Search

The term "Fair Trial" has become very important in modern times and is one of the basic rights of the accused. There is no comprehensive definition of this term, but there are details in the international documents on the guarantees that come as a result of this right. These include the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and many other human rights Instruments. The 18th Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan also makes the right to a fair trial a part of the Constitution. This right includes appointing a judge, giving the accused a chance to defend himself, the right to testify the witnesses, appealing against the verdict and some other matters are also included in the guarantees of this right. This term is not used in the Islamic judicial system, but Islamic teachings are very clear about the guarantees obtained as a result of this right and Islam clearly distinguishes between the accused and the guilty. Justice has always been given priority in the period from the time of Prophet hood to later times and history has preserved many incidents which are clear evidence of this right in the judicial system. This article appraise the Research Review of Right to Fair Trial in Islamic Judicial System. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal of Juridical & Political Science is the property of Republic of Iraq Ministry of Higher Education & Scientific Research (MOHESR) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Genero is the property of Genero and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of International Journal on Criminology is the property of Policy Studies Organization and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Práxis Educativa is the property of Revista Praxis Educativa and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Investigaciones Historicas is the property of Universidad de Valladolid, Facultad de Filosofia y Letras and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Welfare states in Europe are facing major challenges today. Some have even announced the end of the welfare state. By contrast, civil society has been assigned a greater share of responsibility in these states. The key challenge is to balance divergent interests, or at least to provide approaches that enable learning to live with these conflicting interests. Thus, civil society plays a great role for welfare states in Europe. There are many opportunities for citizens and civil society organizations in Europe to voice their opinion and participate in the processes of policy making in order to strengthen freedom and democracy as a guarantee that the welfare state will be run well. Freedom and civil society are two sides of the same coin. This can be illustrated by developments in Eastern European and Western countries. While civil society in Eastern European countries is primarily characterized by its striving for political rights, particularly during the transformation process (freedom from authoritarian suppression), in the Western European states, civil society organizations primarily focus on representing societal interests and engaging in and providing relevant services for modern societies (freedom to achieve social improvement). The authors argue that these two roles of civil society are closely interlinked: If civil society succeeds in enforcing the rights of citizens, it must then be determined how it can continue to pursue its goals in an organized way. As part of this transformation process, civil society has a great potential to stabilize European welfare states. It provides a variety of approaches as to how welfare states can negotiate diverging, or even conflicting, interests, or rather how public and civil actors can live with these differences. This chapter aims to illustrate the linkage between the two functions of civil society and points out the resulting chances and challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Criterio Libre Jurídico is the property of Universidad Libre Seccional Cali and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article informs about the legality of sanctions between the condemnation of their extraterritorial application and humanitarian concerns. Topics include negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights; and sanctions among the legitimate tools available to promote the Union's goals in the field of foreign policy and common security.

In 2022, Bangladesh was criticized at the national and international level due to poor protection of civil and political rights. The country experienced spiking inflation, also due to global post-COVID monetary policies, while floods brought again destruction to the northeastern districts. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine contributed to increase the price of certain imports and halted supply chains. Bangladesh’s reaction to the war and its internationalization at the UN was cautious, reflecting its traditional tendency to avoid neat alignments. Relations with India were at a high according to official sources, and were indeed characterized by frequent high-level visits and growing partnership in various fields. However, this was insufficient to bring solution to lingering bilateral disputes and halt the rise of anti-India sentiment in the country. Likewise, Dhaka’s partnership with Beijing was not free from criticism, while major infrastructure projects aided by Chinese finances were inaugurated. No real progress could be made to ease if not resolve the Rohingya’s plight. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Main justifications for regarding common nationality as a necessary condition for holding equal political rights – Critique of collective self-determination, equal stakes, nature of political activity, and stability justifications – Rejection of the incommensurability of legitimacy and justice – Socioeconomic interdependence and liberal democratic values as the normative grounds for equal stakes – Risk of entrenchment of hostility among national groups as a consequence of a competitive conception of political activity – Instrumental value of stability – Stability through democratic inclusion – Possibility of sustainable pluralism through deliberative democracy – Modified version of the equal stakes argument – Equal political rights on the basis of long-term residence – Association of citizenship with nationality in contemporary European states – Redefinition of citizenship as top-down redefinition of nationality – Need to reconceptualise equal political rights independently of citizenship – Legal argument for interpreting references to popular sovereignty in national constitutions in accordance with long-term residence, rather than nationality – Available legal remedies [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The closest case to a variant of commuters' franchise is the City of London, wherein different bodies, ranging from churches, hospital trusts, and shops to big corporations, are given the right to appoint commuters to vote in the local elections. According to the same logic, it will be difficult to argue that commuters hold additional political powers if a commuter's work city and home city are part of a regional particular-role governance institution. He argues against a commuters' franchise, claiming that commuters' interests should be looked after by the state government or parliament rather than the work city, because the latter is responsible for the well-being and interests of "its own people and only its own people" (p. 92). According to this claim, including commuters in both the work and home city demoi undermines political equality between citizens of the state by giving commuters greater political rights than their counterparts. [Extracted from the article]

