Blog of the International Journal of Constitutional Law and

What’s New in Public Law

–Sandeep Suresh, LL.M in Comparative Constitutional Law (Central European University, Budapest)

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 Indian Supreme Court ordered search engines like Google, Yahoo and Microsoft to set up in-house committees to block keywords and advertisements related to prenatal sex determination.
  2. The North Gauteng High Court in South Africa held that the national government cannot issue a notice of withdrawal from the International Criminal Court without parliamentary approval.
  3. The Constitutional Court of South Korea has set February 27, 2017 as the date for final hearing in the impeachment trial of the President.
  4. The Bulgarian Constitutional Court rendered unenforceable a legal provision in the nation’s Electoral Code that introduced compulsory voting.
  5. The United States Supreme Court reversed the death sentence of a black person convicted for murder because sentencing was influenced by racial bias. The apex court has sent the case back for re-trial.

In the News

  1. The German Constitutional Court judges drafted a non-binding Code of Conduct to govern the post-retirement assignments of the Court’s judges.
  2. Members of the French National Assembly referred the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between the European Union and Canada to the French Constitutional Council because the Agreement violates the nation’s Constitution.
  3. The Brazilian Federal Senate confirmed the nomination of Alexandre de Moraes (the current Justice Minister) to the Supreme Court.
  4. The Theresa May Government in the United Kingdom indicated that a new Bill of Rights will be drafted only after the completion of Brexit.
  5. Malawi amends its Constitution to ban child marriages.

New Scholarship

  1. Luis Roberto Barroso, Reason Without Vote: The Representative and Majoritarian Function of Constitutional Courts, in Democratizing Constitutional Law: Perspectives on Legal Theory and Legitimacy of Constitutionalism (Springer 2016) (discussing the importance of the representative role played by constitutional courts, a subject that has been neglected by constitutional scholars in general, with few exceptions)
  2. Vlad Perju, Proportionality and Stare Decisis: Proposal for a New Structure, in Vicki Jackson and Mark Tushnet eds., Proportionality: New Frontiers, New Challenges (Cambridge University Press 2017) (arguing that a change in the formal structure of proportionality analysis can increase the chance of proportionality test’s successful transplant into American constitutional law)
  3. Eric Posner, Liberal Internationalism and the Populist Backlash, University of Chicago, Public Law Working Paper No. 606 (explaining how populists around the world have targeted international law and see international law as a device used by global elites to dominate policy making and benefit themselves at the expense of the common people)
  4. Harry Hobbs, Andrew Lynch and George Williams, The High Court Under Chief Justice Robert French, 91 Australian Law Journal 53 (2017) (examining the constitutional law jurisprudence evolved by the High Court of Australia under Chief Justice Robert French, who retired in January, 2017).
  5. Katie R. Eyer, The Canon of Rational Basis Review, Notre Dame Law Review, 2017 (rorthcoming) (elucidating the problems with the current understanding of the real role of rational basis review)
  6. Reva Siegel, Same-Sex Marriage and Backlash: Consensus, Conflict, and Constitutional Culture, Yale Law School (February 9, 2017) (examining claims about backlash in the debate over same-sex marriage, and the popular and academic assumptions about courts on which they are based)

Calls for Papers and Announcements

  1. Columbia Law School is inviting student papers for its inaugural ‘Human Rights Student Paper Symposium’ to be held on April 7, 2017. Students must submit their papers or works-in-progress to by March 1, 2017.
  2. The Jean Monnet Network LAWTTIP is inviting paper proposals for the ‘First Joint Conference’ on ‘The TTIP and Beyond: Negotiating and implementing the EU’s Free Trade Agreements in an uncertain environment’ to be held in Rennes on June 15-16, 2017. Proposals must be sent to by March 15, 2017.
  3. The WZB Berlin Social Science Center, the European University Institute and the London School for Economics and Political Science are inviting submissions for the ‘Inaugural Annual European Junior Faculty Forum for Public Law and Jurisprudence’ to be held on June 28-29, 2017. Interested scholars must submit their CV, draft article and its abstract to by April 15, 2017.
  4. The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law is inviting paper abstracts for the Second Annual Administrative Law New Scholarship Roundtable on June 27-28, 2017. Interested scholars must submit abstracts to Chris Walker at by March 17, 2017.
  5. The International Journal of Transitional Justice is inviting submissions for its 2-18 Special Issue on ‘Transitional Justice from the Margins: Intersections of Identities, Power and Human Rights’. Interested scholars must submit their papers online by July 1, 2017.

