Search results for: federal supreme court

Authors: Edoba Bright Omoregie

Abstract:

Nigeria became a federation in 1954 six years before it gained independence away from British colonial rule. The country has remained a federation since then despite the challenging circumstances of military rule and civil strife which have tasked its federal credentials. Since 1961, when it first decided a federalism dispute, cases over vertical and horizontal powers have inundated the country’s Supreme Court. In its current practice of federalism after democratic rule was resumed in 1999, the country has witnessed a spell of intergovernmental disputes over a good number of federalism issues. Such conflicts have eventually found their way to the Supreme Court for resolution, not as a final appellate court (which it is in other non-federal matters) but as a court of first and final instance following the constitutional provision granting the court such power. However, in April 2014 one of such disputes was denied hearing by the court when it declined original jurisdiction to determine the matter. The suit was instituted by one state of the federation against the federal government and the other 35 states challenging the collection of value added tax (a consumption tax)on certain goods and services within the state. The paper appraises the rationale of the court’s decision and reason that its decision to decline jurisdiction is the result of an avoidable misunderstanding of the dual sovereignty instituted by the federal system of Nigeria as well as a misconception of the role which the court is constitutionally assigned to play in resolving intergovernmental schisms in the federal system.

Keywords: dual sovereignty, federalism, intergovernmental conflict, Supreme Court

Procedia PDF Downloads 518

Authors: Shaho Ghafur Ahmed

Abstract:

The right to self-determination of peoples is a fundamental human right recognized by the principles of international law. It could be embodied in the internal level in the form of federalism. Most federal constitutions prevented the secession of constituent entities, while some remained silent, as the case of Iraq, and rare instances of them recognize it. But, after the failure of federalism, these entities seek to separate whenever the opportunity arises. In several cases, they have resort to peaceful methods in some others they resort to force. The constitutional Supreme Court, which guaranty the unity and integrity of the State, often prevent these attempts. After not a commitment of federalism in Iraq, which has been founded since 2004, the Kurdistan region, as the only federated entity, has conducted a unilateral referendum on 25 September 2017 for its independence. The Iraqi government refused it. The Iraqi Federal Supreme Court, through interpreting the constitutional provisions, decided that this referendum and it’s purposes, which was the independence of the region, was unconstitutional. Subsequently, the Iraqi government used forces and blockaded the region so as to force it to turn off this process. So, in this paper, the right to self-determination of the peoples in federated entities and its obstacles will be discussed through the comparative legal basis and analyzing the decisions of the Federal Constitutional Courts. We will compare the role that the Supreme Court of Canada played regarding the referendum that operated in Quebec in 1995, in which it refused only the unilaterally attempts for the independence of this province. While, in the case of the Kurdistan region, the Iraqi Federal Supreme Court has definitively refused this right. No measures were taken by this Court to protect the region from the Iraqi government reactions. This decision led to the questioning of the neutrality of this Court. So, from the point of view of the Kurdistan region, this Court became a political instrument to prevent it to be independent in the international community, in the absence of a clear constitutional provision, through an abstract and an incomplete interpretation of federal constitutional provisions.

Keywords: right of self-determination, federal supreme court, supremacy of federal constitution

Procedia PDF Downloads 135

Authors: Joseph Ignagni, Rebecca Deen

Abstract:

This paper analyzes the extent to which the U.S. Supreme Court votes to support the position of the United States in cases where the government is a party to the litigation. This study considers the relationship between the Solicitor General’s Office and the U.S. Supreme Court. The Solicitor General has the unique position of being the representative of the Executive Branch and the U.S. government before the Supreme Court. While a great deal of research has looked at the Solicitor General’s success as a “friend of the court,” far less has considered this relationship when the U.S. is a direct party in the litigation. This paper investigates the success rate of the Solicitor General’s Office in these cases. We find that there is considerable variation in the U.S. government’s success rate before the Court depending on the issue, Supreme Court leadership, the ideological direction of the Court and whether the U.S. approached the Court as a petitioner or respondent. We conduct our analysis on the Court’s decisions from 1953-2009. This study adds to our understanding of checks and balances, separation of powers, and inter-institutional relationships between the branches of the federal government of the United States.

Keywords: U.S. president, solicitor general, U.S. Supreme Court, separation of power, checks and balances

Procedia PDF Downloads 325

Authors: Fethia Braik

Abstract:

This paper summarizes the history of the US Supreme Court. It did not enjoy today’s status. It did neither control legislation nor the executive power. It was until 1803, during Marshall’s term, that it gained the pride of ruling over the constitutionality of acts be they federal or local, congressional or presidential. The Chief Justice, whether intended or not, vested such power in the supreme judicial institution via the case of Marbury v. Madison. Such power, nevertheless, had not been exercised for many years, till the Dred Scott case.

Keywords: Judiciary Acts 1789, 1801, chief justice, associate justice, justice of peace, review of constitutionality of acts, Jay court, Ellsworth court, Marshall court

Procedia PDF Downloads 271

Authors: Shreeya Umashankar

Abstract:

The Supreme Court of India has emerged as the most powerful organ of State and amongst the foremost constitutional courts in the world through the instrument of Public Interest Litigation (PIL), the exercise of writ jurisdiction and the expansive interpretation of fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India. Judicial activism impinging on every facet of governance has become the norm in recent times. This paper traces the evolution of judicial activism since Independence through pronouncements of the Supreme Court. It brings out distinct phases in this evolution– the initial phase of judicial restraint, the first phase of an activist judiciary where the Supreme Court primarily was concerned with protection of fundamental rights and humane treatment of citizens; the second phase where the Supreme Court took keen interest in preservation and protection of the environment; the third phase where the Supreme Court extended its reach into the socio-economic arena and the fourth phase when issues of transparency and probity in governance led to interventions by the Supreme Court. The paper illustrates through judgements of the Supreme Court that the instrument of the PIL and the exercise of writ jurisdiction by the Supreme Court go beyond the traditional postulates of judicial processes and political theory on separation of powers between the organs of State.

Keywords: fundamental rights, judicial activism, public interest litigation, Supreme Court of India

Procedia PDF Downloads 588

Authors: Júlia Massadas

Abstract:

The objective of this paper is to analyze the role played by the institute of the public hearings in the Brazilian Supreme Court. The public hearings are regulated since 1999 by the Brazilian Laws nº 9.868, nº 9.882 and by the Intern Regiment of the Brazilian Supreme Court. According to this legislation, the public hearings are supposed to be called when a matter of circumstance of fact must be clarified, what can be done through the hearing of the testimonies of persons with expertise and authority in the theme related to the cause. This work aims to investigate what is the role played by the public hearings and by the experts in the Brazilian Supreme Court. The hypothesis of this research is that: (I) The public hearings in the Brazilian Supreme Court are used to uphold a rhetoric of a democratic legitimacy of the Court`s decisions; (II) The Legislative intentions have been distorted. To test this hypothesis, the adopted methodology involves an empirical study of the Brazilian jurisprudence. As a conclusion, it follows that the public hearings convened by the Brazilian Supreme Court do not correspond, in practice, to the role assigned to them by the Congress since they do not serve properly to epistemic interests. The public hearings not only do not legitimate democratically the decisions, but also, do not properly clarify technical issues.

Keywords: Brazilian Supreme Court, constitutional law, public hearings, epistemic competence, legal authority

Procedia PDF Downloads 374

Authors: Joseph Ignagni, Rebecca Deen

Abstract:

In this study, the decision making of the Justices of the United States Supreme Court will be considered in terms of constrained maximization and cognitive-cybernetic theory. This paper will integrate research in such fields as law, psychology, political science, economics and decision-making theory. It will be argued that due to its heavy workload, the Supreme Court may be forced to make decisions in a boundedly rational manner. The ideas and theory put forward here will be considered in the area of the Court’s decisions involving religion. Therefore, the cases involving the U.S. Constitution’s Free Exercise Clause and Establishment Clause will be analyzed.

Keywords: bounded rationality, cognitive-cybernetic, US supreme court, religion

Procedia PDF Downloads 344

Authors: Gabrielle Pilliat

Abstract:

The Supreme Court of Canada rendered unconstitutional the sections of the Canadian Criminal Code which prohibited the Physician-assisted suicide in February 2015. However, in 1993, the same Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Physician-assisted suicide should remain absolutely prohibited. In the light of these historical facts, we will explore how the Supreme Court of Canada was able to make two different decisions 20 years apart. To understand how Canada could rule so differently between 1993 and 2015 about Physician-assisted suicide, we will analyze the content of the Supreme Court of Canada decisions’ discourse of 1993 and of 2015. Our preliminary results indicate that A) the patient autonomy (or the personal choice) has taken over the idea of the preservation of life (or the sacred character of life) in 2015. B) That between 1993 and 2015, the physician is seen differently by the Judges; like an abusive murderer in 1993 and like an objective evaluator in 2015. C) That the patient is seen as a victim in 1993 and more like a hero in 2015.

Keywords: physician-assisted suicide, patient autonomy, choice, sacred character of life, dignity

Procedia PDF Downloads 241

Authors: Rafael Tedrus Bento

Abstract:

The analysis of proportionality as a test is raised as a basic foundation for the achievement of Fundamental Rights. We used legal dogmatics and empirical analysis to seek the expected results, from the reading of the RV Oakes trial by the Supreme Court of Canada. In cases involving freedom of expression, two tests are used to resolve disputes. The first examines whether, in fact, the case can be characterized as a violation of freedom of expression; the second assesses whether this violation can be justified by the reasonable limit clause. This test was defined in the RV Oakes trial by the Supreme Court of Canada, concluding with the Oakes Test, used worldwide as a proportionality test. Resulting is a proportionality between the effects of the limiting measure and the objective - the more serious the harmful effects of a measure, the more important the objective must be.

Keywords: Oakes, proportionality, fundamental rights, Supreme Court of Canada

Procedia PDF Downloads 112

Authors: Uluhan Berk Ondul

Abstract:

This article aims to shed light on the new stage of transitional justice in Argentina through examining the representations of the 2x1 decision of the Supreme Court and Santiago Maldonado’s Disappearance in the newspaper, La Nación. The two events hold the key to understanding Argentina’s journey since return to democracy as they are about the same crimes of the dictatorship, namely, the forced disappearance of civilians and the subsequent impunity that follows. In the case of a convicted torturer, The Supreme Court of Argentina ruled on 3rd of May 2017 that the days spent in preventive detention after two years should be counted double for the overall sentence. This court decision was met with severe resistance from the members of the parliament as well as the human rights movement. The second item on the list still continues and divides the country into two camps: (1) those who think that the police force has committed another act of forced disappearance in the case of activist Santiago Maldonado and (2) the others who blame the peronistas (the party and supporters of the ex-president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner) of using this subject as a means to score political points. As a newspaper known for its proximity to the current administration, La Nación offers an insight to the direction of the country and also demonstrates how the neoliberal mindset works. The results of the study show that the transitional justice process in Argentina is far from being complete as the Promise of Nunca Más is still not a shared value but a political statement.

Keywords: Argentina, Fallo 2x1, impunity, Santiago Maldonado, transitional justice

Procedia PDF Downloads 200

Authors: Timothy T. Hsieh

Abstract:

Current patent venue transfer laws under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) e.g., the Gilbert factors from Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501 (1947) are too malleable in that they often lead to frequent mandamus orders from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) overturning district court rulings on venue transfer motions. Thus, this paper proposes a more robust two-step burden-shifting framework that replaces the eight Gilbert factors. Moreover, a brief history of venue transfer patterns in the seven most active federal patent district courts is covered, with special focus devoted to the venue transfer orders from Judge Alan D Albright of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. A comprehensive data summary of 45 case sets where the Federal Circuit ruled on writs of mandamus involving Judge Albright’s transfer orders is subsequently provided, with coverage summaries of certain cases including four precedential ones from the Federal Circuit. This proposed two-step burden shifting framework is then applied to these venue transfer cases, as well as Federal Circuit mandamus orders ruling on those decisions. Finally, alternative approaches to remedying the frequent reversals for venue transfer will be discussed, including potential legislative solutions, adjustments to common law framework approaches to venue transfer, deference to the inherent powers of Article III U.S. District Judge, and a unified federal patent district court. Overall, this paper seeks to offer a more robust and consistent three-step burden-shifting framework for venue transfer and for the Federal Circuit to follow in administering mandamus orders, which might change somewhat in light of Western District of Texas Chief Judge Orlando Garcia’s order on redistributing Judge Albright’s patent cases.

Keywords: Patent law, venue, judge Alan Albright, minimum contacts, western district of Texas

Procedia PDF Downloads 68

Authors: Valentina Dotto

Abstract:

Climate change cases used to take the form of statutory disputes rather than constitutional or common law disputes. This changed in 2015, with the Urgenda Climate case in the Netherlands (Urgenda Foundation v. The State of the Netherlands, C/09/456689/HAZA 13-1396) and, the Juliana case in the U.S. (United States v. U.S. District Court for District of Oregon, 17-71692, 9th Cir.). The two cases represent a new type of climate litigation, the claims brought against the federal government were in fact grounded in constitutional rights. The complaints used the Doctrine of Public Trust as a cornerstone for the lawsuits asserting that government's actions against climate change failed to protect essential public trust resources; thus, violating a generation's constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property. The Public Trust Doctrine –a quintessentially American legal concept-, reserved to the States by virtue of the 9th and 10th amendment of the federal Constitution, gives them considerable jurisdiction over natural resources and has been refined by a number of Supreme Court rulings. The Juliana case exemplifies the Doctrine’s evolutionary nature because it attempts to apply it to the federal government, and establish a right to a climate system capable of sustaining human life as a fundamental right protected by a substantive due process. Furthermore, the flexibility of the Doctrine makes it permissible to be applied to a variety of different legal systems as in the Urgenda case. At the very heart of the lawsuits stands the question of who owns the Earth resources and, to what extent the general public can claim the services that the Earth provides as common property. By employing the widest possible definition of the Doctrine of Public Trust these lawsuits tried to redefine environmental resources as a collective right of all people. By doing case analysis, the paper explores how these cases can contribute to widening the public access to information and broadening the public voice in decision making as well as providing a precedent to equal access in seeking justice and redress from environmental failures.

Keywords: climate change, doctrine of public trust, environmental democracy, Juliana case, Urgenda climate case

Procedia PDF Downloads 145

Authors: Zaid Haris

Abstract:

Since the beginning of time, transgender people have faced difficult circumstances, particularly in Pakistan. They have experienced discrimination, physical abuse, sexual assault, and murder in their lives. In response to their complaints, the Pakistani Supreme Court established a landmark that enables them to participate in society on an equal base. As a result, transgendered people living all around Pakistan have seen their legal, political, and cultural advocacy blossom since 2009. In order to provide and defend the human rights of Pakistan's transgender persons, this paper aims to identify and analyse the constitutional and legal framework set out there. The Supreme Court's momentous decision sparked legal reform in the nation for these rights, most notably the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act of 2017, a bill that was filed in Parliament. The implementation of the rights granted to transgender people in Pakistan, whether it relates to education, health, or any other area, requires close inspection. Additionally, for society to be accepting and inclusive, a significant and radical change in behaviour is required. This paper also includes the interviews of a few transgenders from Pakistan.

Keywords: discrimination, islam, pakistan, physical abuse, sexual assault, transgenders

Procedia PDF Downloads 89

Authors: Dahiru Jafaru Usman

Abstract:

Nigerian courts have been sanctioned by a plethora of authorities to always employ the literal rule in interpreting statutes where the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous. This cardinal rule of interpretation appears not to be employed on Shari'ah issues in Nigeria. This is more pronounced in the interpretation of the jurisdiction of the Shari'ah Court of Appeal (hereinafter the court). The paper doctrinally assesses the judicial attitude of Nigerian appellate courts towards the construction of Section 277 of the 1999 Constitution as amended and other relevant statutory enactments by the State Houses of Assembly. The paper argues that a careful examination of the wordings of the constitution on the jurisdiction of the court literally reveals the intention of the constitutional drafters empowering the National Assembly and States' House of Assemblies to add to the itemised jurisdictional areas of the court other matters not mentioned. The paper found that the appellate courts failed in their construction of the constitutional provisions to accord the words and phrases used in the establishment, jurisdiction, and quorum sections of the court their ordinary and grammatical meaning. This results in consistent limitation of the jurisdiction of the court to matters of Islamic personal law. This remains so even when Decree No. 26 of 1986 was in force suspending and amending the provisions of the 1979 Constitution deleting the word 'personal' in the suspended Nigerian Constitutions. In order not to render section 277 futile, the paper recommends that appellate courts in Nigeria should as required by rules of statutory interpretation adopt literal and ordinary grammatical meaning in interpreting constitutional provisions on the jurisdiction of the court. It is further recommended that appellate courts must interpret the provisions of the 1999 constitution in a manner not to frustrate the several decades' yearnings of the Muslims for a court that would hear all their appellate criminal and civil matters on the path of Shari'ah from the lowest court to the highest. This is a duty the Nigerian Supreme Court placed on their shoulders.

Keywords: interpretation of statutes, jurisdiction, literal rule, Nigeria, Shari'ah Court of Appeal, 1999 Constitution

Procedia PDF Downloads 148

Authors: Ayyoub Jamali

Abstract:

At the first glance, it seems that the African Court on Human and People’s Rights has achieved a tremendous development in the protection of human rights in Africa. Since its first judgement in 2009, the court has taken a robust approach/ assertive stance, showing its strength by finding states to be in violation of the Africana Charter and other human rights treaties. This paper seeks to discuss various challenges and resistance that the Court has faced since the adoption of the Founding Protocol to the Establishment of the African Court on Human and People’s Rights. The outcome of the paper casts shadow on the legitimacy and effectiveness of the African Court as the guarantor of human rights within the African continent.

Keywords: African Court on Human and People’s Rights, African Union, African regional human rights system, compliance

Procedia PDF Downloads 117

Authors: Sadiya S. Silvee

Abstract:

Generally, the decision of the higher court is binding on its subordinate courts. As provided in Article 111 of the Constitution, 'the law declared by the Appellate Division (AD) shall be binding on the High Court Division (HCD) and the law declared by either division of the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts subordinate to it.' This means the judicial discipline requires the HCD to follow the decision of the AD and that it is necessary for the lower tiers of courts to accept the decision of the higher tiers as a binding precedent. Analyzing the application of Article 111 of the Constitution in the criminal justice system as a sentencing guideline, the paper, by examining whether there is any consistency in decision between one HC Bench and another HC Bench, explores whether HCD can per incuriam its previous decision. In doing so, the Death Reference (DR) Cases are contemplated. Furthermore, the paper shall examine whether the Court of Session follows the decision of the HCD while using their discretion to make the choice between death and imprisonment for life under section 302 of PC. The paper argues due to the absence of any specific direction for sentencing and inconsistency in jurisprudence among the HCD; the subordinate courts are in a dilemma.

Keywords: death reference, sentencing factor, sentencing guideline, criminal justice system and constitution

Procedia PDF Downloads 132

Authors: Valentina Tereshkova

Abstract:

The paper shows how the relationship between international law and national sovereignty is viewed through the implementation of European Court of Human Right judgments. Methodology: Сonclusions are based on a survey of representatives of the legislative authorities and judges of the Krasnoyarsk region, the Rostov region, Sverdlovsk region and Tver region. The paper assesses the activities of the Russian Constitutional Court from 1998 to 2015 related to the establishment of the implementation mechanism and the Russian Constitutional Court judgments of 14.07.2015, № 21-P and of 19.04.2016, № 12-P where the Constitutional Court stated the impossibility of executing ECtHR judgments. I. Implementation of ECHR judgments by courts and other authorities. Despite the publication of the report of the RF Ministry of Justice on the implementation, we could not find any formal information on the Russian policy of the ECtHR judgment implementation. Using the results of the survey, the paper shows the effect of ECtHR judgments on law and legal practice in Russia. II. Implementation of ECHR judgments by Russian Constitutional Court. Russian Constitutional Court had implemented the ECtHR judgments. However, the Court determined on July, 14, 2015 its competence to consider the question of implementation of ECHR judgments. Then, it stated that the execution of the judgment [Anchugov and Gladkov case] was impossible because the Russian Constitution has the highest legal force on April, 19, 2016. Recently the CE Committee of Ministers asked Russia to provide ‘without further delay’ a compensation plan for the Yukos case. On November 11, 2016, Constitutional Court accepted a request from the Ministry of Justice to consider the possibility of execution of the ECtHR judgment in the Yukos case. Such a request has been made possible due to a lack of implementation mechanism. Conclusion: ECtHR judgments are as an effective tool to solve the structural problems of a legal system. However, Russian experts consider the ECHR as a tool of protection of individual rights. The paper shows link between the survey results and the absence of the implementation mechanism. New Article 104 par. 2 and Article 106 par. 2 of the Federal Law of the Constitutional Court are in conflict with international obligations of the Convention on the Law on Treaties 1969 and Article 46 ECHR. Nevertheless, a dialogue may be possible between Constitutional Court and the ECtHR. In its judgment [19.04.2016] the Constitutional Court determined that the general measures to ensure fairness, proportionality and differentiation of the restrictions of voting rights were possible in judicial practice. It also stated the federal legislator had the power ‘to optimize the system of Russian criminal penalties’. Despite the fact that the Constitutional Court presented the Görgülü case [Görgülü v Germany] as an example of non-execution of the ECtHR judgment, the paper proposes to draw on the experience of German Constitutional Court, which in the Görgülü case, on the one hand, stressed national sovereignty and, on the other hand, took advantage of this sovereignty, to resolve the issue in accordance with the ECHR.

Keywords: implementation of ECtHR judgments, sovereignty, supranational jurisdictions, principle of subsidiarity

Procedia PDF Downloads 165

Authors: Henrique Rangel, Alexandre Fadel, Igor De Lazari, Bianca Neri, Carlos Bolonha

Abstract:

This paper promotes a comparative analysis of American and Brazilian models of federalism assuming their levels of political centralization as main criterion. The central problem faced herein is the Brazilian approach of Unitarian regime. Although the hegemony of federative form after 1989, Brazil had a historical frame of political centralization that remains under the 1988 constitutional regime. Meanwhile, United States framed a federalism in which States absorb significant authorities. The hypothesis holds that the amount of alternative criteria of federalization – which can generate political centralization –, and the way they are upheld on judicial review, are crucial to understand the levels of political centralization achieved in each model. To test this hypothesis, the research is conducted by a methodology temporally delimited to 1994-2014 period. Three paradigmatic precedents of U.S. Supreme Court were selected: United States vs. Morrison (2000), on gender-motivated violence, Gonzales vs. Raich (2005), on medical use of marijuana, and United States vs. Lopez (1995), on firearm possession on scholar zones. These most relevant cases over federalism in the recent activity of Supreme Court indicates a determinant parameter of deliberation: the commerce clause. After observe the criterion used to permit or prohibit the political centralization in America, the Brazilian normative context is presented. In this sense, it is possible to identify the eventual legal treatment these controversies could receive in this Country. The decision-making reveals some deliberative parameters, which characterizes each federative model. At the end of research, the precedents of Rehnquist Court promote a broad revival of federalism debate, establishing the commerce clause as a secure criterion to uphold or not the necessity of centralization – even with decisions considered conservative. Otherwise, the Brazilian federalism solves them controversies upon in a formalist fashion, within numerous and comprehensive – sometimes casuistic too – normative devices, oriented to make an intense centralization. The aim of this work is indicate how jurisdictional federalism found in United States can preserve a consistent model with States robustly autonomous, while Brazil gives preference to normative mechanisms designed to starts from centralization.

Keywords: constitutional design, federalism, U.S. Supreme Court, legislative authority

Procedia PDF Downloads 490

Authors: Natasha Venter

Abstract:

Recent publications, including Truth to Power by André de Ruyter, Gangster State by Pieter-Louis Myburgh, and Enemy of the People by Pieter du Toit and Adriaan Basson, expose alleged corrupt acts by high-ranking members of State, as well as those in charge of State-owned entities. These literary contributions have gripped the attention of a nation plagued by corruption scandals and the alleged misappropriation of state funds on an almost daily basis. The books, however, leave the populace with the burning question of why “nothing happens” to these individuals who are so directly implicated in the literature. The process followed by the State in the largest successful prosecution of a corrupt state official, Jackie Selebi, sheds some light as to how such high-ranking persons might be brought to book. The Supreme Court of Appeal’s definition of corruption and the interpretation of the facts (as presented by the State prosecutors) by the court is also valuable. Furthermore, some insight into the laws that criminalise corruption in South Africa, as well as applicable international instruments, is necessary. South Africa is ranked as the 70th most corrupt country out of 180 countries by Transparency International’s 2021 Corruption Perceptions Index. This is worrisome as South Africa is a signatory of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (2004) and, as such, has certain international obligations to fulfil. However, if the political will to prosecute corrupt officials in South Africa exists, there are laws and instruments available to punish these individuals. This would not only vindicate the authors of literature about corruption in the country but also restore the hope of South Africans that, ultimately, crime does not pay.

Keywords: corruption, eskom, state capture, government, literature, united nations, law, legal, Jackie selebi, supreme court of appeal

Procedia PDF Downloads 60

Authors: Tien Wei Daniel Hwang

Abstract:

The computer program inventors, particularly in Fintech, are unwilling to apply for patents in Taiwan after 2014. Passing the ‘statutory subject matter eligibility’ test and becoming the system patent are not the only cause to the reduction in the number of application. Taiwanese court needs to resolve whether the defendants had ‘used’ that software patent in patent direct infringement suit. Both 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) and article 58 paragraph 2 of Taiwan Patent Law don’t define the meaning of ‘use’ in the statutes. Centillion Data Sys., LLC v. Qwest Commc’ns Int’l, Inc. reconsidered the meaning of ‘use’ in system patent infringement, and held that ‘a party must put the invention into service, i.e., control the system as a whole and obtain benefit from it.’ In Taiwan, Intellectual Property Office, Ministry of Economic Affairs, has explained that ‘using’ the patent is ‘achieving the technical effect of the patent.’ Nonetheless, this definition is too broad to apply to not only the software patent but also the traditional patent. To supply the friendly environment for Fintech corporations, this article aims to let Taiwanese court realize why and how United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division and United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit defined the meaning of ‘use’ in 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). However, this definition is so lax and confuses many defendants in United States. Accordingly, this article indicates the elements in Taiwan Patent Law are different with 35 U.S.C. § 271(a), so Taiwanese court can follow the interpretation of ‘use’ in Centillion Data case without the same obstacle.

Keywords: direct infringement, FinTech, software patent, use

Procedia PDF Downloads 268

Authors: Hamid Vahidkia

Abstract:

Central to the World Court’s mission is the assurance of universal custom “as prove of a common hone acknowledged as law.” Understudies of the Court’s law have long been mindful that the Court has been superior at applying standard law than characterizing it. However until Nicaragua v. Joined together States, small hurt was done. For within the strongly challenged cases earlier to Nicaragua, the Court overseen to inspire commonalities in factious structure that floated its decisions toward the standard standards certain in state hone. The Court’s need of hypothetical unequivocality basically implied that a career opportunity emerged for a few eyewitnesses like me to endeavor to supply the lost hypothesis of custom.

Keywords: law, international law, jurisdication, customary

Procedia PDF Downloads 18

Authors: Thu Thuy Nguyen

Abstract:

In recent years, mediation has gained a great attention from many jurisdictions thanks to its advantages. With respect to Asia, mediation has a long history of development in this region with various types to amicably settle disputes in civil and commercial issues. The modern mediation system in several Asian countries and territories comprises three main categories, namely court-annexed mediation, mediation within arbitral proceedings and institutional mediation. Court-annexed mediation (or in-court mediation) is mediation conducted by the court in the course of judicial procedures. In dealing with cross-border business disputes, in-court mediation exposes a number of advantages in comparison with two other types of mediation, especially in terms of enforcement of final result. However, the confidentiality of mediation process in subsequent judicial proceedings, qualifications of court judges and the issue of recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment are normally seen as drawbacks of court-annexed mediation as in court-annexed mediation judges will be casts as dual roles as both mediator and ultimate adjudicator in the same dispute. This paper will examine the strengths and weaknesses of in-court mediation in settling transnational business disputes in selected Asian countries, including China, Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore and Vietnam.

Keywords: court-annexed mediation, international commercial disputes, Asia, strengths and weaknesses

Procedia PDF Downloads 280

Authors: S. Vlasyan

Abstract:

The article deals with the implementation of the right to self-determination of peoples on the example of Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. The problem of correlation of two fundamental principles of international law i. e. territorial integrity and the right to self-determination of peoples is considered to be one of the vital issues in the field of international law for several decades. So, in this article, the author analyzes the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada regarding specific issues of secession of Quebec from Canada, as well as the decision of the International Court of Justice in the case concerning East Timor (Portugal v. Australia), and in the case of Western Sahara. The author formulates legal conditions of Nagorno-Karabakh secession.

Keywords: right of self-determination, territorial integrity, the principles of International Law, Nagorno-Karabakh Republic

Procedia PDF Downloads 373

Authors: Aishwarya Pothula

Abstract:

Euthanasia in India is a politically dormant policy issue in the sense that discussions around it are sporadic in nature (usually with developments in specific cases) and it stays as a dominant issue in the public domain for a fleeting period. In other words, it is a non-political issue that has been unable to successfully get on the policy agenda. This paper studies how the Supreme Court of India (SC) plays a role in euthanasia’s policy making. In 2011, the SC independently put a law in place that legalized passive euthanasia through its judgement in the Aruna Shanbaug v. Union of India case. According to this, it is no longer illegal to withhold/withdraw a patient’s medical treatment in certain cases. This judgement, therefore, is the empirical focus of this paper. The paper essentially employs two techniques of discourse analysis to study the SC’s system of argumentation. The two methods, Text Analysis using Gasper’s Analysis Table and Frame Analysis – are complemented by two discourse techniques called metaphor analysis and lexical analysis. The framework within which the analysis is conducted lies in 1) the judicial process of India, i.e. the SC procedures and the Constitutional rules and provisions, and 2) John W. Kingdon’s theory of policy windows and policy entrepreneurs. The results of this paper are three-fold: first, the SC dismiss the petitioner’s request for passive euthanasia on inadequate and weak grounds, thereby setting no precedent for the historic law they put in place. In other words, they leave the decision open for the Parliament to act upon. Hence the judgement, as opposed to arguments by many, is by no means an instance of judicial activism/overreach. Second, they define euthanasia in a way that resonates with existing broader societal themes. They combine this with a remarkable use of authoritative and protective tones/stances to settle at an intermediate position that balances the possible opposition to their role in the process and what they (perhaps) perceive to be an optimal solution. Third, they soften up the policy community (including the public) to the idea of passive euthanasia leading it towards a Parliamentarian legislation. They achieve this by shaping prevalent principles, provisions and worldviews through an astute use of the legal instruments at their disposal. This paper refers to this unconventional role of the SC as ‘judicial entrepreneurship’ which is also the first scholarly contribution towards research on euthanasia as a policy issue in India.

Keywords: argumentation analysis, Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug, discourse analysis, euthanasia, judicial entrepreneurship, policy-making process, supreme court of India

Procedia PDF Downloads 231

Authors: Timothy Fwa Yerima

Abstract:

This paper evaluates the development of human rights jurisprudence in Africa by the ECOWAS Court of Justice. It traces that though ECOWAS was not established with the aim of promoting and protecting human rights as the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights, no doubt, the 1991 ECOWAS Court Protocol and the 1993 ECOWAS Revised Treaty give the ECOWAS Court its human rights mandate. The paper, however, points out that despite the availability of these two Laws, the ECOWAS Court had difficulty in its human rights mandate, in view of the twin problems of lack of access to the Court by private parties and personal jurisdiction of the Court to entertain cases filed by private parties. The paper considers the 2005 Supplementary Protocol, not only as an effective legal framework in West African Sub-Region that tackles these problems in human rights cases but also a strong foundation upon which the Court has been developing human rights jurisprudence in Africa through the interpretation and application of this Law and other sources of Law of the Court. After a thorough analysis of some principles laid down by the ECOWAS Court so far, the paper observes that human rights jurisprudence in Africa is growing rapidly; depicting that though the ECOWAS Court initially had difficulty in its human rights mandate, today it has a bright and visionary landing. The paper concludes that West African Sub-Region will witness a more effective performance of the ECOWAS Court if some of its challenges are tackled.

Keywords: access, African human rights, ECOWAS court of justice, jurisprudence, personal jurisdiction

Procedia PDF Downloads 322

Authors: Hasan Alrashid

Abstract:

The 2005 Hague Convention seeks to ensure legal certainty and predictability between parties in international business transactions. It harmonies exclusive choice of court agreements at the international level between parties to commercial transactions and to govern the recognition and enforcement of judgments resulting from proceedings based on such agreements to promote international trade and investment. Although the choice of court agreements is significant in international business transactions, the United Arab Emirates refuse to recognise it by Article 24 of the Federal Law No. 11 of 1992 of the Civil Procedure Code. A review of judicial judgments in United Arab Emirates up to the present day has revealed that several cases appeared before the Court in different states of United Arab Emirates regarding the recognition of exclusive choice of court agreements. In all the cases, the courts regarded the exclusive choice of court agreements as a direct assault on state authority and sovereignty and refused categorically to recognize choice of court agreements by refusing to stay proceedings in favor of the foreign chosen court. This has created uncertainty and unpredictability in international business transaction in the United Arab Emirates. In June 2011, the first Gulf Judicial Seminar on Cross-Frontier Legal Cooperation in Civil and Commercial Matters was held in Doha, Qatar. The Permanent Bureau of the Hague Conference attended the conference and invited the states of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) namely, The United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar and Kuwait to adopt some of the Hague Conventions, one of which was the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements. One of the recommendations of the conference was that the GCC states should research ‘the benefits of predictability and legal certainty provided by the 2005 Convention on Choice of Court Agreements and its resulting advantages for cross-border trade and investment’ for possible adoption of the Hague Convention. Up to today, no further step has been taken by the any of the GCC states to adapt the Hague Convention nor did they conduct research on the benefits of predictability and legal certainty in international business transactions. This paper will argue that the approach regarding the recognition of choice of court agreements in United Arab Emirates states can be improved in order to help the parties in international business transactions avoid parallel litigation and ensure legal certainty and predictability. The focus will be the uncertainty and gaps regarding the choice of court agreements in the United Arab Emirates states. The Hague Convention on choice of court agreements and the importance of harmonisation of the rules of choice of court agreements at international level will also be discussed. Finally, The feasibility and desirability of recognizing choice of court agreements in United Arab Emirates legal system by becoming a party to the Hague Convention will be evaluated.

Keywords: choice of court agreements, party autonomy, public authority, sovereignty

Procedia PDF Downloads 212

Authors: Myles Frederick McLellan

Abstract:

When errors in the criminal justice process lead to wrongful convictions and miscarriages of justice, it falls upon the State to make reparation for the egregious harms brought to innocent individuals. Of all the remedies available to seek compensation, private and public law litigation against the police and prosecution services is the most widely used. Unfortunately, all levels of court including the Supreme Court of Canada have explicitly endorsed the prospect of striking out or dismissing these claims at the outset on an expedited basis. The burden on agents of the State as defendants to succeed on motions for such relief is so low that very few actions will survive to give an innocent accused his or her day in court. This paper will be a quantitative and qualitative analysis on the occurrence and success of motions to strike and dismiss to forestall financial recovery for the damage caused when a criminal investigation and prosecution goes wrong. This paper will also include a comparative component on the private law systems at common law (e.g. USA, UK, Australia and New Zealand) with respect to the availability of a similar process to pre-emptively terminate litigation for the recovery of compensation to an innocent individual.

Keywords: compensation, innocence, miscarriages of justice, wrongful convictions

Procedia PDF Downloads 108

Authors: Tamir Michal

Abstract:

The subject of Bedouin dispersion has accompanied the State of Israel from the day of its establishment. From a legal point of view, this subject has offered a launchpad for creative judicial decisions. Thus, for example, the first court decision in Israel to recognize affirmative action (Avitan), dealt with a petition submitted by a Jew appealing the refusal of the State to recognize the Petitioner’s entitlement to the long-term lease of a plot designated for Bedouins. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that there existed a public interest in assisting Bedouin to establish permanent urban settlements, an interest which justifies giving them preference by selling them plots at subsidized prices. In another case (The Forum for Coexistence in the Negev) the Supreme Court extended equitable relief for the purpose of constructing a bridge, even though the construction infringed the Law, in order to allow the children of dispersed Bedouin to reach school. Against this background, the recent verdict, delivered during the Protective Edge military campaign, which dismissed a petition aimed at forcing the State to spread out Protective Structures in Bedouin villages in the Negev against the risk of being hit from missiles launched from Gaza (Abu Afash) is disappointing. Even if, in arguendo, no selective discrimination was involved in the State’s decision not to provide such protection, the decision, and its affirmation by the Court, is problematic when examined through the prism of the Theory of Recognition. The article analyses the issue by tools of theory of Recognition, according to which people develop their identities through mutual relations of recognition in different fields. In the social context, the path to recognition is cognitive respect, which is provided by means of legal rights. By seeing other participants in Society as bearers of rights and obligations, the individual develops an understanding of his legal condition as reflected in the attitude to others. Consequently, even if the Court’s decision may be justified on strict legal grounds, the fact that Jewish settlements were protected during the military operation, whereas Bedouin villages were not, is a setback in the struggle to make the Bedouin citizens with equal rights in Israeli society. As the Court held, ‘Beyond their protective function, the Migunit [Protective Structures] may make a moral and psychological contribution that should not be undervalued’. This contribution is one that the Bedouin did not receive in the Abu Afash verdict. The basic thesis is that the Court’s verdict analyzed above clearly demonstrates that the reliance on classical liberal instruments (e.g., equality) cannot secure full appreciation of all aspects of Bedouin life, and hence it can in fact prejudice them. Therefore, elements of the recognition theory should be added, in order to find the channel for cognitive dignity, thereby advancing the Bedouins’ ability to perceive themselves as equal human beings in the Israeli society.

Keywords: bedouin dispersion, cognitive respect, recognition theory, sustainable development

Procedia PDF Downloads 325

Authors: Phutthiwat Waiyawuththanapoom

Abstract:

This research is objected to study the pattern and channel of distribution of Ang Thong’s court doll OTOP product and try to develop the quality of distribution of the court doll product. The population of this research is 50 court doll manufacturers of Ang Thong’s court doll. The data and information was collected by using the questionnaire and use percentage, mean and standard deviation as an analysis tools. The distribution channel of Ang Thong’s court doll can be separated into 3 channels which are direct distribution from the manufacturer, via the middleman and via the co-operated manufacturing group. In the direct distribution from the manufacturer channel, it was found that the manufacturer is given the highest rate of importance to how they keep the inventory. In the distribution via the middleman channel, it was found that the manufacturer is given the highest rate of importance to the distribution efficiency. But in the distribution via the co-operated manufacturing group, it was found that the manufacturer is given the highest rate of importance to the public relationship.

Keywords: distribution, court doll, Ang Thong province, business and social sciences

Procedia PDF Downloads 275

Authors: Sonia Darshini Singh

Abstract:

Recently, the Supreme Court and the federal government made affirmative action illegal. Colleges and universities are no longer allowed to consider race in admissions policies. Colleges and universities had the opportunity to increase racial diversity through affirmative action. Instead, a recent educational outlook has emerged where this race-conscious affirmative action is banned, and elitism is prioritized, thus altering the collegiate experience of students of color. While the statute restricts the consideration of race as a facet in admissions, this prohibition should not allow for the gravity of race and structural racism in the lives of marginalized students to diminish, nor should it limit further efforts to establish equitable access and outcomes for students of color. Not much is known about the racialized experiences of students of color who attend predominantly white institutions in the post-affirmative action era. The purpose of this ethnographic study will be to understand the racialized experiences of students who attend predominantly white institutions (PWI) in New York. This also aims to examine the potential data triangulation between what students wrote about to get into college and their actual racialized experience.

Keywords: higher education, predominantly white institution, equity, accessibility, affirmative action

Procedia PDF Downloads 11