Abstract This paper discusses the transfer of judicial sovereignty in Kosovo from a comparative perspective. In particular, it addresses the transfer of constitutional jurisdiction to the Special Court of Kosovo. This court was formed as a result of Kosovo’s commitment to address allegations made by the Council of Europe in a document known as the Dick Marty report. The report alleges that war crimes and crimes against humanity and international law were committed during and in the aftermath of the Kosovo war (1998–1999). It took several years for the Court to be formed as constitutional amendments, legal infrastructure, and other practical steps were needed to make the Court operational. These preparatory measures have been taken, but practical results are missing, and there is fear that the Court might end up like previous UN- and EU-led justice systems, which did too little and were too late to address the culture of impunity in Kosovo.
{"title":"International(ized) Constitutional Court: Kosovo’s Transfer of Judicial Sovereignty","authors":"","doi":"10.1515/icl-2019-0016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2019-0016","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper discusses the transfer of judicial sovereignty in Kosovo from a comparative perspective. In particular, it addresses the transfer of constitutional jurisdiction to the Special Court of Kosovo. This court was formed as a result of Kosovo’s commitment to address allegations made by the Council of Europe in a document known as the Dick Marty report. The report alleges that war crimes and crimes against humanity and international law were committed during and in the aftermath of the Kosovo war (1998–1999). It took several years for the Court to be formed as constitutional amendments, legal infrastructure, and other practical steps were needed to make the Court operational. These preparatory measures have been taken, but practical results are missing, and there is fear that the Court might end up like previous UN- and EU-led justice systems, which did too little and were too late to address the culture of impunity in Kosovo.","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":"30 1","pages":"373 - 402"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82164068","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The normally challenging task of teaching international law is amplified when teaching international law in jurisdictions that face ongoing human rights problems and other failures of compliance with international law. In those jurisdictions, the dialectics between the globalized world economy and technology on the one hand and the intensification of hostility to human rights and substantive democracies (ie to the values of public international law) on the other hand are much more pronounced. Students will often resist international law and regard it as the ‘enemy of the state’ or a source of illegitimate foreign influence. The challenge of international law teachers in those jurisdictions is thus not only to teach international law but also to draw the students into – rather than alienate them from – thinking about their resistance to international law and about the relations between law, power and legitimacy. How to meet this and related challenges is the focus of this paper, which is based on the authors’ practical experiences of teaching international law in several jurisdictions with an international law crisis including Hong Kong, Israel, and the People’s Republic of China.
{"title":"Teaching International Law in Jurisdictions with International Law Crisis","authors":"Noam Zamir, M. Kielsgard","doi":"10.1515/icl-2019-0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2019-0017","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The normally challenging task of teaching international law is amplified when teaching international law in jurisdictions that face ongoing human rights problems and other failures of compliance with international law. In those jurisdictions, the dialectics between the globalized world economy and technology on the one hand and the intensification of hostility to human rights and substantive democracies (ie to the values of public international law) on the other hand are much more pronounced. Students will often resist international law and regard it as the ‘enemy of the state’ or a source of illegitimate foreign influence. The challenge of international law teachers in those jurisdictions is thus not only to teach international law but also to draw the students into – rather than alienate them from – thinking about their resistance to international law and about the relations between law, power and legitimacy. How to meet this and related challenges is the focus of this paper, which is based on the authors’ practical experiences of teaching international law in several jurisdictions with an international law crisis including Hong Kong, Israel, and the People’s Republic of China.","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":"16 1","pages":"259 - 280"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73616634","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-01DOI: 10.1515/icl-2019-frontmatter3
{"title":"Frontmatter","authors":"","doi":"10.1515/icl-2019-frontmatter3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2019-frontmatter3","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81846222","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract In this paper, I attempt to examine the evolution of judicial review of legislation in Sri Lanka with a view to better understanding how it has impacted the democratic fabric and constitutional matrix of Sri Lanka. The impact that judicial review of legislation has had on rights jurisprudence, enhancement of democracy, prevention of persecution against selected groups are analysed in this paper in relation to the Ceylon Constitutional Order in Council of 1946 (‘Soulbury’ Constitution) and the two autochthonous constitutions of Sri Lanka of 1972 and 1978. The first part of the paper comprises of a descriptive analysis of judicial review of legislation under the three Constitutions. This is expected to perform a gap filling function in respect of the lacuna that exists in Sri Lankan legal literature in relation to the assessment of the trends pertaining to judicial review of legislation in Sri Lanka. In the second part of the paper, I have analysed decided cases of Sri Lanka to explore how the judiciary has responded to legislative and executive power, and has given up or maintained judicial independence. In this respect, I have also attempted to explore whether the judiciary has unduly engaged in restraint thereby impeding its own independence. The third part of the paper evaluates the differences in technique and stance the judiciary has adopted when reviewing draft enactments of the national legislature and when reviewing draft or enacted statutes of Provincial Councils. From a comparative constitutional perspective, this assessment is expected to provide the background that is essential in understanding the island nation’s current constitutional discourse, transitional justice process, and its approach to human rights.