Elsewhere Online

  1. Gautam Bhatia, Upsetting a very fine balance, The Hindu
  2. Tomasz Tadeusz Koncewicz, In Judges We Trust? A long overdue Paradigm Shift within the Polish Judiciary (Part I), Verfassungsblog
  3. Tomasz Tadeusz Koncewicz, In Judges We Trust? A long overdue Paradigm Shift within the Polish Judiciary (Part II), Verfassungsblog
  4. George Letsas, The Constitution and the Folly of Majoritarianism, UK Constitutional Law Blog
  5. Janet Albrechtsen, There is no room for section 18c in a truly liberal Australia, The Australian
  6. Alok Prasanna Kumar, Jayalalithaa DA case: Supreme Court judgment shows judges’ tendency to be verbose in ‘visible cases’, Firstpost
Print Friendly
Published on February 27, 2017
Author:          Filed under: Developments

Of the Politics of Resentment and European Disintegration: Are the European Peoples Ready to Keep Paddling Together? Part I

Tomasz Tadeusz Koncewicz, Professor of Law and Director of the Department of European and Comparative Law at the University of Gdańsk, Poland*

The Politics of Resentment. What is in a Name?

It is trite to say that today “resentment” sweeps across Europe. Yet beyond this sweeping statement, the concept itself, its consequences and modus operandi, are far from clear. We continue to lack conceptual framework to deal with it. We tend to adopt an intuitive understanding of the term and equate it with the politics of protest, contestation and revolt against mainstream politics. In this traditional sense resentment is often analyzed together with populism and the two are even used interchangeably.

Just like populism, resentment is not only anti-elitist, but also anti-pluralist.[1] Populism appeals to resentment to exclude others from “the people” and claim that only “We” represent the real “We the People.” My argument is that for resentment to obtain, it must be qualified and be more than just a critique of the elites and the status quo.

Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
Published on February 26, 2017
Author:          Filed under: Analysis

Catalan Political Representatives Stand Criminal Trials

Antoni Abat i Ninet, Chair of Comparative Constitutional Law, University of Copenhagen – Denmark

The former President of Catalonia (sub-state entity) in Spain, Artur Mas, faces a criminal trial in Barcelona for organising a symbolic popular consultation on independence on 9 November 2014. The non-binding consultation was opposed by the Spanish government that challenged the Catalan Government’s decree calling for a consultation vote on independence in Spain’s Constitutional Court. The highest tribunal decided two articles of the decree were unconstitutional. The first one related to the regulation of calling the referendum and the second one, because according to the Court, the popular participatory consultation was indeed a referendum and therefore the Catalan Government could not go beyond its competencies. The decision was made unanimously by the 12 members of the Court, which is controlled by a conservative majority of members appointed by the currently-ruling People’s Party–a Court that has been particularly hostile on distinctive identity claims. (Abat Ninet – Gardner, Int J Const Law (2016) 14 (2): 378-410).

Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
Published on February 25, 2017
Author:          Filed under: Developments

Five Questions with Sujit Choudhry

Richard Albert, Boston College Law School

“Five Questions with … ” is a brand new feature at I-CONnect. We will periodically invite a public law scholar to answer five questions about his or her research.

This edition features Sujit Choudhry, currently a member of the executive committee of the International Society of Public Law. His full bio follows below:

Sujit Choudhry, the I. Michael Heyman Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley – School of Law, is an internationally recognized authority on comparative constitutional law and politics, who combines a wide-ranging research agenda with in-depth field experience as an advisor to constitution building processes, including in Egypt, Jordan, Libya, Nepal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Tunisia and Ukraine. He has lectured or spoken in over two dozen countries.

