magnify

I·CONnect

Blog of the International Journal of Constitutional Law

Works-in-Progress Roundtable in Comparative Law–The University of Texas at Austin–May 21, 2019

Constitutional Studies Program

at The University of Texas at Austin

and the

Institute for Transnational Law

at The University of Texas at Austin

in cooperation with the

Section on Comparative Law

Association of American Law Schools

invite submissions for

WORKS-IN-PROGRESS ROUNDTABLE IN COMPARATIVE LAW

Convened by

Richard Albert (Texas)

Lauren Fielder (Texas)

Submissions are invited from comparative law scholars around the world for a works-in-progress roundtable on all subjects of comparative law. Preference will be given to early-career scholars as well scholars working on book projects. The purpose of this roundtable is to offer scholars the opportunity to develop their ideas as they work toward submitting a draft for publication.

Convened by Richard Albert (Texas) and Lauren Fielder (Texas), this roundtable will be held in the School of Law at the University of Texas at Austin on Tuesday, May 21, 2019. The roundtable may be extended to a second day (Wednesday, May 22, 2019) depending on the number of submissions accepted.

Subject-Matter

Submissions are welcome on any subject of comparative law—public or private—taking any perspective and using any methodological approach.

Structure

The roundtable will feature a small number of accepted submissions. The roundtable will devote up to one hour to each accepted submission. Participants must have read all submissions prior to the program in order to facilitate a robust and constructive discussion on each submission.

Eligibility

Submissions are invited from comparative law scholars around the world at any level of seniority, including students enrolled in graduate programs in law or related disciplines that engage the study of comparative law.

Submission Instructions

Interested scholars should email PFD versions of their work-in-progress and CV by 5pm Austin (Texas) time on Thursday, March 14, 2019 to tdo@law.utexas.edu on the understanding that the work-in-progress will be shared with all accepted roundtable participants. Scholars should identify their submission with the following subject line: “Work-in-Progress Roundtable on Comparative Law.”

Notification

Accepted applicants will be notified no later than Monday, April 4, 2019. If you do not receive a notification by this date, we regret that we were unable to accommodate your application.

Costs

There is no cost to participate in this roundtable. Group meals will be generously sponsored by the Constitutional Studies Program at The University of Texas at Austin. The Constitutional Studies Program will moreover provide a travel stipend of $250 USD to each accepted applicant. The Institute for Transnational Studies at The University of Texas at Austin will offer an additional stipend of $250 USD for accommodation. Accepted applicants are responsible for securing their own funding for all other expenses.

Questions

Please direct inquiries in connection with this roundable to:

Richard Albert
William Stamps Farish Professor of Law
The University of Texas at Austin
richard.albert [at] law.utexas.edu
Print Friendly
Published on February 10, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments
 

Five Questions with David Kenny

Richard Albert, William Stamps Farish Professor of Law, The University of Texas at Austin

In “Five Questions” here at I-CONnect, we invite a public law scholar to answer five questions about his or her research. 

This edition of “Five Questions” features a short video interview with David Kenny, Assistant Professor of Law at Trinity College Dubin. 

One of his recent papers is entitled “Proportionality and the Inevitability of the Local: A Comparative Localist Analysis of Canada and Ireland,” available for download here.

To nominate someone for a future edition of “Five Questions,” please email contact.iconnect@gmail.com.

Print Friendly
Published on February 8, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Reviews
 

Special Announcement–Mark Tushnet Prize in Comparative Law

Richard Albert, William Stamps Farish Professor of Law, The University of Texas at Austin

In my capacity as Chair of the AALS Section on Comparative Law, I have created a new award to recognize untenured scholars at AALS Member Schools for excellence in comparative law. I invite our readers to submit nominations for the award, which will be named the “Mark Tushnet Prize in Comparative Law.” Self-nominations are welcome as well. The Call for Nominations follows below.


Mark Tushnet Prize in Comparative Law

Call for Nominations

The AALS Section on Comparative Law is pleased to announce the inaugural “Mark Tushnet Prize” to recognize scholarly excellence in any subject of comparative law by an untenured scholar at an AALS Member School.

The Prize will be given to the author(s) of a scholarly article judged to have made an important contribution in the field of comparative law. This article must have been published in an academic journal between July 1, 2018 and June 30, 2019.

