Search results

Abstract: Law and Power in Russia: Making Sense of Quasi-Legal PracticesAnna Jonsson Cornell (Department of Law, Uppsala University, Sweden) reviews Law and Power in Russia: Making Sense of Quasi-Legal Practices by Håvard Bækken (published in 2019 by Routledge).

Dahlia Lenairte's Family and the State in Soviet Lithuania: Gender, Law and Society (2021) offers an account of the changing role and position of women in the family and in society under the Communist reign in Lithuania. Beginning with the first Soviet occupation before the Second World War, Lenairte details the massive changes from Catholicism to Communism with respect to gender policy, family, divorce, childcare, maternity leave, and finally housing, up until the 1980s. Importantly, she shows that, contrary to common belief about Communist policy, gender equality was in fact never achieved in Soviet Lithuania.
Dahlia Lenairtes bog Familie og stat i Sovjet Litauen: Køn, lov og samfund (2021) er en gennemgang af kvinders ændrede roller og position i samfundet og familien under det kommunistisk styre i Litauen. Med et afsæt fra den første sovjetiske besættelse før 2. Verdenskrig viser Lenairte de enorme ændringer der skete fra katolicisme til kommunisme med hensyn til ligestilling, familie, skilsmisse, børnepasning og barselsorlov, og endelig boligsituationen op til begyndelsen af 1980'erne. I modsætning til den almindelige forståelse af kommunistisk ligestillingspolitik bliver det tydeligt, at kvinder aldrig opnåede at blive ligestillet med mænd.

A STXUE de 26-7-2018 (Asunto M. B) declara o carácter discriminatorio dunha normativa nacional (británica) que esixe ás persoas transexuais casadas a anulación do seu matrimonio para acceder ao recoñecemento xurídico pleno do seu cambio de xénero, en tanto condicionante do acceso á pensión de xubilación á idade establecida polo ordenamento nacional para as persoas do sexo adquirido. Este axuizamento leva a cabo en relación á Directiva 79/7/CEE, do 19 de decembro de 1978 relativa á aplicación progresiva do principio de igualdade de trato entre homes e mulleres en materia de seguridade social. ; Este traballo analiza este pronunciamento xudicial situándoo no conxunto da (escasa) xurisprudencia comunitaria que abordou as consecuencias do cambio de sexo desde a normativa comunitaria de carácter socio-laboral. Apúntase tamén a ( fragmentaria e dispersa) regulación xurídica española relativa ao cambio de sexo-xénero e as consecuencias en materia de seguridade social. O traballo pon de manifesto que non son poucos -e leste é un deles- os casos nos que a pesar da diferenciación sexo-xénero ambos os termos utilízanse no mesmo sentido. O traballo avoga por un Dereito "de-xenerado" e "de-xenerador" no sentido sinalado pola autora no epílogo final. ; The ECJ ruling of 26th July 2018 (MB) declares the discriminatory nature of a national (British) regulation that requires married transgender people to annul their marriage in order to have full legal recognition of their gender change, as a conditioning factor of access to retirement pension at the age established by the national law for persons of acquired sex. This prosecution is carried out in relation to Directive 79/7/EEC of 19th December 1978 on the progressive application of the principle of equal treatment of men and women in social security. This paper analyzes this judicial pronouncement placing it in the whole of the (scarce) EU jurisprudence that has addressed the consequences of sex change in the EU regulations of a socio-labour nature. It also points to the (fragmented and dispersed) Spanish legal regulation regarding the sex-gender change and the consequences in terms of social security. The paper shows that there are not a few - and this is one of them - cases in which, despite the sex-gender differentiation, both terms are used in the same sense. The paper advocates a Law "de-generated" and "degenerator" in the sense indicated by the author in the final epilogue.

Abstract: Who is responsible for the protection of human rights in Kosovo?Human rights are central in the international community's missions in Kosovo. Moreover, Kosovo's 2008 Constitution lists eight directly applicable human rights instruments, along with detailed instructions on how they are to be interpreted in line with developments at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). And yet, human rights protection is lacking in the region. Potential violations attributable to the local authorities can be adjudicated, but only through the national courts, which raises questions of independence and impartiality. Meanwhile, NATO's Kosovo Force (KFOR) and the European Union's Rule of Law Programme (EULEX) enjoy immunity against prosecution by the domestic courts while still wielding some executive and judicial power. EULEX has an internal human rights panel, modelled on the less-than-successful panel established to hold the UN's Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) accountable, while KFOR has no similar judicial body. This article maps which options individuals have for addressing human rights violations in Kosovo and where the system still has its weaknesses. Additionally, it traces how the jurisdictions have changed in the past 15 years and proposes a way forward to fill the lacunae that remains.