Suchergebnisse

The power of the government rather than limiting it), human rights and democracy. Therefore, this paper will explore the following research questions: 1. Is the current macro legal framework in Peru and Ecuador consistent with what is generally defined as Rule of Law or is it more related to what is known as Soft Rule of Law? 2. To what extend does a theoretical analysis support the prevailing of a Soft Rule of Law in Ecuador and Peru? This paper has been divided into seven sections. Section one refers to a theoretical revision of the term Rule of Law, section two presents on the concept of soft rule of law, section three focuses on human rights as an essential element of the Rule of Law, section four explores the interaction between democracy and the Rule of Law, section five refers to the challenges faced by the Rule of Law in a consolidated democracy, section six presents, as an example, a brief reflection on the current problems of Peru and Ecuador and finally the paper's conclusions are submitted. ; Campus Lima Centro

ZusammenfassungGezielte Angriffe auf die rechtsstaatlichen Elemente konstitutioneller Demokratie sind ein zentraler Bestandteil des weltweit zu beobachtenden "democratic backsliding". Teilweise lassen sie sich als Reaktion auf die mitunter unreflektierte, mechanistische Rechtsstaatsgläubigkeit der Demokratisierungsforschung und -politik der vergangenen 20 Jahre erklären. Allerdings missbrauchen autoritär-populistische Anti-Demokraten, die selbst in (noch) konsolidierten Demokratien gegenwärtig an Einfluss gewinnen, diese berechtigte Kritik, um ihre anti-pluralistischen Vorstellungen von einem angeblich homogenen Volkswillen und einer unumschränkten Mehrheitsherrschaft zu propagieren. Gegen diese Gefahren des "rule of law backsliding" hilft nur eine klare Benennung des oft negierten Spannungsverhältnisses zwischen Rechtsstaat und Demokratie und die konstruktive Suche nach einer Balance zwischen beiden Prinzipien im Rahmen des demokratischen Verfassungsstaates.

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 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.

Public law notions seen from shari'a law perspective have not been duly discussed in Islamic countries. In the discourse of rule of law in Islam we are confronted with a dilemma, moral values of a religion are not compatible with the coercive legislative measures. Thus the authentic application of shari'a rules is feasible only if a scientific hermeneutic of shari'a law is adapted to the exigencies of today's modern life, while the outlook on the boundaries of hermeneutic remains obscure. The first section of this article, introductory discourse, scrutinizes the fallacy of different theories on the notion of justice leading to the concept of "rule of law" in general. The second section focuses on the rule of law in Islam. Concluding ideas are presented in the final section, conclusion.