Constitutional democracy requires a constitutionalisation of Human Rights and the empowerment of judiciaries to enforce and protect such rights. In Ghana, these requirements have been put in place by the 1992 Constitution. Human Rights have been constitutionalised and the courts granted specific powers of Judicial Review to enforce the values of these rights by policing the actions of the legislature and the executive branches of Government. In response, the Judiciary has done a great deal through the power of Judicial Review to protect Human Rights in the country. It has developed a corpus of Human Rights jurisprudence which individuals and institutions can rely on for rights claims and protection. However, its role is not without blemish. This work seeks to discover the successes as well as the failures of the Judiciary of Ghana in enforcing Human Rights. As a theoretical prelude to the entire work, I claim that the main juridical basis to legitimate Judicial Review lies in the courts duty to enforce a higher body of law grounded in rights. On the basis of this claim, the work argues that while the Judiciary did play a constructive role in the promotion, enforcement and sustenance of Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms in the country, it has not adopted a consistent approach in giving all Human Rights equal weight. A generous reception has been given to Civil and Political Rights, while Social-Economic Rights have not been sympathetically considered. This has generated a gap in Ghana’s Human Rights jurisprudence, and negated the values upheld by the postwar global Human Rights constituency - of which Ghana is a member. To avert the creation of Judicial determinism which will hold back the realisation of Socio-Economic Rights in Ghana, this work urges the Judiciary to accord equal respect to all Rights by adopting a purposive approach in deciding all rights claims. / Thesis (Master, Law) -- Queen's University, 2008-07-15 12:10:00.75

Peer review is seen as an important quality assurance mechanism in both industrial development and the open source software (OSS) community. The techniques for performing inspections have been well studied in industry; in OSS development, peer review practices are less well understood. In contrast to industry, where reviews are typically assigned to specific individuals, in OSS, changes are broadcast to hundreds of potentially interested stakeholders. What is surprising is that this approach works very well, despite concerns that reviews may be ignored, or that discussions will deadlock because too many uninformed stakeholders are involved. In this work we use a multi-case study methodology to develop a theory of OSS peer review. There are three research stages. In the first stage, we examine the policies of 25 OSS projects to understand the review processes used on successful OSS projects. We also select six projects for further analysis: Apache, Subversion, Linux, FreeBSD, KDE, and Gnome. In the second stage, using archival records from the six projects, we construct a series of metrics that produces measures similar to those used in traditional inspection experiments. We measure the frequency of review, the size and complexity of the contribution under review, the level of participation during review, the experience and expertise of the individuals involved in the review, the review interval, and number of issues discussed during review. We create statistical models of the review efficiency, review interval, and effectiveness, the issues discussed during review, to determine which measures have the largest impact on review efficacy. In the third stage, we use grounded theory to analyze 500 instances of peer review and interview ten core developers across the six projects. This approach allows us to understand why developers decide to perform reviews, what happens when reviews are ignored, how developers interact during a review, what happens when too many stakeholders are involved during review, and the effect of project size on the review techniques. Our findings provide insights into the simple, community-wide mechanisms and behaviours that developers use to effectively manage large quantities of reviews and other development discussions. The primary contribution of this work is a theory of OSS peer review. We find that OSS reviews can be described as (1) early, frequent reviews (2) of small, independent, complete contributions (3) that, despite being asynchronously broadcast to a large group of stakeholders, are reviewed by a small group of self-selected experts (4) resulting in an efficient and effective peer review technique. / Graduate

Thesis (MEd)--University of South Australia, 1997

The main objective of this thesis is to provide description, analysis and criticism on the existing international instruments for the promotion of respect and protection of human rights, as well as a suggestion to the international community through the United Nations mechanism to adopt an additional legal instrument as a complementary procedure. This, in turn, should serve as an extra-pressure upon the State governments to bring their internal legal system in the same line as the international standards for the protection of human rights. It is being argued in this work that the current international procedures available to individual alleging their human rights have been abused by State are no longer sufficient and therefore another procedure should be introduced and put into place. The chapter "The Case of Indonesia" serves as a good (or bad?) example of State abusive conduct and remain "untouchable" under international mechanisms. Despite gross and systematic violations of human rights Indonesian government is still immune due to executive-heavy legislation system, restricted judicial review as a result of a corrupt judiciary and impunity of government and other public agencies. The study fvstly concentrates on the procedures available at international level for dealing with individual complaint alleging human rights violations. Different procedures both under Charter and treaty provisions are analysed in the attempt to describe their advantages and disadvantages. Two Charter-based procedures dealt with in the discussion cover the communication procedure under the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) which includes the "1503" procedure. Treaty-based procedures are given special attention in this thesis which include the procedure before the Human Rights Committee (HRC), the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD), the Committee against Torture (CAT) and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). The discussion further presents a critical appraisal of those procedures in which the limitations and weaknesses of the procedures are analysed followed by the suggestion to adopt an additional procedure to complement the current mechanisms available to individual seeking remedies for human rights violations. The limitations of the procedures featured largely by the fact that the decisions resulted from those procedures are legally non-binding. And this all what an individual can receive after being allowed to bring hisher petition before the Committee. Before one is permitted to communicate with one of the Committee hetshe must first meet all the conditions of admissibility. The condition "exhaustion of all domestic remedies" can virtually be seen as a hindrance for individual to communicate with the Committee. Jn order to support this argument several decisions on several individual complaints handed down by the HRC are presented in this study. Finally, the study introduces a complementary procedure called International Judicial Review by which the State Constitutions and legislation can be examined whether or not they are in conformity with international human rights standards and norms. If found inconsistent the Constitutions or legislation must be declared invalid. The power to review is given to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as the "principal judicial organ of The United Nations". And as a World Court the decision made by the ICJ has legally binding power.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Murdoch University, 2002. / Thesis submitted to the Division of Arts. Bibliography: p. [240]-269.

Thesis (J.S.D.)--Stanford University, 2008. / "September 2008." Includes bibliographical references (p. 196-200).

Thesis (M.A. in Security Studies (Homeland Defense and Security))--Naval Postgraduate School, March 2009. / Thesis Advisor(s): Strindberg, Anders ; Simeral, Robert. "March 2009." Description based on title screen as viewed on April 23, 2009. Author(s) subject terms: Judicial Review, Balancing Civil Liberties, Global War on Terror, Political Spaces, Strategic. Includes bibliographical references (p. 99-106). Also available in print.

Thesis (M.H.S.A.)--University of Michigan, 1980.

Thesis (M.H.S.A.)--University of Michigan, 1980.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Brigham Young University. Dept. of Educational Leadership and Foundations, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [125]-137).