Against a back-drop of changes which since the 1980s have been making the UK’s welfare support regime for migrants progressively more restrictive, the research programme critically analysed the impact of European Law, namely EU Law and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the ECHR), on the regime. The enquiry was undertaken in the research period 2003-2011. After considering historical and theoretical contexts, the factors informing reforms to the regime, and the impact of EU ‘soft measures’ at the start of the research period, the research examined the impact of Convention rights-based interventions following entry into operation of the UK’s Human Rights Act 1998 (from October 2000). It sought to establish whether this could be said to amount to a ‘safety-net’ for claimants without a substantive right to welfare support, in some cases as a result of restrictions linked to immigration status. Consideration was then given to EU Law aspects, including ‘free movement’ rights, and the rights under EU Law of new arrivals from other Member States. This analysed the impact of the UK’s restrictions on support from 1st May 2004 affecting nationals from the A8 and A2 countries coming to the UK: restrictions informed by expectations that claimants should ‘reciprocate’ for their support and ‘contribute’ by taking up employment opportunities and helping to meet the labour market’s needs. Comparisons were made with approaches taken by the two other countries admitting such nations in 2004, Sweden and Ireland. The enquiry then focused on the UK’s scheme of implementation of Directive 2004/38 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely in the Member States. Much of the enquiry focused on distinctive features of the scheme such as the operation of the ‘right to reside’, including requirements that claimants must normally be ‘economically active’ or self-sufficient, and the courts’ role in interpreting and applying the scheme, and dealing with challenges based on ‘proportionality’ and discrimination arguments. Collectively, the works informed by the research provide a critical analysis of the UK support regime’s development in the areas referred to. Conclusions are provided in the ‘Research Conclusions’ section of the analysis.

In this PhD by Published Work the author is advocating a right to security broadly grounded in ‘communitarian’ ideals. The ‘absolutist’ state theory of, say, Thomas Hobbes, to protect society from collapse, pays too little attention to genuine fears that the state can actually pose a threat to security; in giving the state significant powers of security, it can undermine the very values one is seeking to secure; and is there actual evidence that substantial gains in state power over the last fifteen years or so, since ‘9/11’, for example, have actually made nations more safe? But liberalism, at least the form suggested by, say, Ronald Dworkin, in being unprepared to accept a balance between rights and security, seemingly overlooks threats that undermine the very freedoms liberals like Dworkin wish to protect. And the liberal philosophy, at least its John Locke traditions, of absolute freedoms is too individualistic and attaches too little weight to responsibilities. Plotting a course, therefore, through these criticisms of state absolutism and liberalism one therefore ‘finds’ communitarianism as a philosophy to support a right to security. The author’s ‘communitarian’, right to security is based on an expansive interpretation of ‘positive’ duties of the state, to protect, say, the rights to life of individuals from violations by non-state actors such as suspected terrorists. The author is therefore not proposing an autonomous right to security; he is developing an existing one. And as the author still sees his right to security as largely a justiciable one enforceable before the courts, his approach is a more moderate aspect of communitarianism embracing some liberal ideas of constitutionalism such as judicial review.

Islamic veiling has been the subject of many theological, social and legal debates, which are fluid and their intensity has been further influenced by its contextualised meanings such as religiosity, modesty, identity, resistance, protest, choice and subjugation. Literature on Muslim veiling has either examined its treatment by legal or socio-feminist perspectives, whereas this thesis critiques the religious, socio-feministic and the legal discourses. The contemporary discourse is dominated by competing binaries that label it as a tool of oppression or one of empowerment. Many of the assertions are based not on the veil’s multiple meanings or the wearer’s true motivations but on misplaced assumptions of moral authority by those who oppose or defend the practice, as well as native informants professing to represent veiled Muslim women, leaving Muslim veiled women’s voices muted. Having examined the religious imperative that has a patriarchal basis, the thesis constructs a critique of the two dominant discourses central to the contemporary debates on veiling. One discourse defends the practice as empowering whilst the other calls for prohibitions on the practice using liberation from oppression as a justification, particularly with issues surrounding the wearing of the full face veil. This is followed by a critique of the key cases generated under Article 9 ECHR, which attempts to balance the religious rights of those who veil with the rights of others. The case law highlights that the ECtHR not only falls short in disclosing satisfactorily how it has struck a balance between these competing rights, but also fails to adopt a neutral stance to religious expression through symbols, its reasoning being based on contradictory stereotypes of Muslim women as passive and victims of gender oppression in need of liberation. The influence of such stereotypes and an inadequate application of the margin of appreciation doctrine have led the ECtHR in validating state prohibitions on the hijab and the full face veil, thereby failing to acknowledge the voices of the veiled women at the centre of a human rights claim, delivering a further blow to them. Post the case of S.A.S. v. France the ECtHR has exasperated this even further by allowing an abstract principle of ‘living together’ as a justification for the full face veil’s prohibition in public spaces, resulting in Article 9 rights of Muslim women who veil being endangered even further by the introduction of such an open-ended ground.