The Prize will be awarded for the first time at the 2020 AALS Annual Meeting, scheduled for January 2-5, 2020. It will be awarded every year thereafter. All untenured scholars—including but not limited to tenure-track professors, visiting assistant professors, lecturers, academic fellows, doctoral candidates—are eligible.

Nominations should be sent by email to Trish Do (tdo@law.utexas.edu) no later than 12:00pm Central time on August 1st, 2019. Nominations should include the full name, institutional affiliation, and contact information for the nominated scholar, in addition to a PDF version of the published article to be considered for the Prize. Self-nominations are welcomed.

For all questions, please contact Professor Richard Albert (richard.albert@law.utexas.edu), Chair of the AALS Section on Comparative Law.

Prize Committee

  • Richard Albert (Texas) (Chair)
  • Mark Kende (Drake)
  • Margaret Woo (Northeastern)

About Mark Tushnet

Mark Tushnet, a former president of the Association of American Law Schools, is the William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law at Harvard Law School. A former law clerk to Justice Thurgood Marshall, Tushnet is an authoritative voice in constitutional law and theory. His scholarship spans all areas of public law, including comparative constitutional law, a field in which he has co-authored a leading casebook. A respected teacher, a devoted mentor, and an influential scholar, he will retire from the Harvard faculty in June 2020.

About the AALS

The Association of American Law Schools (AALS) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit association of 179 law schools. Its members enroll most of the nation’s law students and produce the majority of the country’s lawyers and judges, as well as many of its lawmakers. The mission of AALS is to uphold and advance excellence in legal education. In support of this mission, AALS promotes the core values of excellence in teaching and scholarship, academic freedom, and diversity, including diversity of backgrounds and viewpoints, while seeking to improve the legal profession, to foster justice, and to serve our many communities–local, national, and international. Founded in 1900, AALS also serves as the learned society for the more than 9,000 law faculty at its member schools, and provides them with extensive professional development opportunities, including the AALS Annual Meeting which draws thousands of professors, deans and administrators.

Print Friendly
Published on February 7, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments
 

Democracy and the Monarchy in Malaysia

Dian A H Shah, National University Singapore Faculty of Law

[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.]

On 24 January 2019, Malaysia witnessed the second momentous occasion in her constitutional and political history in the past year. After the general elections in May 2018 had delivered an end to dominant coalition rule under Barisan Nasional (BN), another election installed the country’s sixteenth Yang di-Pertuan Agong (King), who reigns for a term of five years. This election, however, was carried out by and amongst the Conference of Rulers – an institution comprising the nine hereditary Malay rulers from states in the Federation.[1]

The election of the King, to be sure,was not in itself a historic occasion. In fact, this system of electing and appointing the country’s head of state has been practiced since independence – a hallmark of Malaysia’s autochthonous constitution which inherited a Westminster-style system of government. However, it was the circumstances that led to the election of a new King that drew attention to Malaysia’s unique system of constitutional monarchy.

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on February 6, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments
 
Tags:

Special Announcement: I-CONnect Columnists for 2019

David Landau, Florida State University College of Law

The editors of I-CONnect are pleased to announce our new slate of columnists for 2019: Dian A H Shah, William Partlett, Paola Bergallo, and Jill Goldenziel. We are confident that they will provide a diverse and fascinating set of voices, representing a range of regional and substantive areas of focus, for the coming year.

We would also like to give thanks to our outgoing 2018 columnists — Jaclyn Neo, James Fowkes, Francisca Pou Giménez, and Renata Uitz. We are grateful to each of these wonderful scholars for agreeing to serve as columnists last year, and think you will agree that they added an immense amount to the blog.

The format of the columns will stay the same as last year. The goal is to provide ICONnect with regular contributors who have a distinctive voice and unique perspective on public law. 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. Each columnist will produce one column every two months.

Although we expect that many of our readers already know their work, we append brief bios for each of our new columnists below. Please join us in welcoming them to I-CONnect!

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on February 5, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Editorials
 

What’s New in Public Law

Simon Drugda, PhD Candidate at the University of Copenhagen

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 contact.iconnect@gmail.com.

Developments in Constitutional Courts

  1. The Constitutional Court of Germany ruled that obliging email service providers to log and share IP addresses with law enforcement is constitutional.
  2. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that bankrupt oil and gas companies in Alberta must use funds to reclaim oil and gas well sites before paying debtors.
  3. The European Court of Human Rights held that the Russian government must pay the Georgian government ten million EUR in reparations over the deportation of 1,500 Georgian nationals.
  4. The Supreme Court of Venezuela prohibited opposition leader Juan Guaidó from leaving the country.
  5. The Slovak Constitutional Court invalidated a 2014 constitutional amendment that established a vetting process for lower court judges and candidates for judicial office.
  6. The Constitutional Committee of the Slovak Parliament interviewed 40 nominees for Constitutional Court judges, in the first selection hearings broadcast live in the history of Slovakia. Robert Fico, a three-time PM is one of the candidates.

In the News

  1. A senior judge resigned from office on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia claiming political interference.
  2. The Irish government has agreed to hold a constitutional referendum to ease the country’s restrictions on divorce after the Parliament.
  3. The government coalition in Luxembourg proposes a new constitution.
  4. The Parliament of the German state of Brandenburg passed new legislation to boost the number of women in politics. The “parity act” obliges political parties to offer as many female as male candidates for elections, starting in the summer of 2020.

New Scholarship

  1. The Journal Verfassung und Recht in Übersee published two special issues on “The Indian Supreme Court in Crisis?” and “Judicial Review and Democratization in Francophone West Africa.
  2. Urszula Jaremba and Juan Mayoral, The Europeanization of national judiciaries: definitions, indicators and mechanisms, 3 Journal of European Public Policy (2019) (critically examining the concept of Europeanization of national judiciaries, whereby national court act as decentralized European Union judges)
  3. Benjamin Schonthal, Buddhist Legal Pluralism? Looking again at Monastic Governance in South and Southeast Asia, 3 Buddhism, Law & Society(2018) (looking at the plural interactions of state law and Buddhist law in South and Southeast Asia)
  4. Brice Dickson, The Irish Supreme Court: Historical and Comparative Perspectives (2019) (examining the workings and jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Ireland since its creation in 1924)
  5. Sergio Verdugo, How Can Judges Challenge Incumbent Dictators and Get Away With It? (2019) (exploring the paradox of compliance with unfavorable judicial decisions in an authoritarian regime)

Call for Papers and Announcements

  1. Ghent University in Belgium invites applications for a full-time, tenured Assistant Professorship in Privacy Law. The deadline for applications is February 26, 2019.
  2. The Global Citizenship Governance Project, funded by an ERC starting Grant and co-hosted by the European University Institute and the WZB Berlin Social Science Center, invites applications for a Research Associate position. The deadline for applications is March 1, 2019.
  3. The Centre of Excellence for International Courts (iCourts) and PluriCourts (Centre for the Study of the Legitimate Roles of the Judiciary in the Global Order) organize their 7th PhD Summer School on June 17-21, 2019. The deadline for applications is February 1, 2019.
  4. The American Society of Comparative Law (ASCL) invites proposals for concurrent panels and a works in progress conference on the theme “Comparative Law and International Dispute Resolution Processes,” to be at the University of Missouri School of Law on October 17-19, 2019. The submission deadline is May 20.
  5. UCD Sutherland School of Law invites applications for the post of an Assistant Professor in Constitutional Law. The deadline for applications is February 25, 2019.
  6. The British and Irish Chapter of ICON-S holds its second annual conference on April 24-25, 2019, in Strathclyde. The theme of the conference is “The United Kingdom’s Withdrawal from the European Union (?): Domestic and European Constitutional Implications.” The deadline for proposals for papers and panels is February 15, 2019.
  7. The National University of the Public Service (NUPS), the Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church (KGURC), and the Centre for Parliamentary Studies (CPS) based at the Széchenyi University Győr invite submissions for a conference on “Parliaments, chambers, legislatures.” The deadline for submission of paper proposals is March 15, 2019.
  8. Felipe Oliveira de Sousa and Alex Latham organize a special workshop on “Constitutionalism and Disagreement,” to be held on July 7-13, 2019, at the occasion of the IVR Conference 2019. Interested participants should send their abstracts to f.oliveiradesousa@maastrichtuniversity.nl or a.g.latham@swansea.ac.uk by March 1.
  9. The Journal of the Oxford Centre for Socio-Legal Studies invites submission to the 2019 issue. The deadline for submissions is February 10, 2019.
  10. The UCL Journal of Law and Jurisprudence invites submissions for the autumn 2019 issue. The deadline for submissions is March 25, 2019.

