Over recent years, there has been an intense and polarised debate about the extent of democratisation in Turkey, although this has tended to be defined in institutional terms (for example, in the supposed reduction in military tutelage of the political system and the institutional recognition of minority rights). This study seeks to widen the terms of reference by examining the current challenges confronted by the Turkish media within the media-democracy relationship and, using the Kurdish question as a case study, examines the extent to which mainstream Turkish Media are contributing to deliberative democracy. It also seeks to identify where the Turkish media should be most appropriately located within competing models of media and democracy. This analysis of the challenges confronted in achieving and protecting media freedoms in Turkey is based on three empirical exercises. Semi-structured elite interviews were conducted with representatives from most of the mainstream media organisations in the country. Interviews were also conducted with political party representatives, NGO members and academics to ascertain their opinions of the media s democratic performance and credentials and also explore the extent to which they engage with journalists and news organisations routinely in their work. Finally, a content analysis of the coverage/content of two specific events related to the Kurdish Issue (the launch of the Kurdish language TV Channel TRT6 and Uludere Airstrike) in five mainstream Turkish newspapers was conducted. The interviews reveal sharply contrasting views about the extent to which democratisation processes are progressing in Turkey, and identify a range of barriers that continue to inhibit the democratic performance of the mainstream media (e.g. commercialization, state censorship, and other forms of political pressure). The detrimental impact of these factors is to a large degree confirmed by the content analysis of coverage of the Kurdish issue, but the analysis also shows that news output does contain a degree of diversity and difference. For this reason, it is not appropriate to conceive of the Turkish media as acting entirely as a closed message system for political elites.

"Thèse présentée à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de doctorat en droit (LL.D.)" / Depuis l'enchâssement constitutionnel de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés, le contrôle judiciaire de constitutionnalité subit d'importantes critiques. Pour contester la légitimité démocratique de ce contrôle, des politologues et des juristes invoquent notamment le fait que les juges ne sont pas élus, qu'ils ne représentent pas la population, alors qu'ils imposent leurs préférences et leurs interprétations aux législateurs et gouvernements. En réponse à ces critiques, des théories de la légitimité de la justice constitutionnelle ont été élaborées. Ce débat doctrinal influence la jurisprudence de la Cour suprême du Canada, ce qui se traduit par l'élaboration de différentes normes de contrôle judiciaire de constitutionnalité. Ce choix entre l'activisme et la retenue judiciaires est déterminant dans le résultat d'un contrôle constitutionnel sous la Charte. Alors que les critiques du contrôle judiciaire de constitutionnalité témoignent d'une conceptualisation insuffisante du jugement juridique, les attitudes de retenue et d'activisme semblent également problématiques au plan philosophique et théorique. Devant cette situation, la justice constitutionnelle doit être placée dans la perspective de la démocratie délibérative. Il est de plus possible de préciser la fonction du contrôle judiciaire de constitutionnalité dans un système juridique. Se renouvelle ainsi l'explication des opérations d'interprétation et de limitation des droits et libertés ainsi que celles de sanction et de réparation en cas de violation. En adoptant une dimension contextuelle et systémique, le contrôle judiciaire de constitutionnalité prend la forme d'une institutionnalisation de la critique interne du système juridique et sert ainsi d'instance d'autoreproduction du droit. / Judicial review has been the object of substantial criticism since the enshrinement of the Canadian Charter ofRights and Freedoms. Political scientists and lawyers have contested the democratic legitimacy of judicial review by notably invoking that although judges are not elected and do not represent the population, they nevertheless impose their preferences and interpretations on legislators and governments alike. In response to this criticism, theories have been developed addressing the legitimacy of constitutional justice. The jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Canada has been influenced by this ideological debate, which has in turn, established different norms ofjudicial review. The choice between judicial activism and restraint is a determining factor resulting in judicial review under the Charter. While the criticisms ofjudicial review suffer from an inadequate conceptualization of legal judgment, attitudes of judicial restraint and activism seem equally problematic with respect to theoretical and philosophical issues. Under these circumstances, constitutional justice must be considered from the perspective of deliberative democracy. Moreover, it is possible to specify the function ofjudicial review within a legal system. This can generate renewed understanding of the approaches to interpretation and limitation of rights and freedoms, as well those applying to sanctions and reparation in case of a violation. The adoption of a contextual and systemic approach institutionalizes judicial review as an internaI review of the legal system and thus serves as an authority for the self-reproduction of the law.

