Suchergebnisse

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Bachelor ofLaws degree, Strathmore university law school ; On the 4th of August 2010, Kenyans enacted a new Constitution. This Constitution stipulates that all accused persons are entitled to apply for bail unlike previous legislation which denied bail for capital offences such as murder. Bail will therefore be granted unless the court deems that there are compelling reasons not to grant it. The Constitution has however failed to define compelling reasons. The main objective of this research is to interrogate the current counterterrorism framework in Kenya with a particular focus on bail so as to determine whether it is sufficient to preserve national security.This study has been conducted mainly through a literature review of various legislations regarding bail for suspected terrorists using a qualitative approach. It has established that indeed there are various disparities in the law regarding bail for suspected terrorists. This has led to the courts releasing some suspected terrorists on bail who have then gone to commit further acts of terrorism. Furthermore, the 2015 Bail and Policy Guidelines have failed to clarify matters on bail for suspected terrorists. The Judiciary has therefore had to interpret and define compelling reasons. This has led to inconsistencies in the manner in which bail is granted. The study therefore proposes that public interest in terms of national security outweighs the right to bail for suspected terrorists. It also proposes that clear laws regarding bail specifically creating a presumption against granting bail to suspected terrorists should be enacted. This will help to solve the inconsistencies in the interpretation of the law by the Judiciary.

The integration, at the national level, of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights may open the subject of a dispute in relation to a contrary jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, regarding the protection of human rights. This paper integrates the possible disputes and proposes ways of solving them, as well as proposals for improving the dialogue of European states regarding the jurisdictional protection of human rights.

Should judges in United States courts be permitted to cite foreign laws in their rulings? In this book Jeremy Waldron explores some ideas in jurisprudence and legal theory that could underlie the Supreme Court's occasional recourse to foreign law, especially in constitutional cases. He argues that every society is governed not only by its own laws but partly also by laws common to all mankind (ius gentium). But he takes the unique step of arguing that this common law is not natural law but a grounded consensus among all nations. The idea of such a consensus will become increasingly important in jurisprudence and public affairs as the world becomes more globalized

In The Foundations of Australian Public Law, Anthony J. Connolly brings together the two traditionally discrete areas of constitutional and administrative law to present Australian public law as a single, integrated body. Exploring the themes of state, power and accountability in Australia, the text also makes reference to the law of international jurisdictions, where students are informed by contemporary public law theory. Particular attention is also given to the rise of global public law and the increasingly cosmopolitan nature of the subject in Australia. A comprehensive companion website complements the theory and discussion throughout the text and includes chapter summaries, further readings and discussion questions to encourage extended student learning. Written by a leader in the field, The Foundations of Australian Public Law is a key text for students looking to gain a comprehensive understanding of public law across Australia's federal, state and territory jurisdictions.

У статті досліджено правові джерела, які нормативно закріплюють конституційний принцип верховенства права у системі права України; здійснено порівняльний аналіз судових тлумачень і наукових підходів щодо сутності та змісту принципу верховенства права; з'ясовано зв'язок і співвідношення принципів верховенства права та законності. Зроблено висновок по те, що відмінності у теоретичних підходах до визначення верховенства права пов'язані із багатогранністю та глибиною відповідної ідеї. Абсолютно визначена дефініція принципу верховенства права видається недоцільною і неможливою через динаміку розвитку міжнародно-правових стандартів прав людини. In the article legal sources, which normatively fix the constitutional principle of the rule of law in the system of law of Ukraine, have been investigated; the comparative analysis of judicial and scientific interpretation of essence and content of the principle of the rule of law has been presented. It has been concluded that the principle of the rule of law is essential in the formation of all institutes of the state and society in general as it defines human rights as supreme social value, and major public reference point. Therefore it is possible to agree with the thesis that the rule of law is "the principle of the principles". It has been proved that the concept of the rule of law constantly evolves and expands. It is natural that in Ukraine it has to develop and be filled with new content, being similar to the European standards of human rights protection. Differences in theoretical approaches to the definition of the rule of law are connected with the diversity and profundity of the corresponding idea. Absolutely accurate definition of the principle of the rule of law has been presented as inexpedient and impossible due to dynamics of the development of international legal standards of human rights. In the branch legislation of Ukraine the principle of the rule of law has been intentionally put at the head of the system of principles by legislators. The principle of legality is subordinated to it in structure and content.