Elsewhere Online

  1. Andrew Denny, Would a Bill Seeking an Article 50 Extension Require a Money Resolution Proposed by the Government?, UK Constitutional Law Association
  2. Mark Elliott, Can the Government veto legislation by advising the Queen to withhold royal assent?, Public Law for Everyone
  3. Meg Russel, Should we worry if MPs seize control of the parliamentary agenda?, The Constitution Unit
  4. David R. Cameron, House of Commons calls for replacing Irish “backstop” with “alternative arrangements”, Yale MacMillan Center
  5. Arthur Dyevre, Have British judges already left the EU? The impact of the Brexit vote on EU law in the UK, LSE Brexit Blog
  6. Kangnikoé Bado, Togo’s continuing constitutional crisis and ECOWAS’s failed mediation effort, ConstitutionNet
  7. David Pozen, Hardball, Again, Balkinization
  8. Malthe Hilal-Harvald, Truth or dare? Blasphemy and the flawed logic of E.S. v. Austria, Völkerrechtsblog
  9. Freeke Bendels, Arthur Dossche, Jurgen Goossens, and Sien Devriendt, Urgenda en de scheiding der machten: lost de rechter het klimaatvraagstuk op?, BelConLawBlog
  10. Theodora Kostakopoulou, Who Should Be a Citizen of the Union? Toward an Autonomous European Union Citizenship, Verfassungsblog
  11. Sebastián Mantilla Blanco, Rival Governments in Venezuela: Democracy and the Question of Recognition, Verfassungsblog
  12. Lucy Geddes, Universal jurisdiction to the rescue: a way forward for victims of Franco-era crimes of gender-based violence?, OxHRH
  13. Zim Nwokora , Book review: ‘The Politico-Legal Dynamics of Judicial Review: A Comparative Analysis’ by Theunis Roux, IACL-AIDC Blog

Print Friendly
Published on February 4, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments
 

Call for Panels and Papers–2019 ICON•S Conference on “Public Law in Times of Change?”–July 1-3, 2019–Santiago de Chile

ICON·S | The International Society of Public Law is pleased to announce that its 2019 Annual Conference will be held at the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile in Santiago, on July 1-3, 2019. This will be the sixth Annual Conference of ICON·S, following the five Annual Conferences (Florence 2014, New York 2015, Berlin 2016, Copenhagen 2017, Hong Kong 2018) which have been overwhelmingly successful, thanks to the support of our Members.

ICON·S now invites panel and paper submissions for the 2019 Annual Conference on “Public Law in Times of Change?”.

Public law is facing a myriad of new challenges – including rising popular distrust in government, increasingly closed borders, and complex economic and technological change. We are arguably living in hard times for global public law. But will these challenges result in radical changes to the field as we know it, or will public law adapt and respond in ways that reinterpret and reinvigorate its core commitments to democracy, the rule of law, and human rights in a manner that is continuous with our current practices?

Countries around the world are witnessing the reversal of longstanding democratic gains, and new authoritarian threats. Yet there are signs of resilience in the global and national public law order: popular referenda have delivered gains as well as losses for democracy; women and young people have marched in defence of public law values; and justice is being crowd-sourced and data-driven, not just undermined by foreign cyber-attacks and “fake news”.

Under the strain of technological changes and shifts in economic globalisation, the world is also confronting large-scale changes in the structure and scope of global governance and of the “administrative” state. The Welfare State is under “siege” and at both international and domestic levels the problem of economic injustice is dominating the political and socio-economic debate around the globe.

International and regional bodies are re-orienting their focus to respond to these new challenges. And commitments to constitutional and administrative reform likewise remain strong in many legal orders. They continue to engage in formal processes of constitutional review, often as part of a transition from authoritarian to democratic, and colonial to post-colonial rule: from Chile to Myanmar, Bolivia to Tuvalu, Yemen to Sudan, and from the Philippines to Gambia. Many countries are actively debating proposals for major constitutional and legal reform. Others are grappling with the legacies of past reforms and transitions, and asking whether they were sufficient to address legacies of colonialism, and the abuse of human rights, and flagrant disregard for the rule of law.