Professor Choudhry is the Founding Director of the Center for Constitutional Transitions, which generates and mobilizes knowledge in support of constitution building by assembling and leading international networks of experts to complete thematic research projects that offer evidence-based policy options to practitioners. It partners with a global network of multilateral organizations, think tanks, NGOs, and universities.

1. Tell us about something you are working on right now.

I am completing three large thematic, collaborative research projects in partnership with International IDEA: “Territorial Cleavages in Constitutional Transitions”, “Security Sector Reform and Constitutional Transitions in Emerging Democracies”, and “Security Sector Oversight: Protecting Democratic Consolidation from Authoritarian Backsliding and Partisan Abuse”.

2. How and when do you write? Do you have a routine or do you write whenever and wherever you find the time?

I write when our kids let me do so, which means during normal business hours, and rarely in the evenings or on the weekends anymore.

3. Whose scholarship jumps to the top of your reading list when she or he publishes something new? 

I read in comparative politics as well as comparative constitutional law, because much of my work tries to bridge the two fields. Steve Levitsky, Lucan Way, and Andreas Wimmer are on my must read list these days.

4. Is there an article or book that influenced you as a student and that continues today to be an important reference point for you?

Ely’s Democracy and Distrust for its integration of political theory and constitutional doctrine; Alexander Bickel’s The Least Dangerous Branch for its account of strategic judicial decisional avoidance that knits together a range of disparate doctrines; Hart’s Concept of Law for its account of the internal point of view; Dworkin’s “Hard Cases” for its description of the phenomenology of common law adjudication (although I associate myself with Fred Schauer’s criticisms of Dworkin).

5. What are some of the big questions ripe for inquiry in your area of research interest?

Constitutional design, process and interpretation in the context of constitutional transitions of various kinds. Some projects I have in the pipeline under this general theme include what we can learn from the breakdown of liberal democracy in Europe in the 1930’s for contemporary debates about democratic deconsolidation and what constitutional design can do (if anything); how to hybridize elite and popular constitution-making in post-authoritarian and post-conflict constitutional transitions; proportionality analysis by constitutional courts in post-authoritarian democracies; how to blend integrationist and accommodationist approaches to constitutional design in ethnically divided societies; the tradeoff between transitional justice and negotiated transitions to democratic rule.

BONUS Question

6. Do you have any advice to share with younger scholars in public law, say a doctoral candidate or a junior faculty member?

This is comparative constitutional law’s moment. We may be facing the greatest global challenge to liberal democratic constitutionalism since WWII. For those of us who live and work in the United States, but study the world, the myth of American exceptionalism has been punctured, and comparative experience has never been more important to mainstream legal and political analysis. The best scholarship will combine analytical rigor with political salience. Rise to the challenge.

Print Friendly
Published on February 24, 2017
Author:          Filed under: Reviews

An Explicit Constitutional Change by Means of an Ordinary Statute? On a Bill Concerning the Reform of the National Council of the Judiciary in Poland

–Piotr Mikuli, Professor and head of Chair of Comparative Constitutional Law, Jagiellonian University

Towards the end of January 2017, the Polish Ministry of Justice introduced a bill reforming the current legal status of the National Council of the Judiciary. If passed as proposed, the bill would seriously undermine the independence of the judiciary in Poland.

The bill is a sequential step on the road to reshaping the legal order in Poland in a direction in which the standard meaning of the most essential constitutional concepts can be questioned.[1] All measures taken by the ruling Law and Justice Party (PiS) are presented under the guise of ‘necessary reforms’ or ‘greater transparency’ and are justified with reference to the lofty catch phrases of democracy and the notion of ‘the sovereign’, who, in the parliamentary elections, awarded the winning majority the right to unrestrained operation. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Małgorzata Gersdorf, just after releasing the bill, dramatically declared that ‘the époque in which we relied on the principle that the democratic state is ruled by law, as expressed in Art. 2 of the Constitution, has ended’.[2]

Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
Published on February 23, 2017
Author:          Filed under: Developments

Comparative Law in the Age of Trump (I-CONnect Column)

Aslı Bâli, UCLA School 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 2017, see here.]

