This paper takes as starting point the relative indeterminateness of current legal systems. This circumstance determines from the point of view of judicial activity a substantial freedom for judges, which translates into the existence of different interpretive possibilities. For this reason the role of argumentationin judicial activity has been reinforced, but at the same time the question arises of how to control the judges and what kind of responsibility they have in exercising their functions.

The paper looks at the establishment of religion clause in the First Amendment to the US Constitution, and cases, e.g. Brown v. Gilmore, followed by Croft v. Perry and Sherman v. Koch, cases that relate to the concept of the “moment of silence” in educational institutions in which it was claimed that such events constitute a breach of the establishment clause. Courts have been inconsistent in their decision-making, which may indicate a lack of transparency not only in the interpretation of (...) the relevant phrase in the Constitution but also in the judicial interpretation of the “three-pronged test” with regard to “excessive entanglement” as laid out in Lemon v. Kurtzman of 1971. The paper discusses the “moment of silence” within the framework of a model of silence in which this type of silence would be labeled as either textual or situational silence. (shrink)

In a recent line of cases, senior judges in the UK have been called upon to adjudicate in complaints over the failure of health and local authorities to meet the welfare needs of citizens. Local authorities claimed that the disputes had been precipitated by a lack of resources allocated by central government to meet local demand. This article examines the role of the courts in resolving a fundamental tension between central government policy of financial cost-cutting on the one hand and (...) welfarist principles embodied in legislation for the delivery of public services on the other. Questions are raised about the relevance and appropriateness of rights-based adjudication in welfare needs contexts and about the reluctance of courts to intervene in the resolution of resource allocation disputes even where fundamental rights, particularly in areas such as health, community care, and education where notions of rights are inextricably bound up with use of financial resources. These key cases have arisen prior to the implementation of the Human Rights Act 1998. Where relevant, the likely impact of the Act on welfare needs disputes is considered. (shrink)

Recensión de N. Belloso Martín, El control democrático del poder judicial en España, Universidad de Burgos/ Moinho do Verbo, Curitiba, 1999.

A propósito de su reciente visita a Colombia, invitado por la Corte Constitucional y la Universidad de La Sabana, los profesores Leonardo García Jaramillo y Vicente F. Benítez-R. entrevistaron al profesor Jeremy Waldron. Waldron fue Chichele Professor en la Universidad de Oxford, discípulo y contradictor de Dworkin, y es uno de los autores más influyentes del debate teórico político y constitucional contemporáneo. Actualmente es University Professor de la Universidad de New York. La traducción al español de la entrevista es también (...) de Leonardo García Jaramillo y Vicente F. Benítez-R... (shrink)

El Programa de Ética y Teoría Política de la Universidad Nacional de Córdoba reúne a investigadores, becarios doctorales y post-doctorales, profesores y estudiantes avanzados de la carrera de Derecho. El objetivo del grupo es evaluar las instituciones públicas y las conductas de los funcionarios, legisladores, jueces y abogados. El Programa desarrolla diversas líneas de investigación, entre las que se encuentra la evaluación de las políticas de seguridad. En este contexto, se desarrollaron diferentes actividades de formación, se llevaron adelante dos proyectos (...) de investigación, entre los que se encuentra el que se presenta a continuación, y se promovieron diferentes medios de transferencia de los resultados que se presentan al final del informe. Durante el periodo 2011-2012, se llevó adelante la primera investigación sobre la aplicación del Código de Faltas de la Provincia de Córdoba. Tal investigación fue fruto de la cooperación internacional entre la Universidad Nacional de Córdoba y la Universidad de la Rioja de España. La investigación concluyó en el “Informe y relevamiento sobre la aplicación del Código de Faltas en la Ciudad de Córdoba” que mostró la sistematicidad y selectividad con la que se aplicaba a jóvenes de diferentes barrios. El informe también mostró cuáles son las razones que los jóvenes identificaban como causa de la detención. En este informe, surgió que, pese a la sistematicidad y selectividad de las detenciones arbitrarias que afectaban la vida de los jóvenes, estos no tenían acceso a la justicia para denunciar, reparar o prevenir tal situación. (shrink)

