60 resultados para Supreme Court
Resumo:
Un résumé en français est également disponible
Resumo:
En Argentine, la mise en place des lois internationales sur les droits humains dans les tribunaux locaux et son impact ne peuvent être séparés de l’histoire récente, qui a vu commettre des crimes massifs pendant la dictature de 1976 à 1983. En 1987, la Cour suprême a voté « la loi de l’Obéissance due » aussi appelée « loi de l’impunité ». Puis, en 2005, cette loi a été déclarée invalide par une nouvelle décision de la Cour suprême, car contraire à celles sur les droits humains. Les principes de la loi internationale ont prévalu pour permettre une justice efficace, ce changement soulignant le rôle de la société civile. Étant donné les réclamations grandissantes pour plus de justice dans la société argentine, le rôle de la société civile est essentiel pour comprendre la transformation et l’accroissement de la valeur normative des lois sur les droits humains dans les Cours suprêmes argentines. L’action de la société civile internationale est liée aux processus sud-américains de démocratisation, surtout dans le domaine des droits humains. La lutte contre l’impunité n’a été rendue publique que très récemment, soit seulement à partir de 2003. Elle se traduit aujourd’hui dans le rôle grandissant de l’expertise juridique et éthique dans la mise en place des politiques publiques. En fait, l’influence de la nouvelle stratégie dépend largement de la transparence des administrations bureaucratiques, des valeurs et de la volonté politique du gouvernement. Le changement légal peut être analysé selon l’acteur à l’origine du changement, le mécanisme par lequel le changement se fait et le contexte qui fournit l’opportunité pour ce changement. Dans le présent article, nous nous concentrons sur les stratégies argumentatives présentées par les juges dans la description des évènements entourant la décision de 2005. Le but de cet article est d’essayer de lier les stratégies des sociétés civiles avec l’argumentation légale dans la décision de 2005. Ces stratégies poussent à surmonter l’obstacle juridique : le fait que les crimes contre l’humanité n’étaient pas codifiés dans la loi nationale quand ils se sont déroulés (et ne le sont toujours pas.)
Resumo:
The article discusses the present status of weblogs and examines whether legal standards applicable to traditional press and media should be applied to that specific forum. The analysis is based on two key documents: the Draft Report on the concentration and pluralism in the media in European Union (2007/2253(INI)) of the European Parliament Committee on Culture and Education presented in March 2008 and a landmark decision of the Polish Supreme Court from July 26, 2007 (IV KK 174/07) in the light of present judicial tendency in other European countries. The first of the mentioned documents calls for the “clarification of the legal status of different categories of weblog authors and publishers as well as disclosure of interests and voluntary labelling of weblogs”. It emphasizes that the “undetermined and unindicated status of authors and publishers of weblogs causes uncertainties regarding impartiality, reliability, source protection, applicability of ethical codes and the assignment of liability in the event of lawsuits”. The position of the European Parliament, expressed in the document, raises serious questions on the limits of freedom of thought and speech on the Internet and on the degree of acceptable state control. A recent Polish Supreme Court decision, which caused quite a stir in the Polish Internet community, seems to head in the very direction recommended by the EP Culture Committee. In a case of two editors of a web journal (“czasopismo internetowe”) called “Szyciepoprzemysku”, available on-line, accused of publishing a journal without the proper registration, the Polish Supreme Court stated that “journals and periodicals do not lose the character of a press release due solely to the fact that they appear in the form of an Internet transmission”, and that ‘’the publishing of press in an electronic form, available on the Internet, requires registration”. The decision was most surprising, as prior lower courts decisions declined the possibility to register Internet periodicals. The accused were acquitted in the name of the constitutional principle of the rule of law (art. 7 of the Polish Constitution) and the ensuing obligation to protect the trust of a citizen to the state (a conviction in this case would break the collateral estoppel rule), however the decision quickly awoke media frenzy and raised the fear of a need to register all websites that were regularly updated. The spokesman of the Polish Supreme Court later explained that the sentence of the Court was not intended to cause a mass registration of all Internet “periodicals” and that neither weblogs nor Internet sites, that were regularly updated, needed registration. Such an interpretation of the Polish press law did not appear clear based only on the original text of the judgment and the decision as such still raises serious practical questions. The article aims to examine the status of Internet logs as press and seeks the compromise between the concerns expressed by European authorities and the freedom of thought and speech exercised on the Internet.