Following the landmark essay of T. H. Marshall, Citizenship and the Social Class (1949), it has conventionally been assumed that the introduction and expansion of social rights in Europe happened as the final stage of a long process of democratization that included the granting of first civil and then political rights. We present a radically different perspective on the relationship between the extension of suffrage (under meaningful competition for government power) and social rights, that is state-financed entitlements that make citizens' livelihood independent from the labor market in the instance of events such as unemployment or sickness. First, some countries institutionalized a state-financed poor relief system much before mass democratization. In these countries, the primary effect of suffrage extension was to reduce public social spending, not expand it. Second, the way this retrenchment occurred was partly by creating a negative link between social rights, on the one hand, and civil and political rights, on the other. We test our argument with case studies of nineteenth- to early-twentieth-century England, Denmark, Norway, and Prussia, all of which are paradigmatic cases that represent the variation in welfare state types. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper offers a novel substantive justification for mandatory electoral quotas—e.g., gender or racial quotas—and a new methodological approach to their justification. Substantively, I argue for a political egalitarian account of electoral quotas. Methodologically, based on this account and a political egalitarian grounding of political participatory rights, I offer an alternative to the External Restriction Approach to the justification of electoral quotas. The External Restriction Approach sees electoral quotas as at best justified restrictions on political participatory rights. I argue for the Internal Restriction Approach instead, which can justify electoral quotas by specifying the pro tanto scope of political participatory rights rather than by justifying restrictions on the pro tanto scope of these rights. On this approach, adequately set electoral quotas do not even conflict with and are not balanced against political participatory rights, while electoral quotas—when justified—are pro tanto required rather than merely permitted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A populist turn in the argument for laissez-faire occurred between the mid-1970s and the early 1980s. The essay focuses on Milton Friedman, James Buchanan, the supply-side economists, and eulogists of free enterprise like Michael Novak. They reversed the standpoint of previous advocates of the minimal state, who had feared that the enfranchised poor majority would soak the rich, by arguing that the statist danger came in fact from the liberal elites, pressing on with the expansion of governmental functions against the will and interests of ordinary Americans. Such a shift complemented that occurring in the idiom of the political Right since the 1960s. The economic populism of Friedman and Buchanan, in particular, derived from a blend of abstract analysis and a reassertion of freedom as the constitutive value of the country – they combined the universality and prestige of the economic idiom with a normative vision of national identity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Both the right to dissent and the "rule of law" are celebrated and frequently invoked values. Yet widespread popular dissent, such as that seen in the recent Black Lives Matter protests sparked by the police killing of George Floyd and others and a strong backlash against protestors by some political leaders, has deeply challenged the compatibility of those values. This tension raises deep theoretical questions about the essential concept of the rule of law, questions that have not yet been addressed by legal theorists. Consensus is greatest with respect to some of the formal characteristics of the rule of law, and formal definitions of the rule of law focus on formal properties of governance by law, primarily properties associated with the legality principle. Yet many reject the formal definition as overly neutered, contending instead that if it is to mean anything, the concept of the rule of law must not merely restate formal principles of legality, but instead must also include some substantive content, such as a minimum respect for private property or basic human rights. While both sides of this debate make important points, I contend in this Essay that there is a critical middle ground between the two positions. While the concept of the rule of law may not necessarily incorporate the entire spectrum of civil and political rights, the very logic of the rule of law demands respect for and adherence to a core set of substantive values beyond the merely formalistic properties of legality identified by legal philosophers like Joseph Raz. At the same time, the concept of the rule of law is not, as the formalists correctly argue, infinitely pliable. It cannot be made to stand for all things thought desirable by critics and interlocutors in political debate. But the parameters of the rule of law concept need not be arbitrarily drawn. Rather, they are inherent in the concept itself. What we discover when we examine what lies at the intersection of the formalist and substantivist approaches is a core set of overlapping principles that are substantivist in nature, but necessary to the formalist rule of law project. This key substantive component is toleration of and respect for the practice of dissent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Identity politics: Universality and particularity Theorizing identity politics as a democratic instantiation or application of biopolitics first necessitates a working definition of identity politics itself. As a regime that explicitly opposes democracy's commitment to collective participatory governance, liberalism was frankly constructed as an "art of government" that strives "to limit the exercise of government power" (Foucault, 2008, p. 27). The overall lesson Foucault tried to teach us, then, was to be critical of the manifold processes of administration, management, regulation, and normalization at work within the I dispositifs i that constitute the modern state, whether this management is facilitated through an "anatomo-politics" of the individual body Foucault calls discipline, or through the "regulatory controls" of the population Foucault calls biopolitics. (2003, p. 141) By articulating contemporary identity politics as a form of democratic biopolitics, I am not just erecting a conceptual parallelism between the demographic-based logic of identity politics and the population-based logic of biopolitics (though I am doing this too), but I am more fundamentally suggesting that, perhaps, many of the concepts through which Foucault critiqued modern power no longer operate in quite the same manner as they once did. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Marmara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Hukuk Araştırmaları Dergisi is the property of Marmara University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Rather than facilitating access to protection for those escaping persecution or seeking security, today's State policies often aim to prevent individuals from ever reaching their territories. The goal of deterrence has been manifested in border militarization and externalization practices that block those in need of protection – frequently labelled as 'irregular' or 'illegal' migrants – from accessing asylum and other protective procedures. In tandem, widespread State practices of informal, summary, and collective 'pushbacks' seek to remove individuals who do arrive in these State territories without individualized evaluations of their protection claims or adherence to any required procedure. This article argues that these pushbacks, which place affected individuals outside the framework of any applicable law and prevent them from accessing its protections, do more than obstruct asylum claims and violate the principle of non-refoulement. They strip individuals of their right to be recognized as persons before the law, protected by article 16 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. After analysing the doctrine of the United Nations Human Rights Committee on article 16 in particular, and broadly exploring the interpretation of the right in other instruments that contain it, this article examines how the common processes and result of pushbacks implicate and degrade this right. It demonstrates that article 16 constitutes a critical protection against the increasing 'rightlessness' in which asylum seekers and other migrants often find themselves today. As such, it submits that evaluating pushbacks through the framework of the right to recognition as a person before the law, rather than through the lens of refoulement or expulsions alone, allows a better analysis of the multi-layered human rights impact of such practices, scrutinizes their use as a tactic in a deterrence-driven policy landscape, and facilitates a more critical evaluation of their (il)legality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At international level the right to health developed with human rights growing concern and development, as it is understood as continuum which is the conditions to the protection of health of the public. In terms of civil and political rights, one can have the right to medical care services and provision of public health care including the treatment, diagnosis of diseases and other services for health care and for those who are not capable to pay for it.COVID-19 pandemic created global health care concern. The main focus of this paper is to study international human Right to Health in international covenants, declaration and regional charter and also international strategies and responses of COVID-19 pandemic and their possible solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent works have compared political participation in a variety of democratic polities. One major finding of some of this research is that to classify individuals as highly active or inactive politically is to oversimplify the notion of participation. Political participation is multidimensional: active participants in one kind of political behaviour may be inactive in another. Preoccupation with one form of participation, such as voting, may obscure the extent and nature of participation taking place. This finding was summarized neatly in a recent work: "Citizens differ not only in the overall amounts of participation they perform but also as to the types of acts in which they choose to engage. Furthermore, these different types of acts are quite distinctive in form and function and can almost be thought of as alternative participatory systems: – systems that are used for different purposes, that are able to provide types of benefits, and that relate the participant to his government and to his fellow citizens in fundamentally different ways." Surprisingly, perhaps, these types of participation have been found to be similar across several democratic polities. Four distinct activities have been located in the several nations: (1) voting; (2) active participation in political campaigns; (3) cooperative activity such as joining with others formally or informally to pursue political goals; and (4) contacting government officials about some public problem. There has been little analysis of the forms of participation of Canadians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Approximately one-quarter of civil war peace agreements contain some reference to gender, prompting the question of whether or not gender provisions within peace agreements are effective tools for improving women's rights following conflict. As calls by the United Nations and the international community place increasing emphasis on women's involvement in peace processes, this article generates insight into whether peace agreements, a key component of peace processes, help to spur greater political rights for women. The theoretical expectations of the article posit that peace agreements generate legal frameworks for post-conflict states. Specifically, peace agreements have the potential to tie actors' hands to new policies and generate shifts in societal norms and practices; the direction of new policies and practices, however, is dependent on the contents of agreements. When agreements are gender-inclusive, they increase the likelihood of improvements in women's political rights. The expectations are quantitatively tested using civil war peace agreements signed between 1981 and 2011. The findings indicate that the content of agreements matters; gender-inclusive agreements lay the foundations for improvements in women's political rights following conflict. The article demonstrates that peace agreements, when crafted to include gender provisions, are meaningful tools that international and domestic actors can harness to strengthen women's rights after civil war. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explains that the concept of citizenship for Māori in New Zealand has evolved. The Native Rights Act 1865 declared all Māori to be subjects of the Crown. This implication then justified the confiscation of lands in the 1860s from those Māori deemed to be disloyal to the Crown. By the beginning of the twentieth century, politicians began to use the concept of citizenship to force Māori to fight in World War I. In the midtwentieth century, the Māori politician Apirana Ngata used the term 'price of citizenship' to gain social and political rights for all Māori, as a result of the efforts of Māori soldiers fighting as New Zealand citizens in World War II. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Political tolerance, defined as a willingness to grant civil liberties to disliked groups, has historically been viewed as necessary for liberal democracies. Canada is known as a tolerant country, but very little research exists on political tolerance in Canada. Using the "least‐liked" measure of political tolerance, I show that Canada has lower levels of political tolerance than the U.S., and that religiosity—particularly committed and conservative religiosity—is unrelated to political tolerance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Przeglad Sejmowy is the property of Kancelaria Sejmu and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)