O presente artigo objetiva compreender se o Judiciário pode vetar a implementação de uma Política Pública em decorrência dos parâmetros ideológicos sustentados pelo gestor público que a formatou. Para tanto, tomou-se como ponto de partida o seguinte problema de pesquisa: é possível que o Poder Judiciário proíba uma política pública a partir da ideologia desta? O trabalho foi dividido em três capítulos; o primeiro deles trazendo a discussão atinente ao pós-positivismo jurídico neste país; o segundo visando esclarecer a respeito do (...) conceito de ideologia; e o terceiro e último abordando o controle judicial sobre as chamadas escolas cívico-militares. Ao cabo, concluiu-se que a intromissão do judiciário nesta seara constitui-se em caso de ativismo judicial, que desvirtua e corrompe a separação dos poderes. O mandato político concedido ao gestor público concede a ele a liberdade de escolher a maneira como conduzirá suas ações, desde que constitucionais. Utilizou-se, na pesquisa, os métodos qualitativo e bibliográfico de pesquisa. (shrink)

El artículo analiza la justificación deliberativa de la revisión judicial a partir los originales aportes de la obra de Carlos Nino. Propone que el deliberativismo solo puede defender consistentemente un rol para la revisión judicial si esta se orienta radicalmente a las condiciones justificatorias y deliberativas de las decisiones, prácticas y políticas públicas, y no a la evaluación sustantiva de su consistencia con los derechos fundamentales, incluso los que sean considerados precondiciones democráticas. Argumenta que la versión más difundida (...) de las tesis de Carlos Nino caía en una inconsistencia -al tratar de preservar un ámbito sustantivo para la revisión judicial relacionado con los derechos a priori- y reconstruye una versión alternativa y menos conocida, articulada en uno de sus últimos libros, en la que la revisión judicial es articulada en clave radicalmente procedimental-justificatoria. The paper analyzes the deliberative justification of judicial review centered on the original contribution of Carlos Nino’s work. It proposes that deliberativism can only defend, consistently, a role for judicial review in a democracy if the institution is radically oriented to the justificatory and deliberative conditions of public policies, practices and decisions, abandoning any substantive evaluation of their consistency with fundamental rights, even those that are considered as democratic preconditions. The paper argues that the most known version of Carlos Nino’s thesis on the subject was partially inconsistent -while trying to preserve some room for substantive judicial review related to a priori rights- and considers an alternative and less known version, presented in one of nino’s last books, where judicial review is constructed with that radically procedimental-justificatory approach. (shrink)

Este artigo apresenta um panorama da jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal sobre o controle judicial do orçamento público e a proteção dos direitos humanos enquanto fim do Estado e do direito, especialmente considerando a recente tese fixada sobre o assunto. A questão de saber se é possível conciliar a atividade judicial com o controle de constitucionalidade dos orçamentos públicos é complexa e polêmica. Diante disso, para além de analisar as implicações orçamentárias decorrentes da judicialização dos direitos sociais positivos, (...) o objetivo do presente estudo é analisar a postura do Poder Judiciário (STF) com relação ao próprio orçamento.AbstractThis article presents the evolution on the Brazilian Supreme Court jurisprudence involving public budget review, in the light of the human and fundamental rights promotion as a state’s goal – specially regarding the most recent court’s ruling on this issue. The question regarding the possibility to reconcile judicial review with public budget control is a complex one. In analyzing its complexity, this study aims at the effects that litigation over economic and social rights produces on public budget and what kind of attitude should we expect from the Judiciary regarding public budget planning. (shrink)

Mitchel Lasser's Judicial Deliberations compares the argumentative practices of the French Cour de cassation, the US Supreme Court, and the European Court of Justice (ECJ), and examines how they achieve judicial legitimacy. In this review I firstly question the models of judicial legitimacy presented by Lasser. I believe that the French ‘institutional’ model relies far more on the interplay between the Cour de cassation and the legislature than on the system of selection of those who take part (...) in the judicial discourse or on their conception of law which would deny judicial decision a place among the sources of law. I also have doubts about the lack of institutional means of judicial control and the emphasis on ‘argumentative transparency’, which lies at the core of Lasser's presentation of the US system. Finally the ECJ, somewhat included rather as an afterthought in the book's central analysis, in my opinion faces rather different problems from those identified in the book. Secondly, I discuss a deeper problem of Judicial Deliberations: its lack of conceptual clarity and the rather scant evidence it provides for some of its bold claims. In conclusion I make the case for a ‘comparative jurisprudence’ approach, suggested some time ago by William Ewald, which in my view Judicial Deliberations follows only in name. (shrink)

