Petra Šrédlová Diploma thesis Abstract Abstract The trial of Klaus Barbie was an important turning point in the French memory of the Vichy regime. For a purpose of Barbie's conviction, the interpretation of the crime against humanity was changed in the French legal system. Barbie's victims were, for the first time, given the opportunity to publicly testify. Furthermore, the trial provided an opportunity for development of the Jewish memory and the memory of the resistance. The trial of Klaus Barbie provided the basic legal and procedural framework later on used by the courts in trials with Vichy's criminals. Moreover, the personality of Klaus Barbie remained sealed in a negative sense in French memory, when he was often remembered on the occasion of various events. The aim of this diploma thesis is to prove that, on the basis of qualitative content analysis of articles by Le Monde containing the term "Klaus Barbie" in the period from July 3, 1988 to July 4, 2017, further development of the phase of Obsession of the Vichy syndrome can be traced, along with its thematic categories and intensity. This diploma thesis also argues that the memory development did not proceed consistently, but kept on returning in the form of various events in order to recall not only Klaus Barbie and his trial, but also other...

Judge and Jurisconsult – Coercive and Persuasive Authority in Islamic Law (Richter und Rechtsberater- Zwingende und überzeugende Autorität im Islamischen Recht) Wer spricht das Recht in der islamischen Rechtsprechung? Die islamische Rechtsgeschichte konzentrierte sich lange auf den Einzelrichter (qadi) als Inbegriff der Rechtsprechung. Der Richter handelte jedoch nicht als einzige Verkörperung der Rechtsprechung. Ein Justizpersonal unterstützte seine und arbeitete von einer ihm unterstellten Position aus. Darüber hinaus hat der gelehrte Rechtsberater (mufti) die Rechtsprechung durch übereinstimmende und abweichende Meinungen vor Gericht in vielerlei Hinsicht geprägt. Die Arbeit konzentriert sich auf zwei Autoritäten am Gericht – qadi und mufti – in der frühen Abbasidischen Rechtsgeschichte (2. und 3. Jahrhundert nach der islamischen Zeitrechnung bzw. 8. und 9. Jahrhundert der gregorianischen Zeit), die miteinander kooperiert oder auch konkurriert haben. Die Grundlage ihrer Beziehung ist das islamische Prinzip der gerichtlichen Beratung von Experten in Rechtsfragen. Die islamische Rechtslehre ermutigt einen Richter, der mit Rechtsunsicherheiten konfrontiert war, einen gelehrten Rechtsberater (mufti) zu konsultieren, bevor er eine gerichtliche Entscheidung trifft. Die islamische Rechtsprechung entstand somit aus einem Verhältnis von Kooperation, Konfrontation und Kooptation zwischen Richtern und (außer-gerichtlichen) gelehrten Rechtsberatern. / Judge and Jurisconsult – Coercive and Persuasive Authority in Islamic Law Who dispenses justice at court? Islamic legal historians have long focused on the single judge (qadi) as the embodiment of the administration of justice. The judge, however, did not act alone in dispensing justice. A judicial staff supported his work, working from a position subordinate to him. In addition, evading a clearly demarcated judicial hierarchy, the learned jurisconsult (mufti) shaped adjudication in many distinct ways through concurring and dissenting opinions at court. This contribution focuses on two authorities—the qadi and the mufti—who cooperated or competed with each other at court in early Abbasid legal history (2nd-3rd century A. H. / 8th-9th century C.E.). Fundamental to their relationship is the Islamic principle of judicial consultation of experts on legal questions. Islamic legal doctrine encouraged a judge confronted with legal uncertainties to consult a mufti before issuing a judicial decision. Islamic adjudication thus emerged out of cooperation, confrontation and cooptation between judge and (extra-judicial) legal experts.

Aim: This study aims to examine the extent to which access to different socio-economic factors explains differences in the degree of trust in the judiciary system, and which factors are of importance for the differences in trust. The socio-economic factors referred to are annual earned income, degree of education, ownership of condominiums, active employment, gender, and age. The questions that will be answered are: What does a covariation between trust in the judiciary system and socio-economic factors look like? What impact do the socio-economic factors have, and which are the important variables that affect trust in the judiciary system? Method: A quantitative method has been used. The data material examined is the Crime Prevention Council's security survey from 2018. To answer the questions at issue, a multiple regression analysis has been made to visualize the covariance between socio-economic factors and trust in the judiciary system. Theories used are the theory of trust (Rothstein, 2003) and the theory about forms of capital (Bourdieu, 1986). Results: The result found is that the socioeconomic factors examined in this study have a covariance towards trust. Important variables that affect trust in the judiciary are post-secondary education and gender, where women and people with a completed post-secondary education have higher trust. These relationships are both relatively strong positives that are of statistical significance and thus can be generalized to the population.

Section 34 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 outlines the scope of judicial authority as encompassing the resolution of any dispute that can be resolved by the application of law. The courts in South Africa have developed several justiciability canons that restrain when courts may adjudicate disputes, such as standing, mootness, ripeness, and the prevention of advisory opinions. These justiciability canons emanate from constitutional considerations such as respect for separation of powers and the proper role and scope of judicial review in a constitutional democracy. This study focuses on another justiciability canon - the political question doctrine. This doctrine arises from the principle of separation of powers and, in the main, provides that certain questions of constitutional law are allocated to the discretion of the elected branches of government for resolution. As a result, such questions are non-justiciable and require the judiciary to abstain from deciding them because not doing so intrudes into the functions of the elected branches of government. The underlying theme is that such questions must find resolution in the political process. Through a comparative lens, the study examines the origins and current application of the political question doctrine in selected countries with a view to obtain lessons therefrom. It examines the origins of the doctrine, by placing particular emphasis on the early application of the doctrine by the US Supreme Court. The study also examines the modern application of the doctrine in the constitutional jurisprudence of several countries, including Ghana, Uganda and Nigeria. It advances the view that while the doctrine exists in the South African jurisprudence, the Constitutional Court should articulate and develop it into a clear doctrine taking into account lessons from those countries. The study offers some recommendations in this regard. The study submits that the political question doctrine is an appropriate legal mechanism through which the South African judiciary can address the recent problem of the proliferation of cases brought to the courts that raise non-justiciable political questions and threaten to delegitimize the role of the courts in a democracy. / Public, Constitutional and International Law / LL. D.

A tese busca identificar os elementos jurídicos e extrajurídicos que interferem sobre o comportamento judicial do Supremo Tribunal Federal. A análise é desenvolvida com base nos seguintes modelos decisórios: o modelo legalista, o modelo ideológico, o modelo institucional e o modelo estratégico de comportamento judicial. Ao longo do trabalho, examina-se a influência do direito, da ideologia, das normas que regem o Judiciário, das regras que regem as decisões colegiadas, do Poder Executivo, do Poder Legislativo, da opinião pública e da imprensa no processo decisório do Supremo Tribunal Federal. / This work aims at identifying legal and non-legal factors that interfere with Brazilian Supreme Court decisions. The analysis is developed with basis on the legal model, on the attitudinal model, on the institutional model and on the strategic model of judicial decision-making. It examines the influence of constitutional law, ideology, collegial process, Executive Power, Legislative Power, public opinion and of the media on Brazilian Supreme Court attitudes.

A tese busca identificar os elementos jurídicos e extrajurídicos que interferem sobre o comportamento judicial do Supremo Tribunal Federal. A análise é desenvolvida com base nos seguintes modelos decisórios: o modelo legalista, o modelo ideológico, o modelo institucional e o modelo estratégico de comportamento judicial. Ao longo do trabalho, examina-se a influência do direito, da ideologia, das normas que regem o Judiciário, das regras que regem as decisões colegiadas, do Poder Executivo, do Poder Legislativo, da opinião pública e da imprensa no processo decisório do Supremo Tribunal Federal. / This work aims at identifying legal and non-legal factors that interfere with Brazilian Supreme Court decisions. The analysis is developed with basis on the legal model, on the attitudinal model, on the institutional model and on the strategic model of judicial decision-making. It examines the influence of constitutional law, ideology, collegial process, Executive Power, Legislative Power, public opinion and of the media on Brazilian Supreme Court attitudes.