2016 was marked by a series of high-profile examples of democratic reversals or backsliding, from the Philippines to Poland, from Turkey to Thailand. There is now talk of an “authoritarian wave” where until recently analysts spoke in terms of waves of democracy. Even more surprising, or disorienting, has been the genuine concern expressed about possible threats to democracy in the United States. Understanding the mechanisms by which democracy gives way to illiberal governance and electoral authoritarianism is perhaps the most pressing question that scholars of comparative law and comparative politics must address.

The thinning of the line between democratic and authoritarian practices—particularly as authoritarian tendencies arise under democratic auspices—has been analyzed in scholarship focused largely on non-Western cases. As a scholar working on Turkey, I viewed the election campaign in the United States during the summer and fall of 2016 with concern. In discussing developments in the campaign with colleagues, however, I struggled to persuade them that there was much to learn about American politics from the study of Turkey. After the election and especially since the Trump administration has taken office, I feel less like a Cassandra.

Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
Published on February 22, 2017
Author:          Filed under: Analysis

Article Review: Ioanna Tourkochoriti on Jeremie Gilbert and David Keane’s “Equality versus fraternity? Rethinking France and its Minorities”

[Editor’s Note: In this installment of I•CONnect’s Article Review Series, Ioanna Tourkochoriti reviews Jeremie Gilbert and David Keane’s “Equality versus fraternity? Rethinking France and its Minorities,” which appears in the current issue of I•CON. The full article is available for free here.]

Ioanna Tourkochoriti, National University of Ireland Galway

Jeremie Gilbert and David Keane have written a very interesting article on the delicate relationship between the universalist legal culture dominant in France and the impact that this conception has upon minorities. The authors analyze a number of legal rules that are constitutive of the French republican model. Further, they make a very interesting contribution to the relevant literature by arguing that: “France needs a new interpretative approach and that activating fraternity as a constitutional principle offers the legal means by which this could be realized.”

The authors analyze a number of French policies adopted in the name of the constitutional principle of equality, which show that the French Model has led to practices of social exclusion. These policies are motivated by a conception of the role of the government as not allowed to advantage a minority group. For instance, the collection of statistical data on the basis of ethnicity or religion is prohibited[1] and the French legal framework on non-discrimination has been calibrated, the authors argue, to avoid referring to the rights of minorities. According to the French Conseil Constitutionel, the implementation of the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages would be contrary to the French Constitution as it would challenge the principles of indivisibility of the Republic and of equality of all citizens.[2] The authors discuss the decision of the same Council on affirmative action in access to public higher education.[3] Special measures of recruiting students are accepted in reference to socio-economic criteria defined on a geographical basis for deprived suburban areas provided that there is no reference to “minorities.” In other words, affirmative action is accepted in France provided that it is defined in reference to socio-economic criteria and not on grounds of origin, race or religion.[4] As the authors note, United Nations treaty bodies have called for France to reconsider these policies and to adopt some form of minority rights-based approach.

The authors also discuss the historical development of the republican model of integration. Their narrative focuses on the rejection of cultural identities and of communitarianism as a whole in reference to race, religion or other collective grounds. The principle of equality dictates that the state consider citizens as individuals and not as members of groups. Special measures founded on ethnicity, race or other grounds would lead to a weakening of the “living together” philosophy as understood in France.[5]

Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
Published on February 21, 2017
Author:          Filed under: Reviews

What’s New in Public Law

–Simon Drugda, Nagoya University Graduate School of Law (Japan)

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 Spanish Constitutional Court ruled unconstitutional the Catalan “independence route map,” including the resolution to hold a referendum on independence which had been suspended since last December.
  2. The President of the European Court of Human Rights appointed a new judge of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Prof Giovani Grasso from Italy.
  3. The Constitutional Court of Moldova held that imposing mandatory payment for school books on pupils of elementary and secondary schools is unconstitutional, since the books constitute an essential element of the study process.
  4. The Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt struck down provisions of the civil servants law that granted Muslims paid leave to go on pilgrimage to Mecca while denying Christians the same right.
  5. The UK Supreme Court seeks to improve diversity on the bench.