But how far can public law go in responding to these issues? Are the sources of the current democratic crisis so deeply economic and structural that they evade any meaningful public law response? Are they rooted in debates over national identity and borders, which public law can address only partially and indirectly at best? Or does public law have the resources to adapt and respond to these challenges? Can public law, for example, help shape the future direction of state and global governance, or will changes in national and international governance in fact reshape public law as we know it?

This Annual Conference will seek to address these and related issues, bringing together leading scholars, political leaders and jurists from around the world to debate these questions, and their relevance to Latin America, their own countries, and the world.

The Conference will feature a keynote address by Justice Luís Roberto Barroso of the Supreme Federal Court of Brazil, as well as three plenary sessions featuring prominent jurists, intellectuals and judges, focused on the general themes of the Conference. A provisional program can be found here. At the heart of the Conference, however, are the concurrent sessions during the three-day conference which will be devoted to the papers and panels selected through this Call.

ICON·S particularly welcomes proposals for fully-formed panels, but also accepts individual papers dealing with any aspect of the Annual Conference’s themes. Paper and panel proposals may focus on any theoretical, historical, comparative, empirical, jurisprudential, ethical, behavioral, ethnographic, philosophical or practical, policy-oriented perspective related to public law, including administrative law, constitutional law, international law, criminal law, immigration and citizenship law and human rights and may address domestic, subnational, national, regional, transnational, supranational, international and global aspects of public law.

We strongly encourage the submission of fully-formed panels. Panel proposals should include at least three papers by scholars who have agreed in advance to participate, and panel must be formed in accordance with the Society’s commitment to gender balance. Such fully-formed panel proposals should also identify one or two discussants, who may also serve as panel chair and/or paper presenter. Please kindly note that each participant can present not more than 2 papers and participate – as presenter, chair or discussant – in 4 panels maximum.

Proposals of fully formed panels may be made of – or include some – papers written and presented in Spanish. In these latter cases, paper abstracts and/or panel description must in any event be submitted in English.

Concurrent panel sessions will be scheduled over two days. Each concurrent panel session will be scheduled for 90 minutes.

We invite potential participants to refer to the ICON·S Mission Statement when choosing a topic or approach for their papers or panels.

ICON·S is by no means restricted to public lawyers! We particularly welcome panel proposals that offer genuinely multi-disciplinary perspectives from various areas of law (including civil, criminal, tax, and labor law), as well as from scholars in the humanities and the social sciences (e.g. history, economics, political science, sociology) with an interest in the Conference’s themes. We welcome submissions from both senior and junior scholars (including doctoral students) as well as interested practitioners.

All submissions must be made through the ICON·S website by 23h59 GMT on March 9, 2019. To access the submission page, you need to be a member of ICON·S. Please register or log in with your existing ICON·S account and make sure you have paid your membership fee.

Successful applicants will be notified by April 1, 2019.

All participants will be responsible for their own travel and accommodation expenses.

We very much look forward to receiving your paper and panel proposals.

See you at ICON·S Santiago 2019!

Lorenzo Casini & Rosalind Dixon
Co-Presidents of ICON·S

Richard Albert, Gráinne de Búrca, Mariana Canales, Claudia Golden, Ran Hirschl, David Landau, Ruth Rubio Marin, Francisco Urbina, Cristián Valenzuela, Sergio Verdugo, Joseph Weiler and Fred Felix Zaumseil
Members of the ICON·S 2019 Organizing Committee

Print Friendly
Published on February 1, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments
 

Ambassadors or Outsiders? The Constitutionality of Non-Resident Voting in Frank v Canada (Attorney General)

–Sarah Burton, Doctoral Candidate, University of Ottawa

The Supreme Court of Canada recently ruled that the legislative disenfranchisement of certain non-resident citizens was unconstitutional. While Frank v Canada (Attorney General) 2019 SCC 1 ultimately turns on deference, the decision raises a number of questions about the heart of democracy that will have long term impacts for Canadian law. After flagging Frank’s key takeaways, this post explores a debate on national identity that underpins the competing opinions.

For the majority and dissent in Frank, non-resident voting is emblematic of the broader question of how we ought to treat traditional borders in a globalized world. The competing judgments do not resolve this issue, but they do provide insight into the slippery nature of national identity arguments. Frank also offers a reasoned articulation of divergent legal and political views that will continue to shape liberal democracies in the year to come.

