Political trials are generally understood as extraordinary events in the life of liberal democracies, dramatically staging claims to and contests over political authority and legitimacy. Notably, political trials often attract commentary on their theatrics whereby the spectacle becomes a matter of uneasy scrutiny, despite the tacit crosscultural acknowledgment that the trial is an inherently theatrical form. This thesis is an attempt to conceptualise the political operations and effects of the relation between performance and performativity in trials, treating these as separate but related terms. It proposes a new framework for studying political trials by drawing on theories of performativity (J.L. Austin, Jacques Derrida, Judith Butler, Shoshana Felman, Stanley Cavell) which assist not only in rethinking the role and effects of performance in trials, but also in introducing a multivalence to the meaning of ‘political’ in political trials. In other words, performative theory allows the formulation of the politics of trials beyond its standard conception in terms of the utilisation of legal procedure for political ends or expediency, instead attuning us to the unconscious processes, inadvertent gestures, ghostly operations, structural infelicities and other similar dynamics that recast the political effects of legal proceedings. This thesis is therefore an attempt to conceptualise the spectacles and spectres of justice at the intersection of law and politics. In addition to incorporating brief discussions of various 20th and 21st century political trials to develop this theoretical framework, it offers close studies of three cases: the 1921 Berlin trial of Soghomon Tehlirian, and two contemporary ‘deep state’ trials from Turkey – the Ergenekon trial, and the Hrant Dink murder trial. A sustained concern is with legacies of political violence, how they are addressed or contained by law, and how they are perpetuated by law.

Major changes to the interpretation and application of the law of self-determination have taken place since the era of decolonisation. Notably, because most non-selfgoverning territories have attained independence, analyses have shifted by looking at the internal application of self-determination. Although competing theories have generally defined internal self-determination as conditions under which human rights, democratic representation and access to the right to development are realised, there is continued uncertainty about how the concept is applied. In this regard, questions emerge about the linkage between internal self-determination and external selfdetermination within the self-determination continuum and particularly, whether territorial minorities can secede based on claims of oppression arising from state failure to satisfy conditions associated with internal self-determination. This thesis proposes that a global governance approach is required for understanding and applying post-colonial self-determination. Unlike other analyses, it is argued that the conditions relative to internal self-determination are case-specific. This means that the application of internal self-determination will be influenced by specific legal and extra-legal considerations affecting the parties in the minority-state relationship. Significantly, the actual conditions of internal self-determination may look different in each case, even though a normative process of evaluation is applied. A global governance approach identifies and formulates obligations based on these legal and extra-legal considerations, and a process for territorial minorities to pursue external selfdetermination if internal self-determination is denied. When considering possible local, regional and international pressures affecting territorial minorities like economic inequalities, human rights abuses, and the adverse effects of globalisation, is important to appreciate that obligations cannot be defined by pre-set criteria, but are derived from multi-party dialogue and the identification of specific rights, roles and responsibilities belonging to territorial minorities, states and the international community.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

It is generally agreed that the transition from authoritarian rule to a constitutional democracy often coincides with the adoption of a new, incomplete and often vague constitution that empowers, and more importantly constrains newly appointed and elected state officials and institutions. In such a transitional setting, it is to be expected that power will not only be exercised on the basis of democratic principles and practices, but that it will also be based on the rule of law, that serves to limit the arbitrary and abusive exercise of public power. Therefore, this thesis examines the role of newly empowered courts in emerging and transitional states and the far-reaching implications of transferring political conflicts into constitutional cases concerning the rule of law. It argues that resolving and judicialising contested constitutional questions can put the rule of law, the constitutional judiciary and the process of transition itself to the ultimate test in the period immediately following a transition to democracy. This thesis presents an in-depth case study analysing the recent constitutional and political developments in the fragile state of Iraq following the US-led invasion in 2003. It uses original and detailed analyses of the key case law of the Federal Supreme Court of Iraq; the legal doctrinal method and insights from comparative literature on courts, law and the political system. This thesis assesses the Court in the context of broader constitutional principles, such as the rule of law, and modern phenomena, such as the trend towards the judicialisation of politics, in the specific circumstances of transitional democratic states. Findings from this research are complex and multiple; they illustrate how establishing and upholding the rule of law in states that are newly emerged from authoritarian rule can be a formidable undertaking, one that is shaped by a legacy of authoritarianism and at best ‘rule by law’. The research concludes that, judicialisation affects and is affected by the rule of law. Thus, state officials and institutions may well bypass the constitution as well as transfer political disputes into constitutional cases; often using the judiciary to legitimise and institutionalise excessive political powers. When the government is not bound by the rule of law and the law is not sovereign over all, judicialisation might expose the court to external interference, as well as affecting the functioning of a new parliament which is attempting to establish its powers and legitimacy.

No description available.

No description available.

It is generally accepted in legal and bioethical discourse that the patient has a right to self-determination. The competent patient should be in a position to make informed decisions about his/her care. In practice, this is often not the case. Paternalism, the approach to medical practice that left decision-making in the hands of the doctor, is waning and it is increasingly recognised in both the legal and medical arenas that there are values other than medical factors which determine the choices that patients make. Unfortunately, these developments have not resulted in huge advances for patient self-determination. This is largely because the mechanism by which the law purports to protect self-determination – the consent model – has fundamental flaws that constrain its effectiveness. In the last three decades, various attempts have been made to reconceptualise consent on order to make it fit for purpose, but these have achieved only limited success. This thesis starts with the premise that it is often more productive to consider what an alternative model has to offer, than to persist with amelioration of a model that is fundamentally flawed. The limitations of the consent model are discussed and a novel model, the property model, is advocated. The theoretical underpinnings of this model and its structure are presented. Essentially, the patient’s bodily integrity is protected from unauthorised invasion, and his/her legitimate expectation to be provided with the relevant information and opportunity to enable him/her make an informed decision regarding treatment is taken to be a proprietary right. It is argued that the property model potentially overcomes the limitations of the consent model, including the obstacle caused by the requirement to prove causation in consent cases. The property model provides a means by which the patient’s right to self-determination can be recognised as a distinct legal right. The model does not create new rights, only seeking to afford stronger protection of an existing right. No constitutional, professional, or other conflict is generated by applying property analysis to patient self-determination. The model fits with the rights-based approach that the courts have evolved in UK consent cases, and is consistent with modern medical professionalism.

This thesis identifies and defines the new African sovereignty. It establishes a modern sovereignty in Africa hatched from the changing nature of sovereignty in which countries come together at various levels or grades of partial surrender of national sovereignty in order to work closer together for their mutual advantage and benefit. To this end, the narrative zooms in on the central issues within the realms of money matters whereby a new model of monetary sovereignty and monetary solutions is designed in an attempt to ease the recurring tensions and challenges of modern national sovereignty in the continent of Africa. As such, this discussion will offer a historical journey through the constitution of sovereignty, to the birth of the nation state and international public law. It develops the theory of the changing nature of sovereignty within the modern state and opens new lines of inquiry for Africa. In this regard, it draws from juxtaposing and mixing elements of regional and global financial integration as well as retaining national financial sovereignty features to form this new design which I dub continental sovereignty. At its core, the thesis will deal with the legal aspects that stem from the co-mingling of legal systems of nation states and communities at the regional and global levels within the context of financial integration. The argument is that the rule of law remains sacrosanct in monetary management. Effective financial integration is the result of properly structured and managed legal frameworks with robust laws and institutions whether at a national, regional or global level. However, the thesis reveals that in order to avoid undermining the progress of Africa’s financial integration project, any solution for Africa must be immersed within a broader global solution where development issues are addressed and resolved and Africa can form a more central part in all relevant international discussion fora. The work will expound these issues by applying them within a regional and global context, with the state of affairs in Africa forming the nucleus. This application consequently presents the six key themes of the thesis which will be considered therein. They are: a.) regional advantage: which exploits the possibilities of deeper and further financial integration between smaller communal arrangements; b.) regional risk and exposure: the extent to which this deeper form of financial integration can spiral out of control if effected too quickly and too ambitiously; c.) global advantage: which considers the merits of global financial integration and the influence exerted by financial laws on the global financial architecture; d.) global risk and exposure: which considers the challenges of global financial integration especially within the background of the Global Financial Crisis 2007-2008; e.) African challenge: which considers the extent to which this analysis impacts the African economic and financial integration agenda; and f.) development challenge: which examines the extent to which global development issues impact the African solution (continental sovereignty) and the need for any solution for the continent to be roped into a broader global solution within which Africa can form an important part. Even though the thesis requests an optimistic undertone on the progress made so far, it unearths the African problem of multiple national sovereignty and multiple overlapping regional sovereignty constituted as the ‘spaghetti bowl’ dilemma. As such, the unique contribution to knowledge on financial integration in Africa can be echoed in these words: Africa‘s financial integration agenda has had little success in authenticating a systematic and dependable legal framework for monetary management. Efforts made have been incomplete, substandard, and not carefully followed through particularly reflected in the impuissant nature of the judicial enforcement mechanisms. Thus, the thesis argues that, any meaningful answer to the problems dogging the continent is inter alia deeply entrenched within a new form of cooperative monetary sovereignty. In other words, the thesis does not prescribe the creation of new laws; rather it advocates the effective enforcement of existing laws.