Explore the vast range of titles available.

The people of Myanmar were struck by three major human rights disasters during the country's period of democratization from 2003 to 2012: the 2007 Saffron Revolution, the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis in 2008, and the 2012 Rakhine riots, which would evolve into the ongoing Rohingya crisis. These events saw Myanmar's government categorically labeled as an offender of human rights, and three powerful Southeast Asian member states-Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia-responded to the violations in very different ways. In each case, their responses to the crises were explicitly shaped by norm conflict, which may be understood as a tension between international and domestic norms. Their reactions were compelled by a need to address conflicting domestic and international expectations for norm compliance regarding human rights protection and non-interference in internal affairs. In Norms in Conflict: Southeast Asia's Response to Human Rights Violations in Myanmar, Anchalee Rüland makes sense of state action that occurs when a governing body is faced with a circumstance that is at once in line with and contrary to its own governing policies. She defines five different types of response strategies to situations of norm conflict and examines the enabling factors that lead to each strategy. Domestic norms are known to evolve as a country's values change over time yet Rüland argues that the old and new norms may also coexist; knowledge of the underlying political context is crucial for those seeking a solid understanding of state behavior. Norms in Conflict challenges the conventional understanding of the logic of consequences in determining state behavior, advancing constructivist theory and establishing a provocative new conversation in international relations discourse.

This is the first legal monograph analysing multilevel governance of global ‘aggregate public goods’ (PGs) from the perspective of democratic, republican and cosmopolitan constitutionalism by using historical, legal, political and economic methods. It explains the need for a ‘new philosophy of international law’ in order to protect human rights and PGs more effectively and more legitimately ‘Constitutional approaches’ are justified by the universal recognition of human rights and by the need to protect ‘human rights’, ‘rule of law’, ‘democracy’ and other ‘principles of justice’ that are used in national, regional and UN legal systems as indeterminate legal concepts. The study describes and criticizes the legal methodology problems of ‘disconnected’ governance in UN, GATT and WTO institutions as well as in certain areas of the external relations of the EU (like transatlantic free trade agreements). Based on 40 years of practical experiences of the author in German, European, UN, GATT and WTO governance institutions and of simultaneous academic teaching, this study develops five propositions for constituting, limiting, regulating and justifying multilevel governance for the benefit of citizens and their constitutional rights as ‘constituent powers’, ‘democratic principals’ and main ‘republican actors’, who must hold multilevel governance institutions and their limited ‘constituted powers’ legally, democratically and judicially more accountable.

That the recent turn in European Constitutional Review has effectively brought about a revolution in European law has been observed before. At issue are two major developments in European judicial review. On the one hand, the European Court of Human Rights has been collapsing traditional boundaries between constitutional law and private law with a series of decisions that effectively recognized the \"horizontal\" effect of Convention rights in the private sphere. On the other hand, the European Court of Justice has also given horizontal effect to fundamental liberties embodied in the Treaty on the Function of the European Union in a number of recent cases in a way that puts \"established\" boundaries between Member State and Union competences in question. This book takes issue with these developments by bringing to the fore a key issue that the horizontality effect debate has hitherto largely overlooked, namely, the question of sovereignty. It shows with detailed references to especially the American debate on state action and the German debate on Drittwirkung that horizontal effect cannot be understood consistently without coming to grips with the conceptions of state sovereignty that inform different approaches to horizontal effect.

Les « valeurs » apparaissent fréquemment dans le discours des juristes, en particulier à propos des droits fondamentaux. Pourtant, parce qu'elles ne constituent pas un objet véritablement juridique, il semble que la science du droit contemporaine peine à en saisir la substance. La présence des valeurs dans le monde du droit, tout autant que l'impensé théorique qui l'entoure, rendent alors particulièrement nécessaire une étude approfondie sur le rapport entre valeurs et normes, c'est-à-dire sur la fondation axiologique du droit. La question des valeurs est de celles que l'on qualifie parfois de fondamentales. Elle interroge, en effet, les fondations libérales de notre ordre juridique, ainsi que notre rapport à la connaissance et à la morale. Du problème de la rationalité des valeurs aux tensions démocratiques qui en découlent, les questions recelées par les valeurs sont nombreuses et riches d'enseignements pour la science du droit.

In this paper, we analyse the ability of private individuals and organisations to enforce Australia’s treaty commitments, as referenced in domestic statutes. More particularly, we analyse the contribution of administrative law to the enforcement of international law within the domestic legal system. We study the complexity of such enforcement through two case studies centred on High Court decisions from the 1990s, 'Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh and Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority'. Through the case studies we analyse how and why international law commitments are altered when they are ‘drawn down’ into domestic law and litigants seek to enforce them there. We focus on a common implementation technique in Australian law, whereby treaty obligations constitute qualified limitations on executive discretion under statute. Through our case studies we illustrate how statutory reference to a treaty needs to be analysed as an intermediate step in implementation, with much of the work to make the treaty obligation enforceable in domestic law being undertaken by the administrative decision-makers charged with applying the statute, potentially supervised by the courts. Our themes are the role of domestic courts in enforcing treaty obligations and the inter-institutional dynamics generated by statutory implementation. We show how the legislative incorporation of international law may only constitute the starting point of a complex series of institutional interactions, often refracted through administrative law doctrine.

