Suchergebnisse

The rhetorical force of the rule of law is acknowledged through official discourse in Myanmar just as it is in other countries across Asia and around the world. Given that Myanmar manifestly does not conform to substantive models of the rule of law, which are associated with democratic government and individual liberties, might it conform to a minimalist one? Is there in Myanmar a thin rule of law to which the military government can lay claim, one compatible even with grave abuses of human rights? Or is there only "un-rule of law"? Beginning with some theoretical concerns, this article passes briefly through a review of law and rule-of-law rhetoric in the country's modern history before arriving at the present day. It recounts a court case arising from a recent historic event, the September 2007 antigovernment protests, to query whether or not a thin rule of law can, in Myanmar at least, be said to coexist with authoritarian rule. It concludes that it cannot. But if the army in Myanmar has succeeded in overwhelming the courts at cost of the rule of law, ironically in doing this it may also have averted a worse scenario, one in which the denial of fundamental rights for which it is well known could be even greater than at present.

The impact of foreign law on the development of national laws has been analyzed and vindicated in numerous studies in comparative legal literature. These studies typically focus on the two most prominent legal systems--common law (the Anglo-American system) and civil law (the Continental system). The historical reasons for this are clear, emanating from the fact that the world's legal systems are based on these legal regimes and are amended in the spirit of changes made to them. Over the years, however, with the many effects of legal and economic globalization, legal systems have become a diverse mosaic which has appropriated doctrines and interpretations on legal issues drawn from various other legal traditions. One of the most prominent legal systems to emerge in recent years is that of the European Union (EU), currently the largest democratic bloc of countries in the world. Despite its relative novelty, EU law has great influence on the development of legal interpretation in many legal systems. This Study, which is laid out in two complementary Articles, is the first to empirically examine the influence that EU law had on the development of a non-EU country. These Articles take Israel as a case study on which normative conclusions can be drawn for other non-EU countries with whom the EU has established close bilateral legal, economic, cultural, and social relations. The importance and significance of comparative sources to the development of Israeli jurisprudence is expressed in local legislation and rulings.

Article 6, paragraph 1 of Framework Decision 2002/584/JHA provides that the issuing judicial authority is the judicial authority of the Member State competent to issue a judicial decision in accordance with the law of that State for the purpose of surrender on the basis of the European arrest warrant to another EU Member State.The Court of Justice in Luxembourg, by its recent case-law, held that the notion of issuing judicial authority does not concern the prosecutor's offices in a Member State which are at risk of being subjected, directly or indirectly, to individual orders or instructions by the executive power in the context of adopting a decision on the issuing of the European arrest warrant. The effects of this judgment are mandatory for all Member States and require clarification from the Member States affected by the ECJ ruling regarding the nature of the European arrest warrant authority, even a possible intervention by the legislature in these EU Member States, to facilitate the settlement of cases of arrest in full agreement with the principles of mutual recognition and mutual trust of judgments in the European area.

Jefferson's importance as a political theorist tends to be overshadowed by his success as diplomat and statesman. The practical accomplishments of his forty years in public office often obscure the breadth and consistency of the philosophy behind all of his official conduct, and his tremendous influence in formulating and disseminating the principles on which the modern democratic state rests is too often forgotten. His genius consisted, not so much in the originality of his political ideas, as in his ability to select from the conflicting theories of his day all that could be practically applied, and to transmute a diverse intellectual heritage into a working philosophy of the state. Against the sovereign whose command is law, Jefferson sets up a legal theory seeking justice as well as order, and by which ruler and subject are alike bound. It is a theory which transcends national lines, recognizing that isolation, in any rigorous sense, means stagnation and death, both to the individual and to the state. So when Jefferson asks for "peace, commerce, and honest friendship, with all nations–entangling alliances with none," only the second phrase is negative, and it means no more than it says. Peace and commerce are both relations external to the individual state; and both presuppose for their maintenance some form of international organization–some system of international law. Both Jefferson's writings and his official acts testify to his belief that the intercourse of nations must be governed by some body of legal rules.

Die Öffnung des deutschen Bilanzrechts bewirkt eine zunehmende Anwendungsbreite von internationalen Rechnunungslegungsnormen (wie insbesondere der US-GAAP und der IAS) für deutsche Rechtsanwender;1 die heterogenen Normtypen und die – damit einhergehend – unterschiedlichen ökonomischen Eigenschaften dieser Normen erfordern für einen sinnvollen Rechnungslegungsvergleich eine komparative Rechnungslegungstheorie. Eine Besinnung auf die ökonomische Theorie ist – auch ausgelöst durch die Internationalisierung der Rechnungslegung – hier grundsätzlich festzustellen,2 wie auch das moderne deutsche Bilanzrecht seine heutige Prägung durch die ökonomische Theorie – und nicht vornehmlich durch die Anwender – erhielt.3 Es ist das Ziel des Aufsatzes, einen Beitrag zu einer institutionenökonomischen Theorie der Rechnungslegung zum Zweck der Bestimmung von Informationsinhalten und Gewinnansprüchen sowie zur vergleichenden Rechnungslegungstheorie zu leisten. In einem ersten Hauptteil (2) wird im folgenden – auf dem institutionenökonomischen Forschungsprogramm aufbauend – skizziert, welche Bedeutung Institutionen im Rahmen des Nutzenkalküls von Entscheidern zuzumessen ist; danach werden die einzelnen für eine vergleichende Rechnungslegung relevanten Institutionsarten typisiert (in formale und informelle Regeln) sowie deren Attribute im individuellen Zielstromkalkül eingeführt (nämlich Prädikate der Manipulationsfreiheit und Prädikate der Entscheidungsverbundenheit). Das Verhältnis der Institutionen zueinander wird im folgenden Abschnitt (3) anhand eines rechtlich geprägten und eines ökonomischen Systemverständnisses entwickelt. Es wird gezeigt, daß beide Systembegriffe auf einer Nichtadditivität der sie konstituierenden Institutionen gründen, die den qualitativen Vergleich unterschiedlicher Systeme erschweren; man überschätzt hingegen die Unterschiede zwischen juristischem und ökonomischem Systemverständnis: beide sind funktionsähnlich. Im letzten Hauptteil (4) werden schließlich vor dem Hintergrund einer gestaltenden Theorie die hierfür relevanten Teilbereiche (Sub-Systeme) der Rechnungslegungsordnung vorgestellt sowie einzelne Publizitätsnormen funktional ausgelegt. Der Beitrag schließt mit zusammenfassenden Thesen (5). ; This paper presents some consequences of economic theory for the regulation of corporate accounting and disclosure under Geman accounting legislation (de lege lata) and in an international context. The following implications are discussed: (i) It is argued that the economic income conception provides means for a better understanding of the informational needs of accounting data-users and can serve as a guidance for the interpretation of legal rules concerning disclosure. (ii) From a Law and Economics-perspective the article develops a concept to comparing the economic content of different legal regimes in an international accounting environment. (iii) It is shown that – in the "new paradigm" of complementarities (Milgrom/Roberts) – regulation of disclosure standards can also be seen as a function of the institutional setting, e.g. of the (national) structure of corporate governance and the (national) financial system. (iv) The principle of full disclosure can be interpreted as a complementary element of the overall disclosure system in a country. Especially the fine tuning of the application of the principle of full disclosure in a national context depends on whether it figures as part of an insider control-system or an outsider control-system. (v) Finally, it is argued that the interpretation of extraordinary items in German accounting law, for the time being, does not satisfy the informational needs of market participants.