This thesis explores the intersection of freedom of expression (as protected in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter)) and copyright in Canada. In this thesis, I argue that both lower Canadian courts and the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) should reconsider their approaches to this intersection. Lower Canadian courts have consistently rejected arguments that provisions of Canada's Copyright Act unjustifiably infringe the Charter right to freedom of expression. The SCC, on the other hand, has consistently interpreted provisions of the Copyright Act in such a manner as to result in expanded protection for the expression interests of non-copyright owning parties. It has done so not by relying explicitly on the Charter right to freedom of expression, but through a process of statutory interpretation. I argue that both approaches merit reconsideration. Specifically, I argue that the approaches adopted by lower Canadian courts to the intersection of the Charter right to freedom of expression and copyright are based on now-invalidated approaches to both copyright and to freedom of expression, and are thus themselves invalid; that to the extent to which the SCC's approach to this intersection assumes that the Charter right to freedom of expression can be protected, in the context of copyright, through statutory interpretation alone, that it fails to adequately protect the Charter right to freedom of expression; that other leading national courts from which the SCC has previously sought assistance have explicitly engaged with this intersection, and that the SCC should follow suit; and that the SCC's own copyright and freedom of expression jurisprudence suggests that provisions of the Copyright Act may unjustifiably infringe the Charter right to freedom of expression. These four arguments, taken together, suggest that the time is ripe for reconsideration of this intersection.

The principle of autonomy of will is considered to be the crucial principle controlling all private relationships of human life. People in the sense of individuals of private law have opportunity to form their private relationships according to their free will thanks to the autonomy of will, even while within certain predetermined limits. The principle of autonomy of will is closely related to the principle of non-mandatory rule in private law and to the principle of equality, the principle of pacta sunt servanda and to the principle according to a person acts lawfully unless there is a legal rule prohibiting or curtailing that behaviour. The purpose of my thesis is to classify the term autonomy of will in its historical context and its definition in the context of other principles and institutions of private law. The importance of this principle is further illustrated by the specific expressions autonomy of will in our legal system. My thesis is composed of a general part and a special part. The general part is divided into three chapters. Chapter One deals with the historical appearance of autonomy of will from ancient times to modern history, ie from primary manifestations of autonomy of will in the contractual relationships of people to its international establishment. In the chapter Two of the...

English abstract Protecting the environment is currently one of the complex issues of law and policy. Necessary response to adverse changes in the environment lays down binding rules on environmental protection in international law, EU law and national law. The EU internal market is secured by four fundamental market freedoms - the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital. The relationship with the environment is reflected in the quality and characteristics of the products, and the conditions under which these products are marketed in different Member States. Environmental protection is strongly linked with service area, which concerns matters such as the operation of landfills. The EU's objectives in the areas of internal market and environmental protection very often collide. Then it is necessary to find a balanced approach between the protection of environmental objectives and ensuring the economic principles of the European Union.

Le principe de la séparation des pouvoirs est l’un des plus importants fondements de la démocratie moderne qui reconnaît la suprématie de la loi. Ce principe est en effet un pilier essentiel dans la construction d’un régime politique démocratique basé sur la coopération et l’équilibres entre les pouvoirs. Platon, Aristote, John Locke, Montesquieu et Rousseau ont théorisé ce principe qui a ensuite été appliqué après les révolutions américaine et française. Son application représente l’une des plus garanties essentielles contre la tyrannie et le despotisme des gouvernants et l’assurance du respect des droits de l’homme et ses libertés, outre le fait de réaliser la justice. Par l’étude de ce principe, cette recherche se veut pour objectif de focaliser l’attention des juristes sur son importance au sein de la hiérarchie des fondements constitutionnels dans l’Etat. En outre, cette étude vise à mesurer l’intérêt des pays sujets de notre analyse (La Tunisie, l’Egypte, l’Algérie, la Libye et le Maroc) pour ce principe et son influence sur leurs constitutions. Ce qui permettra de déterminer si la séparation des pouvoirs y est théorique ou réellement mise en pratique, ainsi que les caractéristiques de l’application de ce principe dans ces pays. / The principle of separation of powers is one of the most important principles on which the idea of modern democracy is governed by the rule of law. It is a fundamental pillar of the structure of a democratic political system based on cooperation and balance between powers. This principle was expressed by Plato, Aristotle, John Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau. In the wake of the American and French revolutions, and their applications has become the most important guarantee to prevent the domination and tyranny of rulers as well as respect for human rights and freedoms and justice.This research aims at enlightening those interested in studying the law in its importance and prestige in the constitutional rules of the state. (Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria, Libya, and Morocco) and its impact on their constitutions, to determine whether the separation of powers is theoretical or practical, and to examine the specificity of these countries in applying this principle.

Submitted by JOSIANE SANTOS DE OLIVEIRA (josianeso) on 2017-05-23T12:00:43Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Azarias Maluzane Chunguane_.pdf: 2321381 bytes, checksum: ae9ae6299322f4d5d127f5def7b5e91a (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-05-23T12:00:44Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Azarias Maluzane Chunguane_.pdf: 2321381 bytes, checksum: ae9ae6299322f4d5d127f5def7b5e91a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-03-29 / CNPQ – Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / A República de Moçambique é um Estado de Direito Democrático, que regida pela Constituição (2004), garante, nos seus princípios fundamentais, que o Estado respeite os direitos e liberdades fundamentais do Homem. Porém, apesar da Constituição estabelecer esses princípios orientadores do Estado de Direito, várias questões têm posto em causa os Direitos Humanos, a Segurança Pública e a própria afirmação do Estado de Direito Democrático. Dentre essas questões, destacam-se uma justiça deficitária, violação de Direitos Humanos e o uso excessivo e desproporcional da força por agentes policiais contra cidadãos que se manifestam em prol de seus direitos. Isto impõe a necessidade de promover mudanças na vida diária da instituição policial e nas atitudes do seu pessoal em prol do respeito e salvaguarda dos Direitos Humanos. Isto significa que os Direitos Humanos devam ser sempre observados no processo da atividade de comando e liderança, na captura de pessoas, no tratamento de detidos, no uso da força, em suma, em toda a atividade policial coletiva e individual. Visando a observar as causas que concorrem para a violação dos Direitos Humanos por parte da Polícia, analisar o nível de conhecimento dos Direitos Humanos por parte da Polícia da República de Moçambique (PRM) e expor situações de violação dos Direitos Humanos por parte da Polícia da República de Moçambique (PRM), desenvolvemos nosso estudo, inicialmente, sob o aporte teórico do conceito de Estado Democrático de Direito, liberdades de expressão, reunião e manifestação, Direitos Humanos, Segurança Pública, Polícia e sua função. A segunda parte é essencialmente qualitativa e coadjuvada pela abordagem quantitativa, sendo que o método qualitativo será adequado para compreender o estágio do respeito dos Direitos Humanos pela Polícia da República de Moçambique (PRM). Por fim, apresentamos nosso contexto e sujeitos colaboradores da pesquisa, para, então, a partir de seus discursos, identificar os fatores que concorrem para o uso da força na atuação policial moçambicana durante manifestações públicas. / The Republic of Mozambique is a State of Democratic Right, governed by the Constitution (2004), insures, in its fundamental principles, that the State respects fundamental human rights and freedoms. However, although the Constitution establishes these guiding principles of the Rule of Law, several issues have challenged Human Rights, Public Security and the very affirmation of the State of Democratic Right. Among these issues are deficient justice, violation of human rights, and excessive and disproportionate use of force by police officers against citizens who speak out for their rights. This imposes the need to promote changes in the daily life of the police institution and in the attitudes of its personnel in order to respect and safeguard Human Rights. This means that Human Rights must always be observed in the process of command and leadership activity, in the capture of people, in the treatment of detainees, in the use of force, in short, in all collective and individual police activity. In order to observe the causes that contribute to the violation of Human Rights by the Police, analyze the level of knowledge of Human Rights by the Police of the Republic of Mozambique (PRM) and expose situations of violation of Human Rights by the Police of the Republic of Mozambique, we developed our study, initially, under the theoretical support of the concept of the Democratic State of Law, freedom of expression, assembly and demonstration, Human Rights, Public Security, Police and its function. The second part is essentially qualitative and supported by the quantitative approach, and the qualitative method will be adequate to understand the stage of respect for human rights by the PRM. Finally, we present our context and collaborating subjects of the research, and then, from their discourses, identify the factors that compete for the use of force in the Mozambican police action during public demonstrations.