{"title":"Grasping at Straws: Judicial Review of Legislation in Sri Lanka","authors":"Danushka S. Medawatte","doi":"10.1515/icl-2019-0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2019-0002","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this paper, I attempt to examine the evolution of judicial review of legislation in Sri Lanka with a view to better understanding how it has impacted the democratic fabric and constitutional matrix of Sri Lanka. The impact that judicial review of legislation has had on rights jurisprudence, enhancement of democracy, prevention of persecution against selected groups are analysed in this paper in relation to the Ceylon Constitutional Order in Council of 1946 (‘Soulbury’ Constitution) and the two autochthonous constitutions of Sri Lanka of 1972 and 1978. The first part of the paper comprises of a descriptive analysis of judicial review of legislation under the three Constitutions. This is expected to perform a gap filling function in respect of the lacuna that exists in Sri Lankan legal literature in relation to the assessment of the trends pertaining to judicial review of legislation in Sri Lanka. In the second part of the paper, I have analysed decided cases of Sri Lanka to explore how the judiciary has responded to legislative and executive power, and has given up or maintained judicial independence. In this respect, I have also attempted to explore whether the judiciary has unduly engaged in restraint thereby impeding its own independence. The third part of the paper evaluates the differences in technique and stance the judiciary has adopted when reviewing draft enactments of the national legislature and when reviewing draft or enacted statutes of Provincial Councils. From a comparative constitutional perspective, this assessment is expected to provide the background that is essential in understanding the island nation’s current constitutional discourse, transitional justice process, and its approach to human rights.","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":"30 1","pages":"281 - 306"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74105753","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article discusses the idea of international human rights law as ‘constitutional law’. It applies the French concept of Le contrôle de conventionnalité des lois, to demonstrate the constitutional potentials of international human rights law in the domestic sphere. In most monist constitutional systems based on the French civilian model, international law takes precedence over acts of parliament and other domestic legislation. Due in part to that hierarchy, conventionnalité permits the courts to review domestic law for compatibility with international law. From that perspective, international human rights norms can be said to have assumed a ‘para-constitutional’ function. Using two case studies from francophone Africa, this article argues that conventionnalité has the potential to play a significant role in the domestic implementation of international human rights and ultimately contributing to a more comprehensive domestic human rights regime.
摘要本文探讨了国际人权法作为“宪法”的理念。它采用法国的法律公约(contrôle de conventinalit des lois)概念，以显示国际人权法在国内领域的宪法潜力。在大多数以法国民事模式为基础的一元论宪法制度中，国际法优先于议会法案和其他国内立法。部分由于这种等级制度，惯例法允许法院审查国内法是否符合国际法。从这个角度来看，可以说国际人权准则承担了一种“准宪法”功能。本文通过对非洲法语国家的两个案例研究，论证了惯例国际法有潜力在国内实施国际人权方面发挥重要作用，并最终有助于建立一个更全面的国内人权制度。
{"title":"International Constitutional Law and Judicial Review of Domestic Human Rights Legislation","authors":"Laura-Stella Enonchong","doi":"10.1515/icl-2018-0064","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2018-0064","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article discusses the idea of international human rights law as ‘constitutional law’. It applies the French concept of Le contrôle de conventionnalité des lois, to demonstrate the constitutional potentials of international human rights law in the domestic sphere. In most monist constitutional systems based on the French civilian model, international law takes precedence over acts of parliament and other domestic legislation. Due in part to that hierarchy, conventionnalité permits the courts to review domestic law for compatibility with international law. From that perspective, international human rights norms can be said to have assumed a ‘para-constitutional’ function. Using two case studies from francophone Africa, this article argues that conventionnalité has the potential to play a significant role in the domestic implementation of international human rights and ultimately contributing to a more comprehensive domestic human rights regime.","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":"76 4 1","pages":"118 - 87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87861831","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-08-01DOI: 10.1515/icl-2019-frontmatter2
{"title":"Frontmatter","authors":"","doi":"10.1515/icl-2019-frontmatter2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2019-frontmatter2","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84961864","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract The notion of urban autonomy is increasingly significant in a global era where city governments are playing an ever-growing role in development, as well as in domestic and international politics. While extending significantly beyond legal configurations of local government powers and functions, urban autonomy is importantly shaped, enabled and protected by constitutional and legal provisions. This is so especially where urban governance happens in a resource-strapped and often politically volatile environment. This article considers the extent to which formal constitutional structures, and their justiciability, enable and channel urban autonomy in the developing world, with a focus on the constitutionally ensconced powers and functional authority of cities in South Africa. Through an overview of relevant constitutional and statutory provisions and of court decisions upholding urban autonomy in intergovernmental disputes, the article illustrates that South African cities have been served well by a constitutional framework emphasising cooperative governance and developmental local government, as well as by the justiciable entrenchment of local government’s executive, legislative and administrative authority.
{"title":"Urban Autonomy in South African Intergovernmental Relations Jurisprudence","authors":"M. Pieterse","doi":"10.1515/icl-2018-0072","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2018-0072","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The notion of urban autonomy is increasingly significant in a global era where city governments are playing an ever-growing role in development, as well as in domestic and international politics. While extending significantly beyond legal configurations of local government powers and functions, urban autonomy is importantly shaped, enabled and protected by constitutional and legal provisions. This is so especially where urban governance happens in a resource-strapped and often politically volatile environment. This article considers the extent to which formal constitutional structures, and their justiciability, enable and channel urban autonomy in the developing world, with a focus on the constitutionally ensconced powers and functional authority of cities in South Africa. Through an overview of relevant constitutional and statutory provisions and of court decisions upholding urban autonomy in intergovernmental disputes, the article illustrates that South African cities have been served well by a constitutional framework emphasising cooperative governance and developmental local government, as well as by the justiciable entrenchment of local government’s executive, legislative and administrative authority.","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":"34 1","pages":"119 - 146"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86401272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This paper describes new legislation relating to citizenship of the Czech Republic, namely Act No 186/2013 Coll, and shows how wide the gap is between the law and the applicants’ expectations. It is based on an analysis of more than 1,600 naturalisation decisions from 2013–2016. This analysis made it possible to draw the conclusion that the decisive aspects for naturalisation are different from those perceived as important by the applicants themselves. The acquisition of Czech citizenship is not, in practice, conditional to making any extraordinary contribution or to a higher level of integration. The stipulated condition for naturalisation in the Czech Republic is the absence of any obstacle defined by the law. One of these possible obstacles is the conclusion that the applicant poses a risk to state security. Recently, there seems to be a trend, where particular attention is devoted to this criterion reflecting the actual fear of society.