In the News

  1. The Upper House in Pakistan unanimously adopted a resolution seeking to enhance role and powers of the Senate to protect the rights of federal units.
  2. Ecuador heads to the polls to elect a new President, National Assembly, and vote in a referendum that seeks to bar public officials from hiding wealth in offshore tax havens. If it is successfully passed, politicians and public servants will have a year to repatriate their money from abroad.
  3. The EU Parliament approved the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the EU.
  4. The Romanian Parliament agreed on Monday to hold a referendum regarding anti-corruption measures after public protests.
  5. The Parliament of Finland voted 120-48 to pass a law allowing same-sex marriage.

New Scholarship

  1. Catarina Santos Botelho, 40 Anos De Direitos Sociais – Uma Reflexão Sobre O Papel Dos Direitos Fundamentais Sociais No Século XXI (40 Years of Fundamental Social Rights – A Reflection on the Role of Fundamental Social Rights in the 21st Century) Julgar 29 (2016) (examining the role of social rights in the twenty-first century constitutionalism)
  2. David J. Gerber, A Global Adaptive System for Supporting Human Rights? (2017) (proposing a view of institutions for the protection of human rights as components of a global adaptive system)
  3. Aslı Ü. Bâli and Hanna Lerner (eds.), Constitution Writing, Religion and Democracy (2017) (exploring the challenge of crafting a democratic constitution under conditions of deep disagreement over a state’s religious or secular identity)
  4. Scott Newton, The Constitutional Systems of the Independent Central Asian States: A Contextual Analysis (2017) (undertaking a comparative analysis of the Kyrgyz Republic and Republics of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in their cultural, historical, economic, and socio-political context)
  5. Adam Perry, Mercy and Caprice under the Indian Constitution, Indian Law Review (forthcoming 2017) (critically examining case law of the Supreme Court of India on powers of the executive to pardon offenders)
  6. Eoin Carolan, Leaving Behind the Commonwealth Model of Rights Review: Ireland as an Example of Collaborative Constitutionalism (2016) (developing a model of collaborative constitutionalism as an alternative to conventional models of constitutional review)
  7. Mazen Masri, The Dynamics of Exclusionary Constitutionalism Israel as a Jewish and Democratic State (2017) (examining the constitutional implications of Israel’s definition as a ‘Jewish and democratic’ state informed by a socio-legal approach) [The introduction chapter of the book is available for download at]

Calls for Papers and Announcements

  1. The Laureate Program in Constitutional Law at the University of Melbourne, funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC), and led by Prof Adrienne Stone invites application for the visiting fellowships in a comparative constitutional law mentoring scheme. Laureate Visiting Fellowships offer outstanding female doctoral and early career researchers to participate in an intensive mentoring program. Applications close on 12 March 2017.
  2. The Institute for International and Comparative Law in Africa (ICLA) at the University of Pretoria invites interested scholars to apply for the position of African country reporters for Oxford’s Constitutions of the Countries of the World (CCW).
  3. The Palestine Yearbook of International Law invites submissions of scholarly articles to its XX Volume. The deadline for abstracts is March 15, 2017.
  4. Utrecht Journal of International and European Law invites submission to its 85th edition in the summer of 2017 on ‘General Issues’ within international and European law. The submission deadline is April 18, 2017.
  5. The Cambridge Doctoral Workshop in Legal Theory invites submissions for its third edition, to be held on June 5, 2017. The deadline for abstracts is March 24, 2017.
  6. The Cegla Center for Interdisciplinary Research of the Law at Tel Aviv University organizes an international conference on ‘Judicial Review – Law and Politics.’ The conference will mark the publication of Prof Daniel Friedmann’s book: ‘The Puse and the Sword – The Trials of Israel’s Legal Revolution.’