A adoção de um catálogo constitucional de direitos e o fortalecimento do judicial review, trouxeram como consequência a judicialização da política em inúmeras democracias, onde se verifica uma expansão da atuação do Poder Judiciário em detrimento das esferas representativas do Estado. Neste contexto, tem se observado em países do Sul Global, o emprego de novos mecanismos procedimentais em casos que envolvem a violação contínua e generalizada de direitos fundamentais, de alguns grupos menos favorecidos, decorrente de bloqueios políticos e institucionais, (...) denominados de “litígios estruturais”. (shrink)

Judicial Deliberations compares how and why the European Court of Justice, the French Cour de cassation and the US Supreme Court offer different approaches for generating judicial accountability and control, judicial debate and deliberation, and ultimately judicial legitimacy. Examining the judicial argumentation of the United States Supreme Court and of the French Cour de cassation, the book first reorders the traditional comparative understanding of the difference between French civil law and American common law (...) class='Hi'>judicial decision-making. It then uses this analysis to offer the first detailed comparative examination of the interpretive practice of the European Court of Justice. Lasser demonstrates that the French judicial system rests on a particularly unified institutional and ideological framework founded on explicitly republican notions of meritocracy and managerial expertise. Law-making per se may be limited to the legislature; but significant judicial normative administration is entrusted to State selected, trained, and sanctioned elites who are policed internally through hierarchical institutional structures. The American judicial system, by contrast, deploys a more participatory and democratic approach that reflects a more populist vision. Shunning the unifying, controlling, and hierarchical French structures, the American judicial system instead generates its legitimacy primarily by argumentative means. American judges engage in extensive debates that subject them to public scrutiny and control. The ECJ hovers delicately between the institutional/argumentative and republican/democratic extremes. On the one hand, the ECJ reproduces the hierarchical French discursive structure on which it was originally patterned. On the other, it transposes this structure into a transnational context of fractured political and legal assumptions. This drives the ECJ towards generating legitimacy by adopting a somewhat more transparent argumentative approach. (shrink)

Judicial review (richterliches Prüfungsrecht), administrative review (Verwaltungsgerichtbarkeit), and constitutional review (Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit) are three different ways in which the judiciary has sought to control the executive and legislative powers of the state. Historically and functionally they are closely linked. I intend to discuss them in their German context, focussing, in particular, on the Weimar Republic, that is to say, on the period between 1919 and 1932. Although I shall not be addressing the highly interesting parallels with the U.S. Supreme (...) Court, or with the comparable courts in Italy, France, and, especially, Austria, I should like to invite attention to them, for there is really no Sonderweg in Germany as far as these developments are concerned. (shrink)

Este trabajo propone un replanteamiento a la forma de entender el activismo judicial, sobre todo, alejarlo de las críticas que se han gestado desde diferentes posiciones teóricas sin un sustento empírico fuerte, ya que en la práctica judicial ese activismo, en específico, el que se da en sede constitucional de última instancia, representa una vía institucional para la concretización de los derechos fundamentales y la sociedad democrática. Así, el activismo judicial al representar una consecuencia del control (...) judicial tendrá una base institucional que es compatible con el diseño institucional del Estado Constitucional, pues ese diseño ha conferido discrecionalidad a los jueces constitucionales para concretizar el contenido de la Constitución. (shrink)

"In this paper I shall attempt to sketch a defense of the plain man's view that the job of the judge, qua judge is to apply the law." What seems to have lead to the other view is the pervasive role of policy and principle in the justification of judicial decisions. This is no argument, however, for the existence of discretion: "For while it must be admitted that judges are entitled to appeal to certain general policies and principles, this (...) by no means implies that they are entitled to exercise discretionary judgment in the formulation of such standards." With Dworkin, distinguishes weak and strong discretion: the former means merely final or controversial; the latter implying that judges are at some point free to reach decisions not controlled by authoritative standards. Agrees with Dworkin that non-rule standards are part of law. "Both Dworkin and I are in agreement that law is a system of entitlements, although, as we shall see, we differ as to what is their basis." "At any rate, we share the view that a litigant before a court of law is not in the position of one begging a favor from a potential benefactor, but rather in that of one demanding a particular decision as a matter of right, as something to which the law entitles him. Such a demand has two aspects: a claim that a right exists which the law recognizes; a claim that this right takes precedence over any competing legal rights or obligations involved. Let us refer to these two sorts of claims respectively as ones involving decisions as to recognition, and weight.:" Argues that we cannot distinguish between legal moral principles and non-legal moral principles without a rule of recognition. The same is true for the problem of establishing weight between various principles - here we have to consider how well a principle coheres with the institutional practice of a legal system. "[I]t is the distinctive feature of the institutionalized role of the judiciary, in contrast to the legislative, that it may not directly base decisions on substantive considerations of the value of competing social policies." "The theoretical possibility of the law being indeterminate with regard to what it requires...does not imply any correspondign indeterminacy with regard to what is required of the judge.". (shrink)

