Search results

This research attempts to shed light on the role of the international Court of Justice (ICJ) and the significance of its adjudicatory and advisory functions. The theme of this research will initially project a brief introduction of the topic in question, keeping in view the historical and contemporary perspectives of the ICJ. This research also focuses on the organizational structure of the United Nations, keeping in view the position and role of the ICJ within the organization. With practical examples of case laws, the ambit of judicial review in the context of judicial and advisory function of ICJ will also be taken into account. It will also present brief analysis on the intra-organizational relationship between the ICJ and other organs of the UN. ; This research attempts to shed light on the role of the international Court of Justice (ICJ) and the significance of its adjudicatory and advisory functions. The theme of this paper will initially project a brief introduction of the topic in question, keeping in view the historical and contemporary perspectives of the ICJ . This research also focuses on the organizational structure of the United Nations, keeping in view the position and role of the ICJ within the organization. With practical examples of case laws, the ambit of judicial review in the context of judicial and advisory function of ICJ will also be taken into account. It will also present brief analysis on the intra-organizational relationship between the ICJ and other organs of the UN.

Ombudsman, unlike the court, cannot make binding decisions, but usually public authorities follow its recommendations, otherwise he may bring the case to the attention of politicians and the public by informing Parliament. The link between the two fundamental European institutions, the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Ombudsman, may be defined as a strong direct link between the problems of EU citizens. Requests to each institution represent an interest of each petitioner, which is intended to be solved by matching laws with moral rules and general principles of law.

The legal architecture of the EU is considered to be sui generis and like any other hybrid system, the process of integration and interaction with the older instruments of the member-states can sometimes become difficult. This article investigates the interventionist tendencies of the Bundesverfassungsgericht in EU development and the reactions of the EU Court of Justice. The main finding is that the German Court often acts as a balance setter in the process of EU integration. The research introduces the debate of the national states' legal resistance to integration and highlights the changes brought in this respect by the Treaties of Maastricht and Lisbon.

The aim of this study is trying to interpret the crisis of legitimacy which faced the political system in Libya after the events of 2011, including the multiple legislative and executive bodies, based on specified theoretical perception is Crisis Theory for Jürgen Habermas, which he is trying to linking between the political system has legitimacy and its ability to overcome the different crises and challenges that faced, is a reliable perception in the case of Libya, in particular, every political party in the Libyan scene is consider himself the legal and legitimate representatives of the Libyan community, in light of political division and multiple parliamentary bodies and executive Governments in the country,the researcher adopted in this trying to analytical reading emphasize on specific points in many official and non-official studies and reports on the Libyan situation, study found that all successive political parties that topped the Libyan political scene form 2011, had failed to counter the various challenges whether security or constitutional, and were unable to manage the different crisis suffered by the Libyan citizen, specially economic, living and service, this place it in a real crisis of legitimacy at the level of society as a whole, in light of decrease what they have done in the past and what they can do in the future under the current situation, which contributed in create a case of distrust among the citizens in their programs and plans and lost motivation to participate in the various activities that they supervise on the one hand, and in increasing cases of disrespect for laws and decisions that represent their authority on the other hand,this leads us to say that the political system in Libya after the events of 2011, is faces a national crisis of legitimacy, accompanied by crises in motivation and non-normality, according to Habermas societal crisis theory, this is reflected in our reading of studies and reports that have been exposed to the Libyan crisis.

Executive Council Thirty-Fourth Ordinary Session 7 – 8 February 2019 Addis Ababa, Ethiopia ; The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (the Court) was established in terms of Article 1 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Establishment of an African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (hereinafter referred to as "the Protocol"), adopted on 9 June 1998, in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, by the then Organization of African Unity (OAU). The Protocol entered into force on 25 January 2004. The Court became operational in 2006 and is composed of eleven (11) Judges elected by the Executive Council and appointed by the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union. The Seat of the Court is in Arusha, the United Republic of Tanzania. Article 31 of the Protocol mandates the Court to "…submit to each regular session of the Assembly, a report on its work. The report shall specify, in particular, the cases in which a State has not complied with the Court's judgment.

The preliminary ruling procedure is a useful tool that, over time, allowed the national courts to participate to the application of European Union law and contributed to this law system evolution. Our study reveals that the procedure is useful for both the national court and the litigant parties, as it clarifies both categories of participants on how should be applied the law of the European Union. However, the preliminary ruling procedure is subject to specific rules, very well systematized in the Recommendations to national courts and tribunals in relation to the initiation of preliminary ruling proceedings, a document issued by the Court of Justice of the European Union itself. Ignoring these recommendations led to the rejection, as inadmissible, of certain requests for a preliminary ruling, and this is a situation that should be avoided in the future.