Resumo:
La tribune de l'éditeur / Editor's Soapbox
Resumo:
This paper is an examination of the Supreme Court of Canada's interpretation of federalism since constitutional repatriation in 1982. It argues that the lure of centralist efficiency is overpowering a fundamentally important part of our federal order: regionalism. The author contends that changes made by the Court to certain fundamental concepts of Canadian constitutional law now provide Parliament with greater latitude than before in the exercise of its legislative powers. According to the author, these changes are disturbing because they are structured so as to preclude consideration of the legitimate concerns of regional polities. Furthermore, he argues that the Court has reinforced the central government's power to regulate the economy, including intraprovincial matters affecting trade, by resorting to highly functional tests that emphasize economic efficiency over other criteria. This, he claims, makes it more difficult to invoke legitimate regional interests that would lead to duplication, overlapping and even, in the eyes of some, inefficiency. The author the focuses on the Court's treatment of environmental protection in an attempt to show the tension between the Court's desire to use a functional approach and the need to recognize regional interests. Finally, through an examination of recent case law, he attemps to demonstrate that the Court's dominant perspective remains functional despite its endorsement of a more community-oriented undestanding of federalism in Secession Reference. If the Court chooses to proceed in this manner, it will alienate regional polities and may encourage them to choose more radical means of asserting their differences. Further, the author argues that strict adherence to the functional effectiveness approach will undermine the very values that federalism is meant to promote.
Resumo:
Cet article a précédemment été publié par la Supreme Court Law Review (Second Series).
Resumo:
Since the advent of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, Canadians courts have become bolder in the law-making entreprise, and have recently resorted to unwritten constitutional principles in an unprecedented fashion. In 1997, in Reference re Remuneration of Judges of the Provincial Court of Prince Edward Island, the Supreme Court of Canada found constitutional justification for the independence of provincially appointed judges in the underlying, unwritten principles of the Canadian Constitution. In 1998, in Reference re Secession of Quebec, the Court went even further in articulating those principles, and held that they have a substantive content which imposes significant limitations on government action. The author considers what the courts' recourse to unwritten principles means for the administrative process. More specifically, he looks at two important areas of uncertainty relating to those principles: their ambiguous normative force and their interrelatedness. He goes on to question the legitimacy of judicial review based on unwritten constitutional principles, and to critize the courts'recourse to such principles in decisions applying the principle of judicial independence to the issue of the remuneration of judges.
Resumo:
Un résumé en anglais est également disponible.
Resumo:
This brief article is devoted to a critique of the arguments put forward by the Attorney General of Canada in connection with the Reference concerning certain questions relating to the secession of Quebec (hereinafter, "the Reference"). This critique will not be presented from a plainly positivist standpoint. On the contrary, I will be examining in particular (1) how the approach taken by the Attorney General impoverished the legal concepts of the rule of law anf federalism, both of which were, however, central to her submission; and, in a more general way, (2) how the excessively detailed analysis of constitutional texts contributes to the impoverishment of the symbolic function of the law, however essential that dimension may be to its legitimacy. My criticism will take into account the reasons for judgement delivered recently by the Supreme Court in the Reference.
Resumo:
The author outlines a new legal approach, which he labels federal constitutionalism, to the question of aboriginal difference in Canada. This approach has the potential to open up more fruitful avenues for the resolution of aboriginal law issues than either the “frozen rights” approach currently adopted by the Supreme Court of Canada or the treaty federalism approach, which posits that treaties should be used to resolve all differences between aboriginals and non-aboriginals. The author outlines the difficulties inherent in both the frozen rights and treaty federalism approaches. Federal constitutionalism, in contrast, draws its vitality from an organic understanding of Canada’s constitutional experience. It would allow aboriginal peoples to be seen as federal actors who have historically shaped the Canadian federation. Federal constitutionalism is a multi-faceted approach that would permit aboriginal questions to be addressed using the federal principle, thereby allowing the legal focus to move away from section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. Aboriginal peoples would be able to exercise the rights of sovereignty over their own internal affairs, while individual aboriginals could participate directly in federal and provincial governments without having to proceed through the intermediary of aboriginal representatives. Federal constitutionalism would allow aboriginal peoples a guaranteed sphere of autonomy, while permitting recognition of their historical interdependence with non-aboriginal peoples.
Resumo:
This short article will address the two following issues: the new vision of the Canadian constitutional order entertained by the Supreme Court in the Reference re Secession of Quebec (I) nd the impact of this new vision. upon the fate of Canada (II)
Resumo:
"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de LL.M. en droit option recherche"
Resumo:
"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de LL.M. en droit des affaires"