Text in Afrikaans / Summaries in Afrikaans and English / Die beginsel van die onafhanklikheid van die regbank word verskans in die Grondwet van die Republiek van Suid-Afrika van 1996. 'n Onafhanklike regbank is noodsaaklik ten einde te voldoen aan die primere funksie van die regbank, naamlik die bewerkstelliging van geregtigheid. Openbare vertroue in die onafhanklikheid van die regbank verhoog die legitimiteit van hierdie instelling, wat noodsaaklik is vir nakoming en eerbiediging van die howe se beslissings deur die gemeenskap. In die verlede het kritici beweer dat die regbank 'n legitimiteitskrisis beleef op grond daarvan dat polilieke oorwegings 'n rol gespeel het by die aanstelling van regsprekende amptenare, dat die regbank nie verteenwoordigend genoeg is van die bevolking wat betref ras en geslag nie en dat die howe in die verlede in sommige gevalle te owerheidsgesind was en soms diskriminerende wetgewing sonder veel skroom of teenspraak aanvaar en toegepas het. Kritici het daarop gewys dat die opbloei in die volkshowe as alternatief tot die formele howe, as voorbeeld dien van die algehele miskenning van en wantroue in die reg bank. 'n Kritiese evaluering van hierdie aangeleenthede is gedoen aan die hand van 'n regsvergelykende ondersoek. Daar is tot die gevolgtrekking gekom dat die Regterlike Dienskommissie en die Landdrostekommissie 'n belangrike hervorming teweeg gebring het op die gebied van aanstelling van regterlike amptenare. Verder is bevind dat die juriestelsel nie 'n realistiese oplossing bied om die regbank meer verteenwoordigend van die gemeenskap te maak nie, maar dat die assessorestelsel blyk 'n meer praktiese en geskikte alternatief te wees. Dit het verder geblyk dat daar van regterlike beamptes verwag word om, in die lig van die Grondwet van 1996 en 'n stelsel van grondwetlike oppermagtigheid, 'n aktivistiese waarde-ge6rienteerde of waarde-aktiverende benadering by wets- en grondwetuitleg te volg. Daar is verder bevind dat die informele howe behoue moet bly, maar aangepas behoort te word by veranderende omstandighede, in die lig van die Grondwet en die handves van fundamentele regte. Ten slotte is voorstelle gemaak as moontlike oplossing vir bepaalde probleme wat geidentifiseer is. / The principle of the independence of the judiciary is entrenched in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa of 1996. An independent judiciary is essential in order to fulfill the primary function of a judiciary, namely the realisation of justice. Public confidence in the independence of the judiciary increases the legitimacy of this institution, which is essential for respect for and compliance with the decisions of the court by the community. In the past critics maintained that the judiciary is experiencing a legitimacy crisis, due to the fact that political considerations have played a role in the appointment of judicial officials, that the judiciary is not representative of the community in respect of race and sex and that the courts have been too executive-minded in the past and have at times accepted and applied discriminatory legislation without much hesitation or contradiction. Critics alleged that the proliferation of people's courts as an alternative to the formal courts, was an indication of the general denial of and loss of confidence in the judiciary. A critical evaluation of these aspects was undertaken by way of a comparative study. It lead to the conclusion that the Judicial Service Commission and the Magistrates Commission brought about an important reform regarding the appointment of judicial officials. It was found that the jury system does not constitute a realistic solution to make the judiciary more representative of the community, but that the assessor system seems to be a more practical alternative. It became apparant that in view of the Constitution of 1996 and our system of constitutional supremacy, it is expected of judicial officals to follow an activistic value-orientated or value-activated approach during legislative and constitutional interpretation. It is furthermore concluded that the informal courts should be retained, but that they should be adapted to the changing circumstances in view of the Constitution and the bill of rights. Finally, suggestions are made in order to address certain problems which have been identified. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.D.