Cette thèse est consacrée à l’étude des fichiers de police et de gendarmerie pour, notamment, mettre en lumière l’idée-force selon laquelle une conception moderne de l’État de droit promeut non seulement leur encadrement mais plus encore leur nécessité. De fait, il existe en France de nombreux fichiers tenus par diverses administrations dont le but est par exemple de recenser des personnes en fonction de leur statut, de comptabiliser les propriétaires de véhicules ou les titulaires de permis de conduire, de dénombrer les personnes condamnées, et par ces biais de prévenir et si possible faciliter la répression des contraventions, délits et crimes. Le droit à la sûreté constitue une liberté fondamentale, et il convient de percevoir que par leur existence même les fichiers de police participent de cet objectif. En pratique, il s’agira de savoir si des abréviations comme FAED, FNAEG, FIJAIS, STIC, JUDEX, FPR, FRG, FVVS, FIT, FNFM, SDRF, SIS-Schengen, N-SIS,FAC, FCA, FPIS, SDRF, AGRIPPA, FDST, FOS, CIBLE, FIP, STUC, FTIVV, SCPPB, TREIMA, RAPACE, FAR, FNPE, FSCP, SALVAC, FNT, FBS, FTPJ, FSPORA ou FNPC désignent des outils véritables et efficients de rapprochements criminels, utilisés par les autorités afin d’élucider les crimes les plus graves. En substance, ces fichiers visent, grâce à une simple requête, à identifier voire à localiser les délinquants et les criminels dans toute la mémoire informatisée des services, qu’ils’agisse des fichiers d’antécédents criminels ou même des simples notes inscrites en procédure. Au demeurant, ces moteurs de recherche peuvent fonctionner pour tous les types de délits ou crimes. / This thesis is dedicated to the understanding of police files and to their compatibility with Human rights. Also, it questions both potential Human rights and individual freedom violations behind such acronyms: FAED, FNAEG, FIJAIS, STIC, JUDEX, FPR, FRG, FVVS, FIT, FNFM, SDRF, SIS-Schengen, N-SIS, FAC, FCA,FPIS, SDRF, AGRIPA FDST, FOS, CIBLE, FIP, STUC, FTIVV, SCPPB, TREIMA, RAPACE, FAR, FNPE, FSCP, SALVAC, FNT, FBS, FTPJ, FS-PORA or FNPC. While leading an investigation, the vigilance shall then be doubled: On one hand, investigators (police and customs) should be provided with relevant and sufficient information so as to lead their inquisition and to collect enough evidence (Loppsi 2). On the other hand, the Human rights of each citizen have to be insured against abuse and misuse of information. In 2009, The CNIL (National Commissionon Informatics and Liberty) revealed that 83 % of the data of the STIC was not accurate.Data related to victims and to their offender is then stored (identity, date and place of birth, nationalities addresses). Some crimes files even reveal information related to the ethnical or racial origins of the parties, information related to their political and religious opinions, and information related to their health or to their sexual life. In case of any information misuse, recourse to justice seems to be very limited. In France, no law supports the opposition of a party to access data related to his/her identity. This is an exception made to the Informatics and Liberty Law (according to the Law 78-17 dated January 6th 1978 modified).

No description available.

Liberals claim that the exercise of state power must be justified on terms that all citizens can reasonably accept. They also support democracy. The challenge is to bring these two desideratum in line-- to ensure that democratic deliberations are somehow predicated on claims that all citizens can reasonably accept. Put differently, the challenge is to set the terms of public reason. Liberal philosophers advance grand theories of political justice towards this end. They claim that a reasonable argument in the political sphere is one that conforms to theory x. The difficulty is that there will be those who reasonably reject theory x, preferring theory y or z, or eschewing theory altogether. Pessimism at the prospect of agreement on higher-order theories of justice leads some to advocate simple majority rule. The thesis argues that convergence on higher order theory is not essential to public reason. The Supreme Court of Canada’s method of adjudication under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is used as a model. Where basic rights are engaged, or are alleged to be engaged, the Court examines the reasonableness of law and policy using a series of open-ended tests. These tests discipline their deliberations by focusing attention on generally accepted facts and values (notably, the values expressed by the Charter). The thesis contends that the Court’s open-ended, contextual approach can serve as a model for broader public reasoning. The thesis then explores the role of religious arguments within this model. In a polity committed above all to Charter values, what is the place of religion in the justification of law? It is argued that religion is understood to be private and inscrutable under the Charter. This is what justifies the Court’s generous reading of the right to religious freedom. It also justifies our forbidding state coercion in the name of religion. With the preceding ideas in mind, the thesis examines Canadian law and public discourse on the issues of therapeutic cloning (ch.4) and same sex marriage (ch.5).