ICTB in defining crimes against humanity and genocide as the core international crimes. Firstly, I scrutinize what is the legal status of international law (treaty and customary law) in Bangladesh's legal system? Secondly, by applying international criminal law standards, I focus on that is it one of the obligations of Bangladesh to apply international criminal law definitions of genocide under the treaty obligation as the contracting parties to Genocide Convention 1948, and the ICC Statute 1998? Thirdly, I also discuss whether Bangladesh has any obligation to apply customary international law definitions of crimes against humanity because crimes against humanity are considered as jus cogens offense in general international law, from which no derogation is permitted. Lastly, after a critical evaluation of domestic and international criminal law instruments, I conclude that Bangladesh certainly failed to fulfill its legal obligation to define international crimes under a treaty and customary laws, which is one of the fatal errors of the ICTB, a government-sponsored criminal tribunal, to secure criminal justice to the accused.