Is There a Rational Justification for Punishing an Accomplished Crime More Severely than an Attempted Crime? A Comment on Prof. Dr. Bjorn Burkhardt's Paper
In: Brigham Young U.J. of Public Law (1990), pp. 81-95
28 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Brigham Young U.J. of Public Law (1990), pp. 81-95
SSRN
In: Innere Sicherheit im europäischen Vergleich: Sicherheitsdenken, Sicherheitskonzepte und Sicherheitsarchitektur im Wandel, S. 203-215
SSRN
SSRN
In: המשפט יא, 55, 2007
SSRN
In: Israel affairs, Band 7, Heft 4, S. 100-132
ISSN: 1743-9086
In: Israel affairs, Band 7, Heft 4, S. 100-132
ISSN: 1353-7121
In: Israel affairs, Band 7, Heft 4: Public policy in Israel, S. 100-132
ISSN: 1353-7121
In seiner Funktion als "High Court of Justice" ist der israelische Supreme Court die einzige und höchste Instanz für Eingaben der Bürger gegen Verwaltungshandlungen. Der Beitrag zeigt am Beispiel richtungsweisender Urteile in Fragen der Gleichstellung von Frauen, wie der Oberste Gerichtshof seine Zuständigkeit benutzt, um gestaltend auf die sozialen Normen der öffentlichen Politik einzuwirken. (DÜI-Hns)
World Affairs Online
In: תפקידו של התובע בהליך פלילי פלילים ה 173, 1996
SSRN
SSRN
In: Law & ethics of human rights, Band 14, Heft 1, S. 125-152
ISSN: 1938-2545
Abstract
Around the world, many liberal democracies are facing in recent years serious challenges and threats emanating inter alia from the rise of political populism. Such challenges and threats are feeding an almost existential discourse about the crisis of democracy, and recent legal and political developments in Israel aimed at weakening the power of the Supreme Court and other rule of law institutions have also been described in such terms. This Article primarily intends to explore the relevance of the discourse surrounding the decline of liberal democracy, and its possible relevance for Israeli democracy, by examining the principal similarities and differences between specific legislative and administrative measures recently taken or contemplated in Israel and in two Central European states: Poland and Hungary. We focus on three sets of illiberal measures adopted or contemplated in Hungary, Poland, and Israel: (i) measures directed at limiting the power of the judiciary; (ii) measures intended to restrict the operation of civil society organizations; and (iii) measures directed at curbing dissent to governmental policies and at influencing the discourse in the media and academia. Although Israeli democratic institutions still retain much of their independence and vitality, we nonetheless find some degree of similarity between measures taken or contemplated by Hungary, Poland, and Israel, despite the many differences between their legal systems, historical contexts, political cultures, and the distinct stages of backsliding they seem to experience.
In: Law & Ethics of Human Rights 2020; 14(1): 125–152
SSRN
In: Israel studies review, Band 26, Heft 1, S. 4-11
ISSN: 2159-0389
In: Israel Law Review Vol 44 (2012), 143-167
SSRN