Intercultural Performance and Dialogue. From Richard Schechner Performance Studies Onwards

Attraverso un excursus storico, teorico e metodologico, questa tesi di dottorato analizza la nascita, gli sviluppi e l’attuale dimensione costitutivo-identitaria dei Performance Studies, un ambito di ricerca accademica che, nato negli Stati Uniti alla fine degli anni Settanta, ha sempre palesato una natura restia nei confronti di qualunque tentativo definitorio. Se i Performance Studies concepiscono la performance sia come oggetto d’analisi sia come lente metodologica, e se, come evidenziato da Richard Schechner, praticamente tutto può essere “elevato a performance” e quindi indagato secondo le categorie analitiche di questa disciplina, ecco allora che, con uno slittamento transitivo e “meta-metodologico”, questa ricerca dottorale ha scelto come proprio oggetto di studio i Performance Studies stessi, osservandoli “as performance” e avvalendosi degli strumenti metodologici suggeriti dal suo stesso oggetto d’analisi. Questo lavoro indaga come l’oggetto di studio dei Performance Studies sia, seguendo la teoria schechneriana, il “behaved behavior”, e dunque come di conseguenza, il repertorio, prima ancora che l’archivio, possa essere considerato il fedele custode delle “pratiche incorporate”. Soffermandosi su esempi di “reenactment” performativo come quelli messi in atto da Marina Abramović e Clifford Owens, così come sui tentativi condotti dalla sezione dell’Intangible Cultural Heritage dell’UNESCO, suggerisce validi esempi di “archiviazione” della performance. L’elaborato prende poi in esame casi che esemplificano la proficua identificazione tra “studiare performance” e “fare performance”, sottolinea il ruolo cruciale e imprenscindibile determinato dal lavoro di ricerca sul campo inteso come “osservazione partecipante”, ed evidenzia il costante coinvolgimento sociale e politico assunto dai Performance Studies. Questa dissertazione affronta e supporta l’efficacia dei Performance Studies nel proporsi come uno strumento innovativo in grado di analizzare un mondo sempre più performativo nelle sue dinamiche. La loro natura tanto interdisciplinare quanto interculturale sembra farne una lente adeguata attraverso cui promuovere livelli diversi di performance dialogica tra culture localmente distinte ma globalmente assimilabili.

Vorsorglicher Rechtsschutz. Vorsorgliche Massnahmen im internationalen Kontext, offene Fragen im neuen Arrestrecht und Sicherungsmassnahmen der ZPO, mit Beiträgen von Dr. Isabelle Chabloz, Dr. Richard Gassmann, PD Dr. Pascal Grolimund, Dr. Jürg Roth, Prof. Dr. Daniel Staehelin

Am 9. September 2011 führte das Institut für Verfahrensrecht und Internationales Privatrecht (CIVPRO) der Universität Bern in bewährter Zusammenarbeit mit der schweizerischen SchKG-Vereinigung die zweite Schweizer Tagung für Internationales Zivilverfahrensrecht durch. Im Mittelpunkt der Tagung standen vorsorgliche Massnahmen im internationalen Kontext vor dem Hintergrund der neuesten Entwicklungen, namentlich (aber nicht nur) des neuen Lugano-Übereinkommens. Der Tagungsband enthält die auf den Vorträgen basierenden, überarbeiteten und erweiterten Beiträge namhafter Autorinnen und Autoren zum vorsorglichen Rechtsschutz im neuen IZPR (Pascal Grolimund). Besondere Aufmerksamkeit gilt dem neuen Arrestrecht sowohl im als auch ausserhalb des Anwendungsbereichs des Lugano-Übereinkommens (Richard Gassmann und Jürg Roth). Ebenso enthält der Band Beiträge zu den Sicherungsmassnahmen in der Realvollstreckung (Daniel Staehelin) sowie zur Anerkennung ausländischer vorsorglicher Massnahmen (Isabelle Chabloz).

