The aim of this study is to assess the extent to which the Saudi Arabia National Dialogue and activities of King Abdulaziz Center for National Dialogue (KACND) represent a viable attempt to address socio-political issues; whether the ongoing National Dialogue process accurately reflects the aspirations and concerns of contemporary Saudi society; what its impact on socio-political development may be; and how it relates to wider regime strategies and to the evolution of the Saudi polity. The thesis examines KACND’s institutions, practices and impacts, as well as Saudis’ perceptions of all these. It does so by embedding the analysis in a survey of the evolution of broader Saudi socio-political dynamics; drawing in particular on Gramsci, it asks whether the system is moving from a form of patrimonial state to one of ideological hegemony, and whether the KACND is a catalyst in this transition or may even be part of the apparatus that is driving this transition, including its indirect or unintended effects. To that end, the thesis examines the mutual relationship between KACND and the key Saudi social constituencies, with their attendant issues. In particular, it explores the extent to which the KACND’s activities directly and indirectly impact on internal cross-constituency communication and discourse in the Kingdom. The thesis explores the legitimisation of state-society dialogue in Saudi Arabia, focusing on the direct and indirect consequences of the National Dialogue process with reference to the role and activities of KACND. It examines the expanding activities of KACND, including the evolving range of issues discussed as part of the institution’s activities, and the scope of participants. It highlights the shift from ideology-based National Dialogue Meetings such as on national unity and women’s rights, to service-based National Dialogues such as on employment and health. It also examines the newly established Cultural Discourse and assesses the impact of this initiative as a space for ideological debate. The study is based on extensive fieldwork in Saudi Arabia from 2009 to 2011, referencing information and official documentation not previously available, and drawing on findings from a wide range of focus groups, interviews, and participant observation with National Dialogue participants, KACND officials, government ministers, lawyers, journalists, scholars and members of minority constituencies

La Tunisie a longtemps été un laboratoire de recherches pour les sociologues occidentaux sur l'apport des sciences sociales dans un pays du Maghreb. Toutefois ces études sociologiques restent encore centrées sur une période très précise qui dénotait l'existence d'un pouvoir autoritaire et les abus du gouvernement. Le débat occidental s'est alors cristallisé sur la forme du régime et les contestations protestataires en Tunisie. Il a fallu attendre le 13 Janvier 2011 lors du discours au palais de Carthage, pour que la question de la remise en question se pose sans équivoque. Le président Ben Ali avait atteint avec cet ultime affront aux citoyens tunisiens, les limites de son autorité abusive. Au 14 Janvier 2011, la fuite du président déchu Ben Ali a consommé la rupture avec l'ancien régime et a créé ce phénomène que l'on nomme à tort ou à raison la transitologie. Pour la première fois dans le pays, les élections étaient ouvertes à différentes catégories socio-professionnelles, de cultures politiques différentes, à tous les partis hormis le RCD ancien parti du régime, et aux femmes comme aux hommes. Cette initiative a créé un tel engouement, que le jour d’entrée des élus parlementaires au sein du Palais du Bardo, il était nécessaire de déterminer qui étaient ces nouveaux locataires du palais. C’est ainsi que débutent ces travaux de recherche / Tunisia has been, for a long time, a research laboratory for Western sