Blog of the International Journal of Constitutional Law

Conference Report: Beyond the Usual Suspects and Usual Domains? An ICON-S (Singapore) Symposium

Maartje De Visser, Singapore Management University, and Jaclyn L. Neo, National University of Singapore

Avid readers of this blog need no reminder of the clarion call for those with an interest in constitutionalism to move beyond the ‘usual suspects’. Indeed, the very establishment of ICON-S was inspired by the desire to mainstream an interdisciplinary approach to public law writ large. The imperative to cast the net widely seems particularly salient for the Singapore Chapter of ICON-S, of which we are the founding co-chairs. Singapore is a relatively young nation that is outward-looking in many ways, including to cement its status as a regional economic hotspot; its citizenry is racially and religiously diverse, and it has elevated the use of technocracy as the preferred mode of governance to an art.

On 19 September 2019, the Singapore Chapter organized its second annual event, co-organized by the National University of Singapore Centre for Asian Legal Studies and the Singapore Management University School of Law. In line with its mission, academics, legal practitioners, representatives of State bodies, civil society, and policy-makers came together to interrogate constitutionalism along two dimensions. The first panel queried the use of interdisciplinary methodologies to understand and study the constitution. The speakers featured were Ran Hirschl (who was then Kwa Geok Choo Visiting Professor at the National University of Singapore), Kevin YL Tan (National University of Singapore), Mark Findlay (Singapore Management University), and Corinna Lim (AWARE, the main women’s rights NGO in Singapore), with Dian Shah (National University of Singapore) as moderator. The second panel addressed the question how constitutional supremacy can be assured in the age of statutes. The frequency with which statutes are adopted concomitantly increases the likelihood of bills being introduced that have a knock-on effect on constitutional rights and rules. The panel was comprised of Chang Wen Chen (National Chiao Tung University/National Taiwan University), Priscilla Chia (Peter Low & Choo LLC), Lanx Goh (previously Singapore Personal Data Protection Commission and now at Klook Travel Technology), Kenny Chng (Singapore Management University), Hui Choon Kuen (Attorney-General Chambers’ Academy), with Jack Lee (Singapore Academy of Law) as moderator. 

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on October 16, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments

What’s New in Public Law

–Mohamed Abdelaal, Assistant Professor, Alexandria University Faculty of Law

In this weekly feature, I-CONnect publishes a curated reading list of developments in public law. “Developments” may include a selection of links to news, high court decisions, new or recent scholarly books and articles, and blog posts from around the public law blogosphere.

To submit relevant developments for our weekly feature on “What’s New in Public Law,” please email

Developments in Constitutional Courts

(1) The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two landmark cases concerning LGBTQ+ employment rights.

(2) The Constitutional Court of Guatemala issued a provisional injunction to stop a controversial commission of inquiry into the work of a United Nations-backed anti-corruption body.

(3) The Constitutional Court of Turkey ruled that former PM’s constitutional right of freedom of speech and expression has been violated.

(4) The Constitutional Court of Turkey ruled that an electric shock after touching the door of a transformer building constitutes a violation of the right to life.

(5) The Constitutional Court of South Africa held that a university policy which gives preference to English over Afrikaans is constitutional.

In the News

(1) The US House of Representatives introduces a bill to deter foreign interference in elections.

(2) Ghana will hold a referendum on a constitutional amendment allowing political parties to participate in district elections

(3) The Parliament of Azerbaijan approves the appointment of a new Prime Minister.

(4) Lawmakers in Costa Rica reject a proposal to cut the second round of voting in presidential elections.

(5) The Parliament of Italy voted to decrease the number of representatives in both houses.

New Scholarship

(1) Richard Albert, Menaka Guruswamy, and Nishchal Basnyat (eds), Founding Moments in Constitutionalism (2019) (theorizing and illustrating the phenomenon of a constitutional founding moment)

(2) Juan C. Herrera, Binding Consent of Indigenous Peoples in Colombia: An Example of Transformative Constitutionalism, in Claire Wright and Alexandra Tomaselli (eds), The Prior Consultation of Indigenous Peoples in Latin America: Inside the Implementation Gap (2019) (highlighting several limitations on the rights and mechanisms imply for Indigenous people)

(3) Richard Schragger and Micah Schwartzman, Establishment Clause Inversion in the Bladensburg Cross Case, ACS Supreme Court Review 2018-2019 (arguing that American Legion represents a significant development in the dismantling of Establishment Clause jurisprudence)

(4) P. Takis Tridimas, and Giulia Gentile, The Essence of Rights: An Unreliable Boundary?, 20 German Law Journal (2019) (examining the essence clause of the Charter in light of the ECJ case law and the constitutional traditions of the Member States and assesses its role in the framework of fundamental rights protection in EU law)

(5) Martin Krčmář, Personal Liability for Anticompetitive Conduct in the Context of the Trade Agreement between EU and Colombia, Peru and Ecuador (2019) (providing specific examples of the decision-making practices adopted by the competition authorities which have focused on identifying the attribution of company representatives’ conduct)

(6) Cass R. Sunstein, Behaviorally Informed Policy: A Brisk Progress Report (2019) (offering a progress report on behaviorally informed policy and law, while also providing some conceptual clarifications)

(7) Rafael Domingo, The Individual in Contemporary Sacred Natural Law, in Anne Peter and Tom Sparks (eds), The Individual in International Law. History and Theory (2021) (arguing for the adequacy and consistency of a human-centred international law framework from the perspective of the so-called sacred natural law theories)

(8) Gregory M. Dickinson, A Computational Analysis of Oral Argument in the Supreme Court, 28 Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy (2019) (introducing a construct predictive models of judicial decision making based not on oral argument’s superficial features or factors external to oral argument)

(9) Melissa Crouch, The Constitution of Myanmar: A Contextual Analysis (2019) (describing how the process of constitution-making and the substance of the 2008 Constitution contribute to its lack of credibility and fuel demands for reform)

(10) Graham Butler, Constitutional Law of the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy: Competence and Institutions in External Relations (2019) (arguing that the legal framework for EU foreign affairs must adapt to allow for a more assertive Europe in the world)

Call for Papers and Announcements

(1) Deakin Law School hosts a conference on “The Future of Freedom of Speech and Religion after Israel Folau,” to investigate significant aspects of the Folau matter and its implications for Australian law and society on December 7, 2019, at the Law Institute of Victoria, in Melbourne.

(2) The University of Sofia “St. Kliment Ohridski,” Faculty of Law and the Sofia Legal Science Network welcome submissions for the IV Sofia Legal Science Week on “Law and Revolution.”

(3) The 2020 ESIL Research Forum will take place on April 23-24, 2020, at the Department of Law, University of Catania, Italy. The ESIL Research Forum is a scholarly conference that promotes engagement with research in progress by members of the Society. It has a small and intensive format. The Forum targets scholars at an early stage of their careers.

(4) The University of Portsmouth Law School will host the Socio-Legal Studies Association (SLSA) Annual Conference 2020 to be held from Wednesday April 1-3, 2020.

(5) A Call for Applications has been issued for an early career researchers’ workshop on “Convergence and Differentiation in European and Comparative Administrative Law,” to be held on February 14, 2020, in Brussels. The deadline for application is 15th December.

Elsewhere online

(1) Gaurav Mukherjee, Miller/Cherry 2 Goes to Kashmir, Verfassungsblog

(2) Adrian Waters, Will the reduction of legislators fix Italian democracy?, ConstitutionNet

(3) Gerard Magliocca, Not A Constitutional Crisis Yet, PrawfsBlawg

(4) Daniel Tavela Luís and Luís Antônio G. de Andrade, A New Path For Public Utility Expropriations Disputes In Brazil: Arbitration And Mediation, Kluwer Arbitration Blog

(5) Lucy Ferriss, It’s 2040. We Need to Keep Abortion Legal in New York, The New York Times

(6) A Practical Guide to Constitution Building: Decentralized Forms of Government, ConstitutionNet

Print Friendly
Published on October 14, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments

Book Review: John Otrompke on Arthur Peltomaa’s “Understanding Unconstitutionality: How a Country Lost Its Way”

[Editor’s Note: In this installment of I•CONnect’s Book Review Series, John Otrompke reviews Arthur Peltomaa’s book on Understanding Unconstitutionality: How a Country Lost Its Way (Teja Press, 2018).

–John Otrompke, J.D.

In 1985, the Supreme Court of Canada declared that all of the laws of Manitoba enacted in the last 95 years had been unconstitutional, because they had not been translated into French. Even the seemingly-apparent remedy of simply translating all the laws and regulations might be sufficient, because even the laws governing the election of legislators were unconstitutional. In a case called Re Manitoba Language Rights, the Supreme Court suspended its declaration of unconstitutionality under s. 52(1) of the nation’s constitution (which had only recently been enacted in 1982), giving time for the Manitoba legislature to comply with its duty.[1]

This led to a trend in Canadian constitutional law that motivated author Arthur Peltomaa to pen an impassioned argument against the case and its progeny. “Understanding Unconstitutionality: How a Country Lost Its Way” is a thorough and mostly well-written analysis of suspended declarations of unconstitutionality.

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on October 13, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Reviews

What the Harvard Decision Gets Right about Affirmative Action

Yuvraj Joshi, Doctoral Candidate, Yale Law School

A federal judge has upheld Harvard College’s admissions program against a challenge from Edward Blum. Her opinion reinforces what I interpret to be the true purpose of affirmative action in the U.S., which is the pursuit of racial transition.

Blum is the president of Students for Fair Admission (SFFA), an organization with the mission of eliminating the use of race and ethnicity in college admissions. He is responsible for orchestrating multiple anti-affirmative action lawsuits; he brought Abigail Fisher’s unsuccessful case against the University of Texas Austin before the Supreme Court. In his latest attempt to end affirmative action, Blum alleges that Harvard’s admissions practices have “disproportionately negative effect on Asian Americans” compared to white applicants.

U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs of the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts concluded that Harvard does not discriminate against Asian Americans in its admissions process. Judge Burroughs’ opinion follows longstanding U.S. Supreme Court precedent that allows universities to consider race as one of several factors in the pursuit of a diverse student body. A conservative Supreme Court bolstered by a pair of Trump nominees may be willing to depart from that precedent. But at least for now, Judge Burroughs’ opinion is right on the law.

What the opinion also gets right is the aim of affirmative action. As I argue in Affirmative Action as Transitional Justice and other forthcoming work, the purpose of affirmative action in higher education is not merely to diversify the student body; instead, its purpose is to facilitate and negotiate the nation’s passage from its racial past to its racial future.

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on October 11, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments

Book Review: Alice Valdesalici on Antonia Baraggia’s “Ordinamenti giuridici a confronto nell’era della crisi. La condizionalità economica in Europa e negli Stati nazionali”

[Editor’s Note: In this installment of I•CONnect’s Book Review Series, Alice Valdesalici reviews Antonia Baraggia’s Ordinamenti giuridici a confronto nell’era della crisi. La condizionalità economica in Europa e negli Stati nazionali (G. Giappichelli Editore 2017).]

Alice Valdesalici, Senior Researcher, Institute for Comparative Federalism

Antonia Baraggia’s book–Ordinamenti giuridici a confronto nell’era della crisi. La condizionalità economica in Europa e negli Stati nazionali–provides a comparative analysis of different legal systems during the recent economic crisis, in particular, it explores the impact of economic conditionality on both the European Union and two member States, Greece and Portugal.

Baraggia’s investigation can be placed at the crossroad between comparative constitutional studies of constitutional change and constitutional crisis. Its main assumption is that economic conditionality can be conceived as one of the drivers of ‘constitutional mutation’ in EU member States, to the extent that it challenges the foundation of the welfare state model.

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on October 9, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Reviews

What’s New in Public Law

Sandeep Suresh, Assistant Professor, Jindal Global Law School, India

In this weekly feature, I-CONnect publishes a curated reading list of developments in public law. “Developments” may include a selection of links to news, high court decisions, new or recent scholarly books and articles, and blog posts from around the public law blogosphere.

To submit relevant developments for our weekly feature on “What’s New in Public Law,” please email

Developments in Constitutional Courts

  1. The US Supreme Court will soon hear a case to decide whether the 1964 Civil Rights Act’s prohibition of workplace discrimination on the ground of ‘sex’ also bans discrimination based on ‘sexual orientation’.
  2. A Court of Appeal in the Netherlands held that accusations of colonial-era crimes committed by Dutch forces in Indonesia are not bound by the law of limitations.
  3. The Tripura High Court in India banned the centuries-old practice of animal sacrifice in temples on the ground that animals have the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
  4. The Mombasa High Court in Kenya held that amendments to the Merchant Shipping Act which allowed for privatization of the Container Terminal Two at the Port of Mombasa are unconstitutional as the amending process did not meet the requirements of adequate public participation.
  5. Justice Eduardo Medina Mora of the Supreme Court of Mexico resigned from his post in light of the on-going investigation against him by the government for financial irregularities.

In the News

  1. Experts indicate that Australia’s new religious discrimination bill, in its current form, could be unconstitutional as it allows doctors to refuse treatment based on their religious beliefs.
  2. The Ombudsman of Latvia, Juris Jansons, proposed to make the office of Ombudsman politically neutral under the country’s Constitution.
  3. The Guardian Council of Iran approved a law that now allows children of Iranian women married to foreigners to attain Iranian citizenship.
  4. The Parliament of Pakistan rejected a private member’s bill that proposed to allow non-Muslims to become the President or Prime Minister of the country.
  5. The Chief Executive of Hong Kong banned the use of face masks by protestors who are involved in the ongoing anti-government protests.

New Scholarship

  1. Donal Coffey, The Influence of the Weimar Constitution on the Common Law World, Vol 27 Rechtsgeschichte – Legal History (2019) (tracing the influence of the Weimar Constitution on the common law world by looking at the Constitutions of Ireland and South Asian countries).
  2. Tarunabh Khaitan, The Supreme Court as a Constitutional Watchdog, 721 Seminar 22-28 (2019) (pointing out that the Supreme Court of India has adopted a skewed approach to its appellate and constitutional functions by spending a far higher proportion of its institutional resources on its appellate function and far less judicial energy in performing its constitutional defence role).
  3. Robert E Ross, The Framers’ Intentions: The Myth of the Nonpartisan Constitution (University of Notre Dame Press 2019) (addressing the unresolved constitutional question: why did political parties emerge so quickly after the framers designed the Constitution to prevent them?).
  4. Abhinav Sekhri, Article 22 — Calling Time on Preventive Detention (September 2019) (arguing that Article 22 of the Indian Constitution which details various regulations for the deployment of preventive detention laws by sets an inadequate and minimum threshold for the legislature).
  5. Nikos Skoutaris, On Brexit and Secession(s) in C Closa, C Margiotta and G Martinico (eds), Between Democracy and Law: The Amorality of Secession (Routledge 2019) (exploring the interrelationship between Brexit and secession).
  6. Guillaume Tusseau, Codification, religion and practical reasoning: on the ambitions and limits of the benthamian paradigm (Varenne University Institute 2019) (exploring codification as an intellectual and cultural construction)
  7. Andraž Zidar, The World Community between Hegemony and Constitutionalism (Eleven International 2019) (surveying the complex and intertwined relationship between hegemony and constitutionalism in the global community).

Call for Papers and Announcements

  1. The Law & Society Association has opened the Call for Submissions for its 2020 Annual Meeting in Denver, Colorado, on May 28-31. The theme of the annual gathering is “Rule and Resistance.” All are welcome to apply.
  2. The Laureate Program in Comparative Constitutional Law at Melbourne Law School invites applications for the ‘2019 Kathleen Fitzpatrick Visiting Fellowship’. Applications are invited from female doctoral and early career scholars who may be looking for an opportunity to visit Melbourne and work with the program for one to two months. The final deadline to apply for this year’s program is approaching soon: October 13, 2019.
  3. The Department of Law at Utrecht University invites applications for the vacant Post-doctoral position on ‘EU Gender Equality Law’. The successful candidate will be a part of the gender stream of the European Equality Network of Legal Experts in Gender Equality and Non-Discrimination. Interested candidates should apply before October 13, 2019.
  4. The Georgetown University Law Center invites applications for the ‘Women’s Law & Public Policy 2020-2021 Fellowship’. It is a one-year fellowship program, based in Washington D.C., for public interest lawyers from the United States who are committed to advancing women rights. Interested candidates should apply before November 1, 2019 (11:59PM EST).
  5. The Program in Law and Public Affairs at Princeton University invites applications from faculty members, independent scholars, lawyers, and judges for their ‘2020-2021 Princeton Program in Law and Public Affairs Fellowship’ (residential). The selected fellows will devote a significant portion of their time to their research and writing on law-related subjects of empirical, interpretive, doctrinal or normative significance, and participate in the institution’s programs. The deadline for applying is November 13, 2019 (11:59 PM EST).
  6. The International Association of Constitutional Law in association with the National University of Singapore’s Centre for Asian Legal Studies and Melbourne Law School’s Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies invite paper submissions from young constitutional law scholars for the inaugural ‘Junior Scholars Forum’ to be held in Singapore from July 2-3, 2020. Interested participants should submit their paper abstracts by November 29, 2019.

Elsewhere Online

  1. India’s judges are ignoring the government’s abuses in Kashmir, The Economist
  2. Spencer Bokat-Lindell, When Should a President Be Impeached?, The New York Times
  3. Malavika Prasad, In pursuit of an ideal criminal process, The Hindu
  4. Anthony Arnull, Is the UK Supreme Court Pro-EU?, UK Constitutional Law Blog
  5. Kiryl Kascian, A Judicial Path to Nowhere? Challenging the Minority Education Reform Before Latvia’s Constitutional Court, Verfassungsblog
  6. Bruce Dyer, The dual citizen ban – what was Barton thinking?, AUSPUBLAW
  7. Sándor Lénárd, Interview with Prof. Michael W McConnell on religion and public life through American lenses, Mandiner
  8. Juliet Nyamao, The Global Compact on Refugees: A breakthrough opportunity in addressing the protracted refugee crises in East Africa, AfricLaw
Print Friendly
Published on October 7, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments

Late Soviet Constitutional Supervision: A Model for Central Asian Constitutional Review?

William Partlett, Melbourne Law School

[Editor’s note: This is one of our biweekly I-CONnect columns. Columns, while scholarly in accordance with the tone of the blog and about the same length as a normal blog post, are a bit more “op-ed” in nature than standard posts. For more information about our four columnists for 2019, see here. This blog post reflects on ongoing project Partlett is working on with Aziz Ismatov, Assistant Professor at Nagoya University’s Center for Asian Legal Exchange.  The project explores the legacy of socialism in the development of constitutional review in the former Soviet republics.]

The socialist legacy is far more complex than generally acknowledged. Using Uzbekistan as a case study, I argue that the rediscovery of late Soviet debates about a socialist version of constitutional review offers the possibility of jump-starting constitutional review in post-Soviet states where it has remained largely unrealized.

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on October 2, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Analysis

Book Review: Alicia Pastor y Camarasa on Eneida Desiree Salgado’s “Reforma Política”

[Editor’s Note: In this installment of I•CONnect’s Book Review Series,
Alicia Pastor y Camarasa reviews Eneida Desiree Salgado’s book “Reforma Política” (Editora Contracorrente 2018)

–Alicia Pastor y Camarasa, PhD candidate, Centre de recherche sur l’Etat et la Constitution (CRECO), University of Louvain (Belgium)

The demographics of Brazil’s parliament, overwhelmingly white and male, is at odds with its deeply diverse society. Improving the quality of representative democracy in Brazil through modifying the composition of the parliament has been a central project over the past two hundred years, largely occurring through both constitutional and legal reform. Eneida Desiree Salgado explores this topic in her book, Reforma Política. Throughout the text, Salgado undertakes a comprehensive legal analysis of reforms to political rights in Brazil – from the days of the Empire to the present – and explores the challenges that surround democratization. The central thesis of the text is that the fight for liberty in Brazil has always been exclusive, and that legal reforms have often in effect reduced the possibility of radically changing the power structures at play.[i]

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on October 2, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Reviews

What’s New in Public Law

Maja Sahadžić, Ph.D. Researcher (University of Antwerp)

In this weekly feature, I-CONnect publishes a curated reading list of developments in public law. “Developments” may include a selection of links to news, high court decisions, new or recent scholarly books and articles, and blog posts from around the public law blogosphere.

To submit relevant developments for our weekly feature on “What’s New in Public Law,” please email

Developments in Constitutional Courts

  1. The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom ruled that the Prime Minister suspended Parliament illegally.
  2. The Constitutional Court of Italy ruled that it should not always be punishable to help someone “under intolerable physical and psychological suffering” to commit suicide.
  3. The Constitutional Court of South Africa set to rule on “common purpose” in rape cases. The legal question is whether or not people who share the intent to rape can be convicted even if they did not all physically rape the victim.
  4. The Constitutional Court of South Africa found that moderate and reasonable chastisement by a parent is unconstitutional.
  5. The Constitutional Court of Romania decided that the president must appoint interim ministers.
  6. The Constitutional Court of Montenegro instituted preliminary proceedings to consider non-working Sundays.
  7. The Constitutional Court of Thailand decided that the Prime Minister was not a state official when he ruled a decision that secures his position as prime minister.
  8. The Constitutional Court of Ecuador rejected a petition for local consultation on a mining ban.
  9. The Supreme Court of Spain ruled in favor of exhumation of Francisco Franco.
  10. The EU General Court overturned a European Commission decision that Starbucks benefited from illegal tax breaks in the Netherlands.

In the News

  1. The Slovak Parliament ended the long series of votes and selected the four missing candidates of the Constitutional Court of Slovakia.
  2. The speaker of the US House of Representatives announced a formal impeachment inquiry against President Trump.
  3. The Austrian Parliament declared a “climate emergency” making climate change a priority issue just four days from elections.
  4. The European Union appointed the first head of the newly-created EU Public Prosecutor’s Office.
  5. A Haitian senator opened fire outside the Parliament injuring a photojournalist.
  6. The Parliament of the United Kingdom returned a day after the Supreme Court ruled that the decision to suspend sittings for five weeks was unlawful.
  7. The Israeli’s Prime Minister asked to form a new government after a post-election deadlock that has paralyzed the country’s political system.

New Scholarship

  1. Richard Albert, Antonia Baraggia and Cristina Fasone (eds.), Constitutional Reform of National Legislatures: Bicameralism under Pressure (2019) (examining the challenges, difficulties, and prospects of reforming bicameralism in constitutional democracies)
  2. Patricia Popelier, Helen Xanthaki, João Tiago Silveira, Felix Uhlmann and William Robinson (eds.), Lawmaking in Multi-level Settings, Legislative Challenges in Federal Systems and the European Union (2019) (discussing systems where law-making is a shared responsibility assigned to various levels of authority).
  3. Francesco Palermo, Alice Valdesalici and Annika Kress (eds.), Comparing Fiscal Federalism (2018) (investigating intergovernmental financial relations and the current de jure and de facto allocation of financial and fiscal powers in compound states from a comparative and interdisciplinary perspective).
  4. Kate Puddister, The Canadian Reference Power: Delegation to the Courts and the Navigation of Federalism, Publius (2019) (examining how reference cases have been used by governments in Canada, with particular attention to issues related to federalism).
  5. Melissa Crouch, The Constitution of Myanmar, A Contextual Analysis (2019) (analyzing the 2008 Constitution of Myanmar in its historical, political, and social context).
  6. Michael D. Gilbert, Mauricio Guim and Michael Weisbuch, Constitutional Locks, Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper (2019) (studying constitutional “locks” as forced waiting periods for amendments).
  7. Angioletta Sperti, Constitutional Courts, Gay Rights and Sexual Orientation Equality (2019) (considering a wide-range of decisions by constitutional and international courts, from the decriminalization of sexual acts to the recognition of same-sex marriage and parental rights for same-sex couples).

Call for Papers and Announcements

  1. The Review of Constitutional Studies invites submissions of manuscripts in English or French for its issues 24(2) and 25(1). The deadline for submissions in 1 November 2019.
  2. The Gujarat National Law University (GNLU) Law Review welcomes submissions for its seventh volume.
  3. The University of Bologna Law Review invites applications for new Associate Editors. The deadline for submissions is 31 October 2019.
  4. The Institute for Immigration and Social Integration at Ruppin Academic Center, the Association for Canadian Studies and the International Metropolis Project, invite proposals for the 6th Ruppin International Conference on “Immigration and Social Integration: Migration and Diasporas,” to be held in Ruppin on 18-20 May 2020. The deadline for submissions is 10 November 2019.
  5. The Maastricht Centre for European Law and the Maastricht European Centre on Privacy and Cybersecurity invite papers for the workshop on “Digitalisation, Ethics and EU Fundamental Rights,” to be held in Maastricht on 9-10 January 2020. The deadline for submissions is 31 October 2019.

Elsewhere Online

  1. Fracesco Palermo, Editorial – ’70 Years of the German Basic Law’ Symposium, IACL-AIDC BLOG
  2. David R. Cameron, Another government in Italy, another election in Spain, Yale MacMillan Center
  3. David R. Cameron, After UK Supreme Court declares prorogation unlawful, Parliament resumes, Yale MacMillan Center
  4. Omphemetse S Sibanda, Ruling banning the spanking of children is both legally and morally sound, Daily Maverick
  5. Greg Weiner, The Not-So-Supreme Court, The Atlantic
  6. Ian Millhiser, The fight to end Roe v. Wade enters its endgame next week, Vox
  7. Thomas Stephens, The art of interpreting in Switzerland’s polyglot parliament,
  8. Michael Power and Avani Singh, South African High Court Finds Surveillance Law Unconstitutional, IACL-AIDC BLOG
  9. Gregor Kirchhof, The Financial Constitution of the Basic Law, IACL-AIDC BLOG
  10. Michelle Maziwisa, Giving a Voice to Subnational Authorities and Citizens in EU Trade Agreements, Eureka!
  11. Alex Green, Our Constitution, Accountability and the Limits of the Power to Prorogue, UK Constitutional Law Association
  12. Sam Fowles, Cherry/Miller: What’s Next?, UK Constitutional Law Association
  13. Oskar J. Gstrein, The Judgment That Will Be Forgotten, Verfassungsblog
  14. Michał Ziółkowski, Undemocratic but Formally Lawful: The Suspension of the Polish Parliament, Verfassungsblog
  15. Oliver Garner, Why the UK’s Government’s Demands on the Irish Backstop Would Violate the Sovereignty of the EU-27, Verfassungsblog
  16. Cheta Nwanze, Xenophobic attacks: Why the official outrage from Nigeria this time?, African Arguments
Print Friendly
Published on September 30, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments

Book Review: Sophie Weerts on “La loi de la langue: Dialogue euro-indien” (Alain Supiot & Sitharamam Kakarala, eds.)

[Editor’s Note: In this installment of I•CONnect’s Book Review Series, Sophie Weerts reviews La loi de la langue: Dialogue euro-indien (Alain Supiot & Sitharamam Kakarala, eds., Schulthess 2017)

Sophie Weerts, University of Lausanne

In 2012, the Institute of Advanced Studies in Nantes held a seminar on “Droit et Langage”, within the framework of the ‘Indian-European Advanced Research Network’. The strength of the ensuing book – La loi de langue: Dialogue euro-indien – is its engagement with questions concerning the relation between language and law with a transdisciplinary approach. Nine authors from different disciplinary backgrounds – law, philosophy, philology, linguistics, sociology – investigate this relation in light of the European and Indian legal and political system, including a tertium comparationis, with contributions concerning China and Japan. With this comparative framework, the value of the book is to serve as a ‘wake-up call’. It does not only address canonical themes for scholars working on questions of linguistic diversity, linguistic rights, and linguistic regime, but proposes exploration outside of the classic paths of legal positivism and mainstream Western modes of legal thought.

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on September 28, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Reviews