The Constitutional-Judicial Control of the Legislative and Executive Powers in Central and Eastern European Countries

This project looked at the nature, contents, methods, means and legal and political effects of the influence that constitutional courts exercise upon the legislative and executive powers in the newly established democracies of Central and Eastern Europe. The basic hypothesis was that these courts work to provide a limitation of political power within the framework of the principal constitutional values and that they force the legislature and executive to exercise their powers and duties in strict accordance with the constitution. Following a study of the documentary sources, including primarily the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions and decisions of constitutional courts, Mr. Cvetkovski prepared a questionnaire on various aspects of the topics researched and sent it to the respective constitutional courts. A series of direct interviews with court officials in six of the ten countries then served to clarify a large number of questions relating to differences in procedures etc. that arose from the questionnaires. As a final stage, the findings were compared with those described in recent publications on constitutional control in general and in Central and Eastern Europe in particular. The study began by considering the constitutional and political environment of the constitutional courts' activities in controlling legislative and executive powers, which in all countries studied are based on the principles of the rule of law and the separation of powers. All courts are separate bodies with special status in terms of constitutional law and are independent of other political and judicial institutions. The range of matters within their jurisdiction is set by the constitution of the country in question but in all cases can be exercised only with the framework of procedural rules. This gives considerable significance to the question of who sets these rules and different countries have dealt with it in different ways. In some there is a special constitutional law with the same legal force as the constitution itself (Croatia), the majority of countries allow for regulation by an ordinary law, Macedonia gives the court the autonomy to create and change its own rules of procedure, while in Hungary the parliament fixes the rules on procedure at the suggestion of the constitutional court. The question of the appointment of constitutional judges was also considered and of the mechanisms for ensuring their impartiality and immunity. In the area of the courts' scope for providing normative control, considerable differences were found between the different countries. In some cases the courts' jurisdiction is limited to the normative acts of the respective parliaments, and there is generally no provision for challenging unconstitutional omissions by legislation and the executive. There are, however, some situations in which they may indirectly evaluate the constitutionality of legislative omissions, as when the constitution contains provision for a time limit on enacting legislation, when the parliament has made an omission in drafting a law which violates the constitutional provisions, or when a law grants favours to certain groups while excluding others, thereby violating the equal protection clause of the constitution. The control of constitutionality of normative acts can be either preventive or repressive, depending on whether it is implemented before or after the promulgation of the law or other enactment being challenged. In most countries in the region the constitutional courts provide only repressive control, although in Hungary and Poland the courts are competent to perform both preventive and repressive norm control, while in Romania the court's jurisdiction is limited to preventive norm control. Most countries are wary of vesting constitutional courts with preventive norm control because of the danger of their becoming too involved in the day-to-day political debate, but Mr. Cvetkovski points out certain advantages of such control. If combined with a short time limit it can provide early clarification of a constitutional issue, secondly it avoids the problems arising if a law that has been in force for some years is declared to be unconstitutional, and thirdly it may help preserve the prestige of the legislation. Its disadvantages include the difficulty of ascertaining the actual and potential consequences of a norm without the empirical experience of the administration and enforcement of the law, the desirability of a certain distance from the day-to-day arguments surrounding the political process of legislation, the possible effects of changing social and economic conditions, and the danger of placing obstacles in the way of rapid reactions to acute situations. In the case of repressive norm control, this can be either abstract or concrete. The former is initiated by the supreme state organs in order to protect abstract constitutional order and the latter is initiated by ordinary courts, administrative authorities or by individuals. Constitutional courts cannot directly oblige the legislature and executive to pass a new law and this remains a matter of legislative and executive political responsibility. In the case of Poland, the parliament even has the power to dismiss a constitutional court decision by a special majority of votes, which means that the last word lies with the legislature. As the current constitutions of Central and Eastern European countries are newly adopted and differ significantly from the previous ones, the courts' interpretative functions should ensure a degree of unification in the application of the constitution. Some countries (Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and Russia) provide for the constitutional courts' decisions to have a binding role on the constitutions. While their decisions inevitably have an influence on the actions of public bodies, they do not set criteria for political behaviour, which depends rather on the overall political culture and traditions of the society. All constitutions except that of Belarus, provide for the courts to have jurisdiction over conflicts arising from the distribution of responsibilities between different organs and levels in the country, as well for impeachment procedures against the head of state, and for determining the constitutionality of political parties (except in Belarus, Hungary, Russia and Slovakia). All the constitutions studied guarantee individual rights and freedoms and most courts have jurisdiction over complaints of violation of these rights by the constitution. All courts also have some jurisdiction over international agreements and treaties, either directly (Belarus, Bulgaria and Hungary) before the treaty is ratified, or indirectly (Croatia, Czech Republic, Macedonia, Romania, Russia and Yugoslavia). In each country the question of who may initiate proceedings of norm control is of central importance and is usually regulated by the constitution itself. There are three main possibilities: statutory organs, normal courts and private individuals and the limitations on each of these is discussed in the report. Most courts are limited in their rights to institute ex officio a full-scale review of a point of law, and such rights as they do have rarely been used. In most countries courts' decisions do not have any binding force but must be approved by parliament or impose on parliament the obligation to bring the relevant law into conformity within a certain period. As a result, the courts' position is generally weaker than in other countries in Europe, with parliament remaining the supreme body. In the case of preventive norm control a finding of unconstitutionality may act to suspend the law and or to refer it back to the legislature, where in countries such as Romania it may even be overturned by a two-thirds majority. In repressive norm control a finding of unconstitutionality generally serves to take the relevant law out of legal force from the day of publication of the decision or from another date fixed by the court. If the law is annulled retrospectively this may or may not bring decisions of criminal courts under review, depending on the provisions laid down in the relevant constitution. In cases relating to conflicts of competencies the courts' decisions tend to be declaratory and so have a binding effect inter partes. In the case of a review of an individual act, decisions generally become effective primarily inter partes but is the individual act has been based on an unconstitutional generally binding normative act of the legislature or executive, the findings has quasi-legal effect as it automatically initiates special proceedings in which the law or other regulation is to be annulled or abrogated with effect erga omnes. This wards off further application of the law and thus further violations of individual constitutional rights, but also discourages further constitutional complaints against the same law. Thus the success of one individual's complaint extends to everyone else whose rights have equally been or might have been violated by the respective law. As the body whose act is repealed is obliged to adopt another act and in doing so is bound by the legal position of the constitutional court on the violation of constitutionally guaranteed freedoms and rights of the complainant, in this situation the decision of the constitutional court has the force of a precedent.