The legislative supremacy of Parliament, a dominant characteristic of the Westminster system of government, has for a long time been the basic norm of South African constitutional law. In line with the Westminster prototype, the South African judiciary did not have the power to review the substantive validity of legislation. The creation of a new order, based on a supreme Constitution which entrenches fundamental rights and gives the courts the power to review not on! y the procedural validity but also the substantive validity of legislation, has brought about a significant change. This thesis examines the role of the South African judiciary during the transition from a system of legislative supremacy to one of constitutional supremacy and judicial review. The thesis is based on the interim Constitution of 1993. The entrenchment of fundamental human rights in the Constitution implies a greater role for the judiciary. The judiciary has to apply and interpret the human rights provisions vigorously and fearlessly. The human rights provisions have to be applied and interpreted with a keen awareness that a system of constitutional supremacy differs materially from one of legislative supremacy. In a system of legislative supremacy the intention of the legislature is paramount; in a system of constitutional supremacy the Constitution is supreme and overrides all laws, including Acts of Parliament, which are in conflict with it The doctrine of legislative supremacy has in the past led to a literalist and mechanical application of law; this has had a negative impact on the constitutional role of the South African judiciary. The provisions of a Constitution, especially its human rights provisions, are framed in wide and open ended terms; these need to be elaborated before they can be applied; the nature of these provisions, their purpose and the larger objects of the Constitution are important. The interpretation of the provisions of a supreme Constitution is incompatible with a literalistic and mechanical approach. A purposive and liberal or generous approach is called for. A framework and approach to the interpretation and application of South Africa's Bill of Rights are suggested in the thesis. / Constitutional International and Indigenous Law / LL.D.

In a democracy it is the citizens who choose their leaders. Through elections, the people constitute government to preside over public affairs. However, in several African countries the quality of the elections has been vitiated by fraud, incompetence, unequal playing field and violence. Part of the problem is historical. Within the first decade of attaining independence in the 1950s and 1960s, many African regimes rapidly descended into autocracy and many countries formally recognised one-party regimes. Despite many one-party regimes having been abolished after the democratisation wave of the late 1980s and early 1990s, challenges of holding free and fair elections persist. Several elections held since this democratic wave were generally not considered by independent observers as free and fair. Indeed Africa has become well known for flawed elections, such as was the case in the 2007 elections in Kenya, the 2008 elections in Zimbabwe and the 2010 elections in Ivory Coast. Due to the stifled democratic climate, where even elections had a predetermined outcome, coups became a common and regular method of showing discontent or removing government. While the phenomenon of problematic elections is going on, at the continental level, Africa seems to be making renewed commitment towards democratic governance. With the transformation of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) into the African Union (AU) through the adoption of the Constitutive Act of the African Union in 2000, the AU, inter alia, committed to promoting “democratic principles and institutions, popular participation and good governance” and seems determined to depart from the legacy of poor governance. It is in view of the foregoing background that this research sought to investigate the challenges the judiciary in Africa has faced in adjudicating presidential election disputes. And, in light of the growing trend towards establishing common African democratic standards and seeking collective solutions, the research also sought to explore the viability of establishing a continental supranational mechanism for resolving disputed presidential elections through adjudication. / Public, Constitutional and International Law / LLD

This thesis focuses on how well indicators of judicial ideology and institutional constraints predict whether a judge will vote to increase abortion access. I develop a model that evaluates a judge's decision in an abortion case in light of ideological factors measured at the time of a judge's nomination to the bench and legal and institutional constraints at the time a judge decides a case. I analyze abortion cases from all of the U.S. Federal District Courts from 1973-2004. Unlike previous studies, which demonstrate that the president and the home state senators are the best predictors of judicial ideology, I find that the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time of the judge's nomination is the only statistically significant ideological indicator. Also, contrary to conventional wisdom, Supreme Court precedent (a legal constraint) is also a significant predictor of judicial voting behavior in abortion cases.