This paper argues that there are instances in which tobacco control litigation is strengthening the justiciability of the right to health and health-related rights. This is happening in different parts of the world, but in particular in Latin America. In part this is because, to a certain extent, tobacco control litigation based on fundamental rights overcomes the traditional arguments against economic, social and cultural rights adjudication: the anti-democratic argument, the lack of technical competency argument, the problem of the (...) misallocation of scarce public resources and the problem of the implementation of judicial decisions. As we analyzed in this paper, tobacco control cases based on fundamental rights are allowing courts to elaborate on broader standards of judicial adjudication of social rights, e.g., expand notions of standing, progressive realization, and state obligations enshrined in the right to health. Key to this judicial trend is the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which provides a legal standard — supported by scientific evidence — defining concrete measures states should take to address the tobacco epidemic, and thus giving content to the right to health as it relates to tobacco control. (shrink)

La literatura jurídica está dedicando cada vez más atención a los estereotipos perjudiciales en los distintos momentos procesales, desde la fase de instrucción hasta que se dicta sentencia. En este trabajo la estereotipación judicial, como mala praxis de la argumentación judicial, se enfocará en la sentencia. Después de evidenciar el fundamental papel de la motivación como lugar donde poder ejercer un control de las decisiones judiciales (2), así como lugar donde detectar la estereotipación judicial (3), se (...) propondrá reflexionar sobre dos tipos de conocimiento que pueden vehicular los sesgos de una cultura discriminatoria: el sentido común (4) y la pseudo-ciencia (5). Si bien son dos tipos de conocimiento que se emplean en la motivación de la sentencia para alcanzar un mejor entendimiento de los hechos, se observa la necesidad de que el órgano judicial adopte una actitud crítica para detectar la subyacente práctica discriminatoria potencialmente presente en ambas formas de conocimiento. (shrink)

Constitutional law in the United States is, for most practical purposes, the product of ‘judicial review’, the power of judges to disallow policy choices made by other officials or institutions of government, ostensibly because those choices are prohibited by the Constitution. This extraordinary and unprecedented power, America's dubious contribution to the science of government, has made American judges the most powerful in the world, not only legislators but super-legislators, legislators with virtually the last word. Because lawmaking power divorced from (...) popular will is tyranny, most states have attempted to reconcile the lawmaking power of judges with representative self-government by subjecting all or some judges to some form of popular election. In all but four such states, judges, encouraged and supported by their fellow lawyers in the organized bar—would-be judges and beneficiaries of judicial power—have responded by adopting codes of judicial ethics that limit what candidates for election to judicial office are permitted to say. The effect is to undermine elections as a control on judicial power by limiting criticism of judicial activism, the misuse of judicial power. (shrink)

The concepts of judicial independence and the separation of powers are used more as terms of political rhetoric than legal concepts in the British constitution. Responsible government significantly merges the executive and the legislative while parliamentary sovereignty has meant that judicial independence has had a peculiar British meaning, rarely unpacked. In practice, in England, (and presumably in the other UK jurisdictions), individual judges are accorded a high degree of independence, while there is no effective independence of the judiciary (...) collectively as a branch of government. This article then asks what impact current constitutional changes will have on this state of affairs. Adherence to the EU, the growth of judicial review and other factors have already had an important impact; devolution, the Human Rights Act and the reform of the House of Lords may have impacts that will be different in both quality and degree. Coupled with other political changes the end result may well be a more effective separation of powers and more real independence for the judges as a branch of government; but that in turn may call for more open and meaningful democratic control over the appointment of judges. (shrink)

A Teoria do Constitucionalismo Popular representa construção dogmática de relevante importância para o estabelecimento de um novo diálogo institucional e abrandamento da atual supremacia do controle de constitucionalidade promovido pelo Poder Judiciário. A aproximação da Constituição ao povo, com a consequente atribuição da autoridade interpretativa à população, pode ser viabilizada pelo Tribunal de Contas da União, instituição ainda legitimada a realizar o controle de constitucionalidade e capaz de romper com a supremacia do "judicial review".

