You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
Janos Kis outlines a new theory of constitutional democracy. Addresses the widely held belief that liberal democracy embodies an uneasy compromise of incompatible values: those of liberal rights on the one hand, and democratic equality on the other. Liberalism is said to compromise democracy, while democracy is said to endanger the values of liberalism.
The Kurdish Model of Political Community: A Vision of National Liberation Defiant of the Nation-State undertakes a task long due in Kurdish studies: addressing common misunderstandings about and outlining theoretical implications of Kurdish politics. Hanifi Baris develops his arguments with an historical examination and finds apathy towards and a resistance to state-building in Kurdistan. Accordingly, Baris argues, this tendency to establish self-government with distaste to state-building has enabled major Kurdish movements in Turkey and Syria to develop a form of political community that constitutes a viable alternative to those based on theocratic, imperial and national sovereignty. Thus, Baris concludes, rather than being a conflict between competing nationalisms, the current Kurdish conflict in Turkey and Syria is between competing visions of political community.
This insightful book guides readers through the transformation of, and theoretical challenges posed by, the separation of powers in national contexts. Building on the notion that the traditional tripartite structure of the separation of powers has undergone a significant process of fragmentation and expansion, this book identifies and illustrates the most pressing and intriguing aspects of the separation of powers in contemporary constitutional systems.
Drawing on the history and constitutional framework of the constitutional systems of Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore, this book examines the political structures and traditions that were inherited from the British colonial government and the major constitutional developments since decolonization.
Over the past decades, the field commonly known as comparative law has significantly expanded. The multiplication of journals, the proliferation of scholarship and the creation of courses or summer schools specifically devoted to comparative law attest to its increasing popularity. Within the Western legal tradition, a traditional, black-letter approach to law has proved particularly authoritative. This co-authored book rethinks comparative law’s mainstream model by providing both students and lawyers with the intellectual equipment allowing them to approach any foreign law in a more meaningful way.
Shows how legal mobilization embeds constitutions in everyday life, pushing newly codified rights from words on paper to meaningful tools.
Drawing insights from economics and political science, Judging Regulators explains why the administrative law of the US and the UK has radically diverged from each other on questions of law, fact, and discretion.
This book examines accountability issues and the problems of regulating non-governmental organisations (NGOs) through self-regulation. It focuses on methods of self-regulation for NGOs in response to prominent scandals that revealed problems with their accountability, notably the ‘Mafia Capitale’ scandal in Italy and the Oxfam GB scandal in Haiti. It also touches upon other accountability failures, including the allegations against the WWF of facilitating human rights abuses of indigenous groups in Cameroon. The work brings a legal approach to the topic of NGO self-regulation and accountability, contributing to the academic and policy debate in several ways. It advances a brand-new theor...
In this incisive and thought-provoking book, Francois Venter illuminates the issues arising from the fact that the current language of constitutional law is strongly premised on a particular worldview rooted in the history of the states around the North Atlantic Ocean. Highlighting how this terminological hegemony is being challenged from various directions, Venter explores the problem that all constitutional comparatists face: that they all must use the same words to express different meanings.
Using a theoretical and comparative perspective, Aileen Kavanagh argues that protecting rights in a constitutional democracy is a collaborative enterprise between all three branches of government: the Executive, legislature, and courts. With examples from multiple jurisdictions, this book documents the dynamics of collaborative constitutionalism.