The purpose of this dissertation is to address the question of how we can constitutionally justify the judicial review jurisdiction of the English courts. Two competing theories are commonly posited as providing this justification: the ultra vires theory and the common law theory. This research consists of a hermeneutical analysis of these two theories; it examines their rationales and the main themes of the debate between their supporters. It also uses immanent critique to reveal a significant lack of 'fit' between judicial review in practice and each of the theories. It is implicit within the two theories that they match the actual exercise of the supervisory jurisdiction. Thus, the lack of fit exposed by the critique brings into question any claims that either theory can provide the constitutional legitimacy for judicial review. The thesis advanced in this dissertation is in two parts. First, it is argued that the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty operates as a principle. This means that legislation may be balanced against other principles derived from the common law or other statutes. This is in contrast to both the ultra vires and common law theories in which the doctrine is assumed to function as a rule. Second, under this novel conception of parliamentary sovereignty it is not necessary to justify the operation of judicial review by reference to legislative intent or express statutory provision. Rather, the standards of good administration may be rationalized as being developed and applied pursuant to an inherent jurisdiction of the courts.

The previous UK Coalition government (2010-2015) made significant efforts to professionalise the police service in England and Wales. One of their approaches was to require police students to study at university, before becoming police officers. It has been hypothesised that requiring police students to study at university may ensure that professionalism develops within these students/officers, with the higher education received. At the same time as developing professionalism within these officers it has been suggested some of the negative aspects of police culture may diminish. Whether or not these hopes are borne out by university training of police students was the central research question for this project. This original research examined socialisation and culture of police students, within a UK university institution. It evolved by utilising reflexive grounded theory to examine the student perception of the police service, using questionnaires, focus groups and content analysis of completed essays, by Foundation in Policing Degree students. In summary the findings of this research suggested that university training of police students may not have the desired effect on professionalism, as police culture appears to develop regardless of the setting. Further to this, minority ethnic students continue to report being less attracted to the police as a career choice. A number of reasons are suggested for these findings and future recommendations are set out. Ultimately, this research concludes that the way a police officer is trained and/or educated requires reviewing, as simply moving the process to a university setting does not automatically deliver the intended outcomes, and in fact can result in the police culture simply flourishing elsewhere.

When arbitration is conducted online, some inherent, fundamental issues arise which could potentially undermine the enforceability of the final award under the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958, the “New York Convention” (NYC). The study identifies four key challenges which a winning party seeking the enforcement of an electronic award according to the NYC might face with relation to the enforcement of that award: the validity of electronic arbitration agreements, the enforceability of consumer arbitration agreements concluded online, obstacles arising out of the conduct of the arbitration procedures online and the issue of electronic authentication of the final award. The study first critically analyses the NYC, to identify some key problems in relation to each of the said issues which might compromise or undermine the enforcement of awards rendered in online arbitration; it then makes suggestions as to some possible amendments to the NYC. The study then goes on to consider these issues in the context of the applicable law before the Dubai and DIFC Courts as the enforcement courts, to examine their ability to enforce such an award. The study concludes with several recommendations for both practice and law reform in the jurisdictions discussed, in relation to each issue. The study is original in that it is the first comprehensive analysis of all the said issues, from formation of the arbitration agreement, through various stages of online procedures, to the final enforcement of the award, within the examined jurisdictions. Further, the recommended changes would help to improve the efficiency and reliability of the courts of Dubai and DIFC with regard to the enforceability of an award given via online arbitration. This is a particularly important issue in light of the current and anticipated growth in the prominence of the identified jurisdictions as financial and business centres, the centrality of international arbitration to international business and the fundamental need for confidence in the enforceability of the courts and arbitration awards.

This thesis provides an account of the history and the status quo of the death penalty in China, along with an analysis of its possible reform in the future. It begins by looking at the history of the use of the death penalty in China from the pre-Qin-Han era to the present. It revolves around consideration of the international law context, the drawbacks of and challenges to the Chinese legal system concerning the use of the death penalty and the would-be approaches to death penalty reform in China against the background of the global abolition movement. It examines the debates between reformists/neo-liberal cosmopolitans and conservatives in Chinese legal history from the end of the Qing dynasty to present-day China. Concerning the international law context, this thesis analyses how China treats international treaties, especially capital punishment related human rights treaties (mainly the ICCPR), on the legislative and judicial level. It studies the factors that have influenced the abolition movement in European countries. The thesis examines the Chinese Criminal Law and the Criminal Procedure Law to find challenges and gaps concerning the use of the death penalty between the Chinese legal system and the requirements of international human rights treaties. It also analyses case studies and empirical studies of capital crimes. Subsequently, the work outlines a number of alternative punishments to the death penalty and possible approaches to reform. It also analyses the present impetus for reform of the death penalty in China from a socio-economic perspective. The thesis further examines Chinese public opinion concerning the reform/abolition of the death penalty, as reflected in various surveys conducted by the author herself, as well as other Chinese or foreign scholars, for which a detailed analysis is provided in Appendix 6. Finally some possible suggestions and solutions are provided for the future reform of the death penalty in China.

Communities of practice (CoPs) have recently become key components in organizational knowledge management initiatives (Wenger, 2004). They have achieved prominence in the context of knowledge management and organizational learning both with scholars and practitioners. Many researches (Ardichvili et al., 2003; Davenport & Voelpel, 2001; Davenport & Probst, 2002) have investigated how some multinational companies integrated different kinds of CoPs into their knowledge management systems. But those studies focus mainly on the regions of the Western countries. There are limited researches conducted on other social context. This research therefore is to address CoPs in a Chinese organization - Chalco and investigates how the Learning Groups as the communities of practice facilitate knowledge sharing in the company. This research adopts the Nonaka‘s (1994) organizational knowledge creation model (SECI) and defines the organizational knowledge sharing as two parts of organization knowledge creation process: socialisation and externalisation. It examines how the Learning Groups facilitate tacit knowledge sharing (socialization) and the knowledge conversion from tacit to explicit (externalization). This research takes the social constructionist standpoint, trying to understand individuals‘ experience of participating Learning Groups in the company, through the interpretive lens. It adopts a qualitative approach using in-depth interviews to gather data which are then analysed using the narrative analysis approach paying attention to individuals‘ experience expressed through their interview accounts. Through narrative analysis, the way in which Learning Groups facilitate tacit knowledge sharing and the conversion from tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge has been emerged. Some influences of Chinese cultural and social factors to the knowledge were also found. The finding of this study suggests that there are some knowledge sharing barriers caused by both organizational factors and cultural factors. The Learning Groups in Chalco have been playing very positive roles in overcoming those barriers and facilitating knowledge sharing in the company. The findings of this research can benefit to both academics and practitioners. It will help the related academics to understand how the Chinese cultural and social influences on knowledge management practice and how CoPs facilitate knowledge sharing in such context. It also provides an example of best practice on knowledge management for other business managers and government policy makers so that they can develop appropriate knowledge management strategies for the benefit of their companies and the social development.

The subject of dangerous goods as it pertains to carriage by sea is of growing importance and concern because it impacts on safety as well as environmental issues. Both involve liability associated with maritime transportation and liability in respect of dangerous goods is a complex area of law both from an international as well as a domestic perspective. China is a rapidly emerging economic power and a major world player in shipping and seaborne trade including import and export of hazardous substances. Furthermore, China is undergoing remarkable reform and transformation in all respects, and legal regimes, especially in the maritime field, are in a state of evolution. This thesis presents a two-fold area of concentration, that is, the international regime and the domestic Chinese law, looking at the safety as well as the environmental dimensions of international carriage of dangerous goods by sea. In order to carry out a comparative analysis of the international and Chinese legal regimes pertaining to the issues of contractual and tortious liability, a relatively detailed analytical examination of the international regime has been completed. Following this, the legal regime under Chinese law concerning the sea carriage of dangerous goods is critically evaluated in terms of the evolution of the domestic maritime law and the issues of application of international law and domestic law from the perspectives of regulatory law and civil liability. The discussion on the existing issues liability is centered on the principles of liability in tort and contract borne by private parties and state responsibility in respect of damage arising from the maritime transportation of dangerous goods. Conclusions are drawn from the summaries of chapters highlighting the critical issues in light of the findings of the research; the appropriate recommendations and suggestions for improvements to the international regimes; and proposals for law reform in the form of new legislation or amendments to existing legislation with the aim of improving the domestic regime to bring it into closer alignment with international law on the carriage of dangerous goods by sea.

In 1976, the Nigerian Government compulsorily acquired the ancestral lands of Abuja peoples of Nigeria without payment of compensation or resettlement. This is legitimised under Nigerian State laws. Indigenous peoples (IPs) suffer from injustices in relation to land globally. The purpose of this thesis is to find answers to the research questions emanating from this case study. One avenue explored herein in addressing dispossession of IPs’ lands in Africa, is through considering the relevance of international law on their rights. However, there is no universally agreed definition of IPs. In the determination of whether international law provides solutions to the challenges of protecting land rights of Abuja peoples, the existing description of IPs is challenged. The second avenue explored herein, is through a comparative approach to understanding how Kenya has resolved these challenges and how Nigeria should respond to similar challenges. The case study is used to illustrate the need for a viable relationship between State law, IPs’ customary law and international law. The choice of Nigeria is because the case study is in Nigeria. The choice of Kenya as a comparator is because like Nigeria, Kenya is Anglophone with a plural legal system and has recently embarked on law reforms in relation to customary land rights and the place of international law within its legal system. Drawing from theories of legal pluralism and post-colonialism, this doctrinal, case study and comparative enquiry, makes the following original contributions to knowledge. Firstly, the case study is used to argue that international law should expand its description of IPs to include collective of peoples with different cultures. Secondly, it draws from international child rights law to advance the argument that international law on IPs should present them more positively. Finally, the comparative analysis between Nigeria and Kenya on the above subjects has not been made by any known literature at the time of writing.