The complex relationship between international and municipal law has been the bone of significant scholarly contention. In the Indian context, despite a formal commitment to dualism, courts have effected an interpretive shift towards monism by espousing incorporation of international law. The case of Mohammad Salimullah v. Union of India, which involves the issue of deportation of Rohingya refugees from India, represents a challenge in this regard owing to the lack of clarity as to India’s obligations under the principle of non-refoulement. The paper uses the Supreme Court’s recent interim order in the said case as a case study to examine India’s engagement with international law. It argues that the order inadequately examines the role of international law in constitutional interpretation and has the unfortunate effect of ‘refouling’ Rohingyas by sending them back to a state where they face imminent persecution.

In this paper, we analyse the ability of private individuals and organisations to enforce Australia’s treaty commitments, as referenced in domestic statutes. More particularly, we analyse the contribution of administrative law to the enforcement of international law within the domestic legal system. We study the complexity of such enforcement through two case studies centred on High Court decisions from the 1990s, 'Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh and Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority'. Through the case studies we analyse how and why international law commitments are altered when they are ‘drawn down’ into domestic law and litigants seek to enforce them there. We focus on a common implementation technique in Australian law, whereby treaty obligations constitute qualified limitations on executive discretion under statute. Through our case studies we illustrate how statutory reference to a treaty needs to be analysed as an intermediate step in implementation, with much of the work to make the treaty obligation enforceable in domestic law being undertaken by the administrative decision-makers charged with applying the statute, potentially supervised by the courts. Our themes are the role of domestic courts in enforcing treaty obligations and the inter-institutional dynamics generated by statutory implementation. We show how the legislative incorporation of international law may only constitute the starting point of a complex series of institutional interactions, often refracted through administrative law doctrine.

Which way will Egypt go now that Husni Mubarak's authoritarian regime has been swept from power? Will it become an Islamic theocracy similar to Iran? Will it embrace Western-style liberalism and democracy?Egypt after Mubarakreveals that Egypt's secularists and Islamists may yet navigate a middle path that results in a uniquely Islamic form of liberalism and, perhaps, democracy. Bruce Rutherford draws on in-depth interviews with Egyptian judges, lawyers, Islamic activists, politicians, and businesspeople. He utilizes major court rulings, political documents of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the writings of Egypt's leading contemporary Islamic thinkers. Rutherford demonstrates that, in post-Mubarak Egypt, progress toward liberalism and democracy is likely to be slow. Essential reading on a subject of global importance, this edition includes a new introduction by Rutherford that takes stock of the Arab Spring and the Muslim Brotherhood's victories in the 2011-2012 elections.

A ‘squatter’ in the global South is another word for a seemingly incomprehensible heap of legal ambiguities, messy politics and abject poverty. Squatter dwellers are typically immigrants from the countryside, who squat on seized land and are caught in complex mazes of citizenship, labor and property laws. They are suspended in what I call ‘juridical limbo’—a situation in which overlapping legal identities and contradictory laws render individuals or entire communities into a state of semi-legal existence. Many squatters have fallen through the cracks of the legal arena and are vulnerable to being evicted without proper rehabilitation, but some of them have indeed learnt to use the law’s complications to their extralegal advantage. Using the case of two extraordinary land conflicts in India’s most populous city—Calcutta—this paper contrasts the claim-making strategies of two squatter settlements, providing a rich ethnographic account of their differential success in protecting their territory against eviction and of navigating their semi-legal status. Alongside establishing this variation, this paper also interrogates the proximate causes of this variation and puts forth a theoretical framework that focuses on the legal relationship between the state and the urban poor.

The European Court of Justice has been the dark horse of European integration, quietly transforming the Treaty of Rome into a European Community (EC) constitution and steadily increasing the impact and scope of EC law. While legal scholars have tended to take the Court's power for granted, political scientists have overlooked it entirely. This article develops a first-stage theory of community law and politics that marries the insights of legal scholars with a theoretical framework developed by political scientists. Neofunctionalism, the theory that dominated regional integration studies in the 1960s, offers a set of independent variables that convincingly and parsimoniously explain the process of legal integration in the EC. Just as neofunctionalism predicts, the principal forces behind that process are supranational and subnational actors pursuing their own self-interests within a politically insulated sphere. Its distinctive features include a widening of the ambit of successive legal decisions according to a functional logic, a gradual shift in the expectations of both government institutions and private actors participating in the legal system, and the strategic subordination of immediate individual interests of member states to postulated collective interests over the long term. Law functions as a mask for politics, precisely the role neofunctionalists originally forecast for economics. Paradoxically, however, the success of legal institutions in performing that function rests on their self-conscious preservation of the autonomy of law.