The Ideology, Politics and Autonomous Art of Richard Weiner: (An Event in Discourse)"

The first aim of the project was to compile documentation on the life and work of Richard Weiner, a Czech journalist, writer and poet who spent the best part of his life as Paris correspondent for Lidove noviny. Langerova looked at the contexts and the growing independence of certain parts of his work, the distribution of thematic compositional elements into different parts of discourse and their position in the autonomous space of a work of art. Looking at the features of minority literature and the contemporary contexts of Weiner's life and work Langerova focuses on the situation of the Jewish community (Wiener came from an assimilated Jewish family). For this minorities, the function of language as a medium of communication which is able to create an autonomous world became increasingly important. Literature, which is based on this function of language, is a political matter par excellence before it begins forming as an autonomous, independent and divergent place. This means that everything private and intimate is closely connected to political and social responsibility, while supposedly objective genres contain subjective features. Another important characteristic is "nomadism", which asks the question of "Where do I belong". This was very important in Czechoslovakia after World War I , as in the issue of Zionism. Although Weiner rejected Zionism, he asks this question in his writing and it is reflected at a symbolic level in his work, which shows a fundamental thematic and compositional plan of a journey, cross-roads and wandering. These theses were reflected in Weiner's life, which was a series of continuous transfers and unplanned moves, often when he thought he had found his place. As well as tracing the course of his life, and his relations with and views of other writers, Langerova looks at his writings in various areas. Her major focus is the divergence of trivial and great events into different types of discourse in Richard Weiner's work, their transfer (small into great, trivial into mythical) and their historical context.