The well-established pattern of Executive expansionism and limited oversight of Executive action in times of terrorism is problematic from the civil libertarian point of view. How to limit such action has been the subject of much scholarship, a large amount of which focuses on perceptions of institutional competence rather than effectiveness. For the authors, the effective control of security-focused state action is to be judged by the extent to which it consists only of action that is necessary and proportionate (...) and thereby strikes an appropriate balance between security exigencies and individual rights. This article, written and structured in dialectic form, presents competing perspectives on effective oversight mechanisms: on the one hand, an extra-constitutionalism perspective, proposing a limited role for the Judiciary and emphasizing the need for legislative and democratic controls; and on the other, an argument for judicial muscularity. (shrink)

La Unión Europea es una Comunidad de Derecho. El Estado de Derecho es un valor europeo consagrado en el artículo 2 del Tratado de la Unión Europea. Su efectividad requiere de la existencia de un Poder Judicial independiente en la propia Unión y en todos y cada uno de los Estados miembros. Hoy en día está amenazado por un enemigo interior: el populismo iliberal que impugna las instituciones contramayoritarias del control de poder. En la primera parte de este (...) trabajo pondré de manifiesto la incompatibilidad del populismo iliberal con la cultura política democrática que da sentido a las instituciones contramayoritarias. Incompatibilidad que le conduce directamente a impugnar un principio básico inherente a aquella como es el respeto a la independencia judicial. En la segunda, analizaré la respuesta que ha dado la Unión Europea, y concretamente, el Tribunal de Justicia a los ataques a la independencia judicial por parte del Estado polaco. (shrink)

This work examines the development and performance of federal independent regulatory bodies in Canada in the period up to 1979, with particular attention to the operation of legislative schemes that include executive review and appeal powers. The author assesses the impact of the exercise of these powers on the administrative law process, and proposes new models for the generation, interpretation, implementation, review, and enforcement of regulatory policy. The study includes a series of representative case studies based on documentation and extensive (...) interviews with individuals drawn from government, agencies, and other parties, including counsel for public interest groups. This enables author, writing from her experience as a participant-observer embedded in the public interest legal sector, to draw on the experiences and perspectives of a broad range of participants in the regulatory process, including but not limited to those dealing with the regulated energy, transportation, communications, and foreign investment sectors. Legal principles identified as emergent in leading judicial decisions in administrative law are used to assess the powers and practices used in executive reviews and appeals. The author finds those powers and practices to be flawed and proposes changes. The proposed models are designed to accord with emerging legal principles and avoid flaws of the types identified in the review and appeal provisions. This work, written under contract with the Administrative Law Project of the Law Reform Commission of Canada, formed one part of a comprehensive study of administrative law at the federal level in Canada. (shrink)

Haines' work first appeared in 1914; this volume is a reprint of the enlarged second edition, which was judged at that time to be "clearly the most comprehensive survey of the origin and early growth of judicial review." In the second part, covering the period since the Civil War, Haines attempts an adequate rather than a complete quantitative study, including not only the relevant court decisions but also a survey of informed critical opinion concerning the powers of the Court (...) to rule on the constitutionality of legislation. In the final chapter he argues against the traditional doctrine that the courts do not control the legislature, but simply interpret the law. The study includes three lengthy, but not up-to-date, appendices. --L. S. F. (shrink)

Background/ObjectiveJudicial decisions must rest on formal reasoning. Nevertheless, informal reasoning sources were observed in judicial judgment making. Literature has identified sexual aggression cases as the most favorable for informal reasoning. Thus, a field study was designed with the aim of assessing the incidence and effects of cognitive and motivational biases in judicial agents in a case to rape to a woman.MethodsAs for this, Chilean judicial agents assessed an allegation of sexual assault in a case where the perpetrator (...) was known or unknown to the victim. The judicial agents answered to a measure of the myths about sexual aggression, the attribution of responsibility to complainant, the attribution of responsibility to accused, the attribution of credibility to the complainant testimony, the attribution of a nature of a rape to the alleged facts and an estimation of the probability of false/unfounded accusations.ResultsThe results revealed an estimation of false/unfounded accusations of sexual aggression significantly higher than the mean of the best estimates, but into the upper limit of the best estimates; that the studied population did not share, in general, the myths about sexual aggression; and that the sources of attributional biases were driven in favor and against the complainant. Nevertheless, the case study showed that a large number of judicial agents participated of an overestimation of the probabilities of false or unfounded allegations, and of the myths about sexual aggressions and of attributional biases against the complainant.ConclusionIn conclusion, informal reasoning sources were observed in judicial agents when only formal reasoning should prevail. Thus, judicial agents should be trained to control these sources of bias substituting them by formal reasoning. (shrink)

