Search results

The real crisis seems to be in academia, not at the Court

In its judgment No. 238/2014 the Italian Constitutional Court, whilst appearing to show respect for the ICJ's 2012 judgment in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State, makes notable criticisms of that judgment and insists on its own role in the progressive development of international law in the field of State immunity. In particular, the main legal argument of the Constitutional Court, based on the fundamental and inviolable character of the right of access to justice in constitutional law, can also be used, although modified to some extent, in international law. The Court's argument can also resolve the possible conflict between the international norm of State immunity, on the one hand, and the international norms on fundamental human rights and access to justice, on the other. The present contribution seeks to demonstrate that: (a) the right of access to justice and the connected right to reparation for violations of fundamental human rights are established by two customary international norms; (b) there is a potential conflict between these norms and the norm of State immunity; (c) this conflict becomes real and concrete when the limits on access to justice and reparation laid down by immunity are unjustified in accordance with the rule of "equivalent protection"; and (d) the solution to that conflict derives from the normative superiority of the customary norms on access to justice and reparation (being peremptory in nature when functionally linked to the violation of fundamental human rights) over the norm of State immunity. The judgment of the Constitutional Court, utilizing legal reasoning that can also translate to the level of international law, demonstrates that osmosis may occur between the arguments used in constitutional and international law, and that today there is growing interaction between the domestic and international legal orders and their common values. The law of human rights, placed at the very center of the Constitutional Court's judgment, is the field in which this community of values emerges most clearly.

Cover; Half Title; Series Page; Title Page; Copyright Page; Dedication; Table of Contents; Acknowledgments; Part I Conceptualizing the issue; Chapter 1 Constitutional but not constitutionalism; 1.1 The politicization of religion and its way into the constitution; 1.2 Equal liberty as a constitutive element of constitutionalism; 1.3 Outline of further study; Chapter 2 Beyond the secular/religious divide; 2.1 Religion as a constitutional language; 2.1.1 "Islamic constitutionalism"; 2.1.2 Political Islam and constitutional desecularization; 2.1.3 The politicization of religion and fundamentalism

"This volume explores how national and international human rights courts interpret and apply human dignity. The book tracks the increasing deployment of the concept of human dignity within national and international courts in recent decades. It identifies how human-dignity-based arguments have expanded to cover larger sets of cases: from the right to life or to integrity or anti-discrimination, the concept has surfaced in disputes about political and social rights and rule of law requirements, such as equality or legal certainty. The core message of the book is that judges understand, interpret, and apply human dignity differently. An inflation in the judicial recourse to human dignity can saturate the legal environment, depriving the concepts as well as human-rights-based narratives of salience, and threaten the predictability of court decisions. The book will appeal to philosophers of law, constitutional theorists and lawyers, legal comparativists, and internal law specialists. Whilst being dedicated specifically to human dignity jurisprudence, the book touches on many aspects of judiciary and as such will also be of interest to researchers studying legal reasoning, interpretation and application of the law and courts, as well as social philosophers, political scientists, and sociologists of law, politics, and religion"--

The material is a review of the scientific monograph of D.R. Salikhov "Protest relations in Consti-tutional Law: from theory to practice of constitutional and legal regulation". The comments and suggestions made do not in any way affect the high assessment of the peer-reviewed work, which undoubtedly has theoretical and practical significance for the development of the science of Consti-tutional Law. The author presents an exceptionally relevant, original and comprehensive study con-tributing to the development of the problems of Constitutional Law. The results of the analysis are fully reflected in the text of the reviewed monograph