Hornbook constitutional law establishes that Congress and state legislatures are bodies of limited, enumerated powers, and common sense suggests they should get their act together and exercise them more often. But should legislators be permitted to sue in order to exercise their powers when another branch of government infringes on them unconstitutionally, or the body they represent unconstitutionally limits them? This Note argues that, at least in certain circumstances, they should. Following on the heels of the Tenth Circuit's recent treatment of the issue in its Kerr v. Hickenlooper decisions, this Note proposes a redefinition of the legislator standing doctrine under which legislators can sue to remedy unconstitutional infringement of specific, enumerated powers. In doing so, this Note argues that prudential concerns that have historically barred legislators from suing should be disregarded, not only because the Supreme Court signaled as much in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., but also because these concerns are normatively ill considered. Rather, tying legislators' injuries in fact to enumerated powers better aligns standing for legislators with standing for everyone else, while helping ensure courts are not stuck hearing suits they cannot and should not hear.

Departing from traditional approaches to colonial legal history, Mary Sarah Bilder argues that American law and legal culture developed within the framework of an evolving, unwritten transatlantic constitution that lawyers, legislators, and litigants on both sides of the Atlantic understood. The central tenet of this constitution--that colonial laws and customs could not be repugnant to the laws of England but could diverge for local circumstances--shaped the legal development of the colonial world. Focusing on practices rather than doctrines, Bilder describes how the pragmatic and flexible conversation about this constitution shaped colonial law: the development of the legal profession; the place of English law in the colonies; the existence of equity courts and legislative equitable relief; property rights for women and inheritance laws; commercial law and currency reform; and laws governing religious establishment. Using as a case study the corporate colony of Rhode Island, which had the largest number of appeals of any mainland colony to the English Privy Council, she reconstructs a largely unknown world of pre-Constitutional legal culture. Note: This abstract refers to the book The Transatlantic Constitution: Colonial Legal Culture and the Empire, by Mary Sarah Bilder. Available at this site for downloading is a brief excerpt from "Introduction: The Transatlantic Constitution and the Colonial World," pp.1-3, 10-11. It is included here with permission of the copyright holder.

Cover -- Half Title -- Series Page -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Contents -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction: decolonizing law in the Global North and South: expanding the circle -- Challenging limitations of settler colonialism -- 1 Decolonizing Anishinaabe nibi inaakonigewin and gikendaasowin research: reinscribing Anishinaabe approaches to law and knowledge -- 2 Statehood, Canadian sovereignty, and the attempted domestication of Indigenous legal relations -- 3 Decolonization in Third and Fourth Worlds: synergy, solidarity, and sustainability through international law -- Perspectives from the Global North and South -- Part 1 International -- 4 Mastery and gratitude: development aid and the colonial condition in Palestine -- 5 Rethinking international legal education in Latin America: exploring some obstacles of a hegemonic colonial academic model in Chile and Colombia -- Part 2 Sites of engagement -- 6 Indigenous peoples and Belo Monte Hydroelectric Plant: the mobilization of displaced Indigenous peoples in the urban area of Altamira -- 7 Unearthing (de)colonial legal relations: mining law in Aotearoa New Zealand -- 8 Comparative law and epistemologies of ignorance in Chilean constitutional adjudication: a case study -- 9 Not empty of laws: Indigenous legal orders and the Canadian state -- 10 The right to free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC): reflections on experiences of two Indigenous communities in northern regions of Canada and Chile -- Decolonizing through Indigenous worldviews -- 11 Decolonizing corrections -- 12 (Re)bundling nêhiyaw âskiy: nêhiyaw constitutionalism through land stories -- 13 Conducting research from an Indigenous lens -- Notes on contributors -- Index.

The financial politics of the European Union (EU) have been highly debated ever since the 2008 crisis, which left some European countries in financial turmoil. One part of the European financial policy has been the purchase of government bonds through the European Central Bank. The most vocal critics of this policy have for a long time emerged from Europe's biggest economy – Germany. A case against the purchase of government bonds was eventually brought to the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany (FCC). The FCC referred the matter to the European Court of Justice, which in 2018 upheld the practice and found it legal. In May of 2020 the FCC went against the European Court of Justice and pronounced the practice of purchasing government bonds as well as the decision upholding it to be ultra vires. Although there have been other domestic courts within the EU that have overruled EU law, last years's verdict was unique in its blatant defiance of the European institutions and the primacy of EU Law. This paper analyses the two judgements with a focus on the issues of the ultra vires review as well as the primacy of EU law. By scrutinising the FCC's case law on the issue, the author argues that the FCC's judgement is inconsistent with its own jurisprudence, and the case substantially unsuited and unwisely chosen for rendering the ultra vires verdict for the first time. Moreover, the judgement completely disregards the primacy of EU law, which not only questions the equality of EU Members but ultimately jeopardises one of the most crucial principles of the Union.