Artificial intelligence (AI) technology has brought new opportunities and challenges to the judicial field, which dramatically improves judicial efficiency and may even change the judiciary's way. The concept of judicial justice in the information age has a natural affinity with artificial intelligence. As artificial intelligence continues to make breakthroughs in judicial data sorting and deep learning knowledge, judicial artificial intelligence has gradually become a reality. Artificial intelligence can conduct legal argumentation, interpret calculation results, human–computer collaboration, (...) and judicial judgment. At the same time, the development of artificial intelligence technology also has potential risks, such as algorithm black boxes, algorithm discrimination, etc., to help judges achieve judicial justice, the value of judicial justice should be pursued to the limit of its judicial application. Therefore, artificial intelligence justice should be constrained by social relations, legal rationality, and code operation. (shrink)

This paper investigates the Turkish Constitutional Court (TCC)’s treatment of legal challenges brought against Turkey’s legal responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing on a detailed examination of the TCC’s institutional features, political origins and jurisprudential trajectory, and taking three politically salient judgments of the TCC concerning Turkey’s executive-dominated pandemic control as the point of departure, the paper argues that the TCC chose to exercise judicial restraint both in protecting fundamental rights and reviewing pandemic policies of the executive. It (...) also argues that the TCC’s judicial restraint during the pandemic was simply the re-manifestation of its ‘play-it-safe’ strategy — a judicial stance the TCC willingly adopted in the aftermath of the 2016 attempted coup despite possessing strong constitutional powers of judicial review, and its established attitude of assertive scrutiny in the past. From a more theoretical perspective, the analysis also explores how the passive role to which the TCC is consigned in an increasingly authoritarian regime since the 2016 failed coup relates to the global phenomenon of judicialization of authoritarian politics. (shrink)

In this article the author aims to assess Wilfrid J. Waluchow’s more recent book, by depicting its main aim, namely to provide a better understanding of judicial review in a constitutional democracy via the “living tree” metaphor; by disapproving an unwarranted claim, purposely to reduce the metaphor to the common law (bottom-up) methodology; and by re-developing his alternative, specifically to identify the community’s constitutional political morality, with a friendly amendment, which is already explicit —or at least somehow implicit— on (...) it, i.e. not only by judges but also by legislators, including framers, amenders or reformers, and other legal officials, including lawyers and citizens, which at the end will grant him the point.Resumen:En este artículo el autor intenta evaluar el libro más reciente de Wilfrid J. Waluchow, al caracterizar su objetivo principal, a saber: proporcionar una mejor explicación del control judicial de la constitucionalidad en una democracia constitucional mediante la metáfora del “árbol viviente”; al cuestionar un argumento, precisamente el que reduce dicha metáfora a la metodología (de abajo hacia arriba) del common law; y, al re-desarrollar una alternativa, específicamente al identificar la moralidad política constitucional de la comunidad, a partir de una enmienda amigable, misma que ya está explícita —o hasta cierto punto implícita— en ella, i. e. no sólo por los juzgadores sino también por los legisladores, incluidos los constituyentes originarios y revisores o reformadores, y otros operadores jurídicos, incluidos abogados y ciudadanos, lo cual al final de cuentas le dará el punto. (shrink)

Este escrito explicita que en las condiciones actuales del constitucionalismo y del presidencialismo de los países andinos, el control de convencionalidad es un instrumento útil para la realización de los derechos humanos y de la democracia, por vincular al juez común y a las otras instituciones estatales, en la tarea del control del poder, ya no solo desde la Constitución y las leyes de los distintos Estados, sino desde el derecho convencional, desde el derecho contenido en las convenciones (...) internacionales sobre derechos humanos suscritas por los Estados andinos, que cuentan con un órgano judicial de vigilancia, control y adjudicación de responsabilidad. (shrink)