{"title":"Naturalisation in the Czech Republic – The Gap between the Citizen and the State","authors":"Pavel Kandalec","doi":"10.1515/icl-2018-0079","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2018-0079","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper describes new legislation relating to citizenship of the Czech Republic, namely Act No 186/2013 Coll, and shows how wide the gap is between the law and the applicants’ expectations. It is based on an analysis of more than 1,600 naturalisation decisions from 2013–2016. This analysis made it possible to draw the conclusion that the decisive aspects for naturalisation are different from those perceived as important by the applicants themselves. The acquisition of Czech citizenship is not, in practice, conditional to making any extraordinary contribution or to a higher level of integration. The stipulated condition for naturalisation in the Czech Republic is the absence of any obstacle defined by the law. One of these possible obstacles is the conclusion that the applicant poses a risk to state security. Recently, there seems to be a trend, where particular attention is devoted to this criterion reflecting the actual fear of society.","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":"45 1","pages":"187 - 202"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84249034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Split into two parts, the Empirical Paper Series on Secession and Constitutionalism explores the relationship between constitutionalism and secession. While the second part of the article will examine the constitutional arrangement towards secession that prevailed in the states that had a region secede since 1900, this first part discusses the relationship between indivisibility and secession clauses in current constitutions and the prevalence of secessionist movements worldwide. Virtually all consequentialist claims contained in existing scholarship concerning the relationship between constitutionalism and secession fall within either one of two doctrinal creeds. Whereas the Indivisibilist School asserts that indivisibility clauses best prevent secessionism and that secession clauses necessarily prompt this phenomenon, the Secessionist School maintains that prohibiting secession is counter-effective and that recognising it as a right can help defuse secessionism by avoiding confrontational tactics. These claims are assessed on the basis on the Cohesion Dataset, the first-ever census of all constitutional arrangements regarding secession currently operative throughout the world. Contrarily to what existing doctrinal claims would suggest, the relationship between these various constitutional arrangements and secessionism is not linear, but rather U-shaped: both indivisibility and secession clauses are significantly associated with more secessionist activity than average. It is in fact constitutions where secession is neither permitted nor prohibited that are correlated with the least secessionist activity.
{"title":"Indivisibility and Secession Clauses in Current Constitutions and the Prevalence of Secessionist Movements – Empirical Paper Series on Secession and Constitutionalism, Part 1 of 2","authors":"A. Beauséjour","doi":"10.1515/icl-2018-0070","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2018-0070","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Split into two parts, the Empirical Paper Series on Secession and Constitutionalism explores the relationship between constitutionalism and secession. While the second part of the article will examine the constitutional arrangement towards secession that prevailed in the states that had a region secede since 1900, this first part discusses the relationship between indivisibility and secession clauses in current constitutions and the prevalence of secessionist movements worldwide. Virtually all consequentialist claims contained in existing scholarship concerning the relationship between constitutionalism and secession fall within either one of two doctrinal creeds. Whereas the Indivisibilist School asserts that indivisibility clauses best prevent secessionism and that secession clauses necessarily prompt this phenomenon, the Secessionist School maintains that prohibiting secession is counter-effective and that recognising it as a right can help defuse secessionism by avoiding confrontational tactics. These claims are assessed on the basis on the Cohesion Dataset, the first-ever census of all constitutional arrangements regarding secession currently operative throughout the world. Contrarily to what existing doctrinal claims would suggest, the relationship between these various constitutional arrangements and secessionism is not linear, but rather U-shaped: both indivisibility and secession clauses are significantly associated with more secessionist activity than average. It is in fact constitutions where secession is neither permitted nor prohibited that are correlated with the least secessionist activity.","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"147 - 186"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88723821","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-01DOI: 10.1515/icl-2019-frontmatter1
{"title":"Frontmatter","authors":"","doi":"10.1515/icl-2019-frontmatter1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2019-frontmatter1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85546269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：