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on January 31, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Developments
 

Global Public Law Scholarship and Democracy (I·CON Volume 16, Issue 4: Editorial)

We invited Rosalind Dixon, member of the I·CON Editorial Board and Co-President of ICON·S, to write a Guest Editorial.

Global public law scholarship and democracy

Democracy worldwide is under stress: most quantitative measures suggest a measurable decline in the number of countries identified as fully democratic in recent decades.[1] Qualitative studies likewise suggest a notable decline in liberal democratic norms and practices in key states, including swing or “bellwether” states such as India, the Philippines, and Turkey.[2] This form of democratic “erosion” has also occurred in a range of democracies previously seen as leading examples of successful constitutional democratic transition (e.g. Hungary, Poland, and South Africa).[3] Leading scholars and commentators identify the current moment as one of democratic “retrogression,” “decay,” “rot,” or “backsliding.”[4]

The challenge this poses for global public law and lawyers is considerable: How can constitutional, administrative, and international law effectively respond to these changes in ways that effectively protect and promote democracy? The importance and complexity of this question is one of the reasons ICON·S has chosen to put it at the center of its next meetings in Santiago, which will reflect on the theme of public law in times of change. But it is also a question to which leading public law scholars are already beginning to offer valuable answers, and in ways that build on the contributions of I·CON and ICON·S.

Read the rest of this entry…
Print Friendly
Published on January 30, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Editorials
 

ICON’s Current Issue (Table of Contents)

Volume 16 Issue 4

Table of Contents

Editorial

Honor Roll of Reviewers 2018

Articles

David McGrogan, The population and the individual: The human rights audit as the governmentalization of global human rights governance

Aylin Aydin-Cakir, The impact of judicial preferences and political context on constitutional court decisions: Evidence from Turkey

Donald Bello Hutt, Measuring popular and judicial deliberation: A critical comparison

Symposium: Law, polity and the legacy of statehood

Neil Walker, Cormac Mac Amhlaigh and Claudio Michelon, Law, polity and the legacy of statehood: An introduction

Martin Loughlin, The state: Conditio sine qua non

Kaarlo Tuori, Whose voluntas, what ratio? Law in the state tradition  

Nils Jansen, Law and political domination: historical observations, conceptual reflections, and some questions for discussion

Chris Thornhill, On misunderstanding states: The transnational constitution in the national constitution

Olivier Beaud, Federation and empire: About a conceptual distinction of political forms

Bardo Fassbender, The state’s unabandoned claim to be the center of the legal universe

Nicole Roughan, Polities and relative authorities

Nico Krisch, Law and polity: Contingency, fiction, loss

Euan MacDonald, Counterproductive constitutionalization

George Letsas, Law and polity: Some philosophical preliminaries

R. A. Duff, Criminal law and political community

Christiane C. Wendehorst, Perspectives of the law and legal disembedding

Critical Review of Governance

Stéphane Mechoulan, The case against the face-veil: A European perspective

Critical Review of Jurisprudence

Matthew J. Nelson and Dian A. H. Shah, Operationalizing and regulating religious freedom: Apostasy and administrative “reasonableness” in Malaysia and beyond

Marina Aksenova and Iryna Marchuk, Reinventing or rediscovering international law? The Russian Constitutional Court’s uneasy dialogue with the European Court of Human Rights

Book reviews

Samuel Moyn. Not Enough:  Human Rights in an Unequal World (Gráinne de Búrca)

Tom Ginsburg & Aziz Z. Huq. How to Save a Constitutional Democracy (András Jakab)

Tom Gerald Daly. The Alchemists. Questioning our Faith in Courts as Democracy-Builders (Sergio Verdugo)

Gunter Frankenberg. Comparative Constitutional Studies: Between Magic and Deceit (Gautam Bhatia)

Anthea Roberts. Is International Law International? (Colm O’Cinneide)

Jelena von Achenbach. Demokratische Gesetzgebung in der Europäischen Union. Theorie und Praxis der dualen Legitimationsstruktur europäischer Hoheitsgewalt [Democratic Legitimacy and the Legislative Procedures of the European Union] (Lars Viellechner)

Walter Scheidel. The Great Leveler. Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century (Konstantin Chatziathanasiou)

Print Friendly
Published on January 29, 2019
Author:          Filed under: Editorials