Cigarette smoke is by far the leading preventable cause of death and disease in the United States. It has been estimated to kill between 419,000 and 589,000 smokers and up to 65,000 non-smokers each year. This premier status is hardly a new development, having been true for most of the last century, and known to be true at least since the first Surgeon General’s Report in 1964.Why then are tobacco products exempt from any significant federal oversight or control? Why (...) do cigarette advertisements, pitched to young smokers and non-smokers, continue to be plastered on every available surface inside and outside many convenience stores and to adorn the pages of popular magazines? Why, decades since the makers of far less dangerous products began to be held accountable in tort law, was the first payment by a cigarette company on a products liability judgment not made until 2001? (shrink)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is set to bring changes to legal systems. These technologies may have positive practical implications when it comes to access, efficiency, and accuracy in Justice. However, there are still many uncertainties and challenges associated with the implementation of AI in the legal space. In this research, we surveyed Judges on critical challenges related to the Judging Profession in the AI paradigm; Automated Adjudication; and Legal Principles. Our results suggest that (i) Judges are hesitant about changes in their (...) profession. They signal the need for adequate training that fosters legal literacy in AI, but are less open to changes in legal writing or their social and institutional role; (ii) Judges believe higher levels of automation only lead to fair outcomes if used in earlier phases of adjudication; (iii) Judges believe and are concerned about AI leading to Techno-Legal Positivism; and (iv) Judges consider that Legal AI technologies may have a positive impact in some legal principles, as long as everyone has equal access to those technologies and cybersecurity and judge on the loop safeguards are in place; and (v) Judges are strongly concerned about the de-humanization of Justice. They consider that assessing evidence, analyzing arguments, and deciding on a legal case should be inherently human. By surveying these practitioners, we aim to foster a responsible, inclusive, and transparent innovation in Justice. (shrink)

Elimination of state laws that preempt local antismoking ordinances is a national health objective. However, the tobacco industry and its supporters have continued to pursue statelevel preemption of local tobacco control ordinances as part of an apparent strategy to avoid the difusion of grassroots antismoking initiatives. And, an increasing number of challenges to local ordinances by the tobacco industry and persons supported by the tobacco industry are being decided in state supreme courts and courts of appeals. The outcomes of (...) seemingly similar cases about the validity of local smoke-free air ordinances vary signifcantly by state. This paper examines the common and unique aspects of the decisions and the potential implications of court rulings on preemption for future state tobacco control eforts and achievement of national health objectives around the elimination of preemption. Using a search strategy developed for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation System, cases where a state or federal appellate level court made a fnding on the validity of a local smoke-free air ordinance or regulation were identifed in 19 states. In contrast to previous studies, we found that cases in approximately half of states were decided for local governments. We also found that across the states, courts were considering similar factors in their decisions including the extent to which: the local government possessed the authority to pass the ordinance, the ordinance conficted with the state constitution, and state statutes preempt the ordinance. (shrink)

Despite governmental and private antismoking initiatives, tobacco smoking remains a significant public health and economic challenge. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that for each year between 1997 and 2001, cigarette smoking and exposure to secondhand smoke caused approximately 438,000 U.S. residents to die prematurely, resulting in 5.5 million years of potential life lost, and in $92 billion dollars of lost productivity. Also, despite convincing scientific data that laws against indoor smoking protect people from the negative health (...) effects of cigarette smoke, not all states have afforded their residents this protection. As of July 2007, 16 states neither restricted nor banned indoor smoking in restaurants, private worksites, or government worksites, and many state statutes only required separate rooms for smokers rather than eliminating all smoking inside buildings. In several states, local governments have attempted to fill this gap by adopting their own antismoking measures. (shrink)

Cigarette smoke is by far the leading preventable cause of death and disease in the United States. It has been estimated to kill between 419,000 and 589,000 smokers and up to 65,000 non-smokers each year. This premier status is hardly a new development, having been true for most of the last century, and known to be true at least since the first Surgeon General’s Report in 1964.Why then are tobacco products exempt from any significant federal oversight or control? Why (...) do cigarette advertisements, pitched to young smokers and non-smokers, continue to be plastered on every available surface inside and outside many convenience stores and to adorn the pages of popular magazines? Why, decades since the makers of far less dangerous products began to be held accountable in tort law, was the first payment by a cigarette company on a products liability judgment not made until 2001? (shrink)

El trabajo cuestiona la tesis según la cual durante los siglos XVI y XVIII funcionó en la Hispanoamérica Virreinal un régimen autoritario y extractivo; aporta evidencia de que, por el contrario, el orden virreinal o indiano funcionó según ideas e instituciones jurídicas que, en su contexto histórico, permitieron limitar el poder de las autoridades reales y de sus representantes; y argumenta por qué no se justificaba ni benefició a los ciudadanos de las nuevas Repúblicas romper de raíz con esas instituciones (...) jurídicas para adoptar un derecho público ajeno como el derecho administrativo francés. (shrink)