Elsewhere on the Internet

  1. Tobias Lock and Tom Gerald Daly, Brexit and the British Bill of Rights: Capturing Constitutional Complexity, UK Constitutional Law Association
  2. Donnchadh O’Conaill, Reflections on the Citizen’s Assembly (3): The Presentation of Dr. Joan McCarthy, Human Rights in Ireland
  3. Rebecca Cook, South Africa: Genetic-link requirement for surrogacy is constitutional, reporohealthlaw
  4. Olivier De Schutter and Paul Dermine, Social Rights in the New Economic Architecture of the European Union, Oxford Human Rights Hub
  5. Elena Simina Tănăsescu, Criminal policy or criminal politics?, Blog of the IACL, AIDC
  6. Mark Elliot, Distinguishing Anisminic? Ouster clauses, parliamentary sovereignty and the Privacy International case, Public Law for Everyone
  7. Pierre de Vos, No, the Con Court cannot remove the President from office, Constitutionally Speaking
  8. Bianca Selejan Gutan, Living Democracy in Romania: From Protest to Referendum?, Verfassungsblog
  9. Marcin Matczak, A Polish Marbury v. Madison?, Verfassungsblog
  10. Heather Roberts, Ceremony matters: The lasting significance of the swearing-in ceremony of Chief Justice Susan Kiefel, AUSPUBLAW
  11. Neil Siegel, Reciprocal Legitimation in Response to President Trump, Balkinization
Print Friendly
Published on February 20, 2017
Author:          Filed under: Developments

Announcing the Inaugural Issue of the Africa Journal of Comparative Constitutional Law

–Dr. Tom Kabau, Co-Editor in Chief, Africa Journal of Comparative Constitutional Law; Senior Lecturer in Law, School of Law, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

The inaugural issue of the Africa Journal of Comparative Constitutional Law (AJCCL) (volume 1, 2016) is now out. The AJCCL is published by JUTA Law of South Africa and is hosted by the Kenya School of Law in Nairobi. Supported by a distinguished International Advisory Board, the AJCCL provides expert analysis of and commentary on constitutional issues relevant to Africa and the developing world. The contents of the inaugural issue include:

  1. J Oloka-Onyango and Christopher Mbazira, ‘Befriending the judiciary: Behind and beyond the 2016 Supreme Court amicus curiae rulings in Uganda’;
  2. Tom Kabau, ‘Constitutional dilemmas in the recovery of corruptly acquired assets in Kenya: Strengthening judicial assault on corruption’;
  3. Niharika Bahl, ‘Accommodation and altercation: The challenge of legal pluralism in India and South Africa’;
  4. Fredrick Sekindi, ‘Another perpetuation of incumbency through the supreme law: The conceptualisation of the presidency under the 1995 Constitution of Uganda’;
  5. Aydin Atilgan, ‘Global constitutionalism in the context of the Third World: Remarks in pursuit of a new paradigm’.

Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
Published on February 19, 2017
Author:          Filed under: Reviews

On the Looming Split in the Polish Constitutional Order: Harris v Dönges in Central Europe?

Mikołaj Barczentewicz, University College, University of Oxford

As has been widely reported (see, e.g., here), the Polish Constitutional Tribunal is now headed and effectively controlled by the judges appointed in a controversial manner by the Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość, PiS) party. This means that PiS is in a position to view the Tribunal as captive. Accordingly, all state organs controlled by PiS are likely to respect and follow the Tribunal’s new decisions, which was not necessarily the case before (see, e.g. here and here). However, not all public bodies are controlled by PiS. The judiciary and many local governments have a good deal of independence. It looks like we will see exactly how much independence they have in practice, because some of their representatives vowed to ignore judgments of the ‘new’ Constitutional Tribunal.[1] Will this mean a split in the Polish legal system? In this short note, I argue that even though it may mean a ‘partial’ split, it will still be the case that in an important sense there is one Polish legal system.

Read the rest of this entry…

Print Friendly
Published on February 18, 2017
Author:          Filed under: Analysis