Suchergebnisse

Chapters featured in this title include: 'Dual Enforcement of Constitutional Norms', 'Cool Federalism and the Life Cycle of Moral Progress', 'Why Federalism and Constitutional Positivism Don't Mix', and 'Interjurisdictional Enforcement of Rights in a Post-erie World', amongst others

This contribution presents an overview of the Belgian Constitutional Court and its activities during 2016. Two constitutional controversies that were at the forefront of political discussions and attracted much media attention are discussed, namely the separation of powers and the refugee "crisis" as well as the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between the European Union and Canada. Moreover, the article gives an overview of the main cases of the Belgian Constitutional Court of the past year that may be of interest to an international audience. These cases are divided into the following categories: the Belgian Constitution in Europe and the world, separation of powers, justice and order, ethical issues and hot topics.

The views of constitutional experts in modern government, there are three very important elements of the principles of government power in a country, namely the principles of the rights of citizens and the principle of the relationship between citizens and government, as well as the principles of governmental power (the principles According To the Government). This is described in the constitution to whom powers of state organizer submitted, whether the power will be given to the one hand/ institution or given to several State institutions who run these power. The principles of the rights of citizens (The Principles According to The Rights of The governed), in principle rights owned of citizen an integral part to be valued/ respected by a ruler. Then the principles of the relationship between citizens and government (The Principles According to the Relations Between The Government and The Governed), In these principle should be known of each rights and obligations between the citizens and government. Besides, the Constitution understood as a term to describe the overall system of Government of a country, as well as a collection of rules that establish and regulate or define Government in the country concerned. Thus encountered a two-dimensional understanding given as follows: first, the Constitution is the overall picture of the system of Government in a country (The Whole System of Government A Country) that the Constitution describes whether the form of State and system of Government in use. Second, the Constitution is a set of rules that establish and govern a country's Government (The Collection Of Rules Which Regulate or Establish and Govern The Government) it means in this second dimension, the Constitution is a set of rules about how the implementation of the overall system of Government of a country and a set of rules as the basis for the Division of power between the institutions of the State, the both dimension is a unity in the sense of the constitution or basic laws.Keyword: The Indonesian government system constitution is identical

Clarifying the Application of International Law and Regional Standards to promote Constitutionalism and Democracy in Africa. The Quest for an African Constitutional Law ; submitted by Kalkidan Negash Obse ; Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, Dissertation, 2015 ; OeBB ; (VLID)1255686

In this revised and updated second edition of The Dynamic Constitution, Richard H. Fallon, Jr provides an engaging, sophisticated introduction to American constitutional law. Suitable for lawyers and non-lawyers alike, this book discusses contemporary constitutional doctrine involving such issues as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, rights to privacy and sexual autonomy, the death penalty, and the powers of Congress. Through examples of Supreme Court cases and portraits of past and present Justices, this book dramatizes the historical and cultural factors that have shaped constitutional law. The Dynamic Constitution, 2nd edition, combines detailed explication of current doctrine with insightful analysis of the political culture and theoretical debates in which constitutional practice is situated. Professor Fallon uses insights from political science to explain some aspects of constitutional evolution and emphasizes features of the judicial process that distinguish constitutional law from ordinary politics

The field of comparative constitutional law has developed in interesting and exciting directions in recent years. This essay provides a comment on Ran Hirschl's Comparative Matters: The Renaissance of Comparative Constitutional Law, a path-breaking example of the new methodologies that have become possible in the field. Its new boundaries, described not as comparative constitutional law, but as comparative constitutional studies, include comparative politics, political economy, and the broader social sciences. By contrast, this essay suggests that the field must remain anchored in law, in all of its complexity. This may at times suggest different answers, and indeed different questions, from those that Hirschl provides. Moreover, I argue that the difficult questions that the social practice of law raises – such as the demand for justification, and the reliance on interpretation – cannot be abandoned in this new moment of social scientific possibility.

In the period since the end of the Second World War, there has emerged what never before existed: a truly global morality. Some of that morality - the morality of human rights - has become entrenched in the constitutional law of the United States. This book explicates the morality of human rights and elaborates three internationally recognized human rights that are embedded in US constitutional law: the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment; the right to moral equality; and the right to religious and moral freedom. The implications of one or more of these rights for three great constitutional controversies - capital punishment, same-sex marriage and abortion - are discussed in-depth. Along the way, Michael J. Perry addresses the question of the proper role of the Supreme Court of the United States in adjudicating these controversies