La infamia constituye el modelo ideal de castigo actual, ya que marca el cuerpo real y simbólico de ciertos sujetos, sin ninguna mediación institucional: los individuos y los grupos sociales se arrogan el derecho a imputar, juzgar y castigar. De manera que existen instituciones formales y, además, ciertos colectivos informales que neutralizan, excluyen, matan y encierran real y simbólicamente, ejerciendo un poder para-judicial y para-penal. En palabras más precisas, hay una penalidad que no pasa necesariamente por el poder (...) class='Hi'>judicial ni el proceso legal, sino por el tribunal social y psicológico efectuado por algunos agentes de control social informal. La realidad evidencia la absorción progresiva del proceso judicial en el juicio colectivo, sin ninguna garantía ni código distinto a la mirada, el murmullo social y el juicio instantáneo. La sociedad se transforma así en un tribunal permanente que odia, etiqueta y castiga, y cuya inmediatez, espontaneidad y anonimato reaviva la infamia de los viejos sistemas de la penalidad medieval, así como la devastadora marcación totalitaria. (shrink)

The Green Revolution in India which was heralded in the 1960‘s was a mixed blessing. Ambitious use of agro-chemicals boosted food production but also destroyed the agricultural ecosystem. Of late Indian farmers and agricultural scientists have realized this and are anxious to find alternatives – perhaps a non-chemical agriculture – and have even revived their age-old traditional techniques of natural farming. Scientists are working to find economically cheaper and ecologically safer alternatives to agro-chemicals. Blue-Green Algae Biofertilizers, Earthworm Vermicomposts, biological (...) class='Hi'>control of pests and herbal biopesticides are showing promise. Saline agriculture and sewage farming are also being promoted in India to augment food production in the face of water scarcity. There is a move to search for alternative foods, which are more nutritious, cheaper and have shorter harvest cycles. Farm and food policy in India has to change its outlook before there can be a second green revolution. (shrink)

O principal objetivo deste artigo é realizar uma crítica ao argumento segundo o qual o princípio majoritário apresenta riscos à democracia, usualmente empregado pelos defensores da legitimidade democrática do controle jurisdicional de constitucionalidade das leis. Em uma sociedade democrática, onde os princípios da liberdade e da igualdade são adotados, o princípio majoritário fornece um critério justo para identificar os pontos de vista que devem prevalecer ao final de processos coletivos de tomada de decisão. As regras da unanimidade e da maioria (...) qualificada são insuficientes para corrigir as alegadas injustiças produzidas pelo princípio da maioria, em virtude das dificuldades de efetivação que possuem, da ausência de real proteção às minorias e das contradições internas que apresentam. Embora seja possível imaginar um sistema jurídico no qual o princípio majoritário viabilize a existência de uma tirania ou ditadura da maioria, presumir que, nesse contexto, os juízes necessariamente formarão o grupo de defensores dos direitos das minorias é realizar uma aplicação seletiva do princípio da igualdade. (shrink)

In the wake of three high-profile judicial decisions concerning the use of human biological materials, the editors of this collection felt in 2011 that there was a need for detailed scholarly exploration of the ethical and legal implications of these decisions. For centuries, it seemed that in Australia and England and Wales, individuals did not have any proprietary interests in their excised tissue. Others might acquire such interests, but there had been no clear decision on the rights or otherwise (...) of the persons from whom the tissue was obtained. In 2009, however, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales recognised a limited exception to this position in Jonathan Yearworth and others v North Bristol NHS Trust . In that case, the Court held that the appellants, who had deposited semen samples for freezing before they undertook treatment for cancer, had “for the purposes of a claim in negligence … ownership of the sperm which they had ejaculated”. One year later, the Supreme Court of Queensland, Australia, took a similarly property-based approach to determining how a semen sample stored shortly before death should be dealt in Bazley v Wesley Monash IVF . According to that court, the co-executors of the estate had sufficient proprietary interests in the semen to legally demand its return from the laboratory where it was held. In 2011, the New South Wales Supreme Court similarly found that the widow of a recently deceased man had a right to possession of his semen in Joceyln Edwards; Re the estate of the late Mark Edwards .In the editors’ view, these decisions signalled a turning point in the Anglo-Australian jurisprudence in this area, taking the law a step beyond the decisions of the late 20th century such as R v Kelly , in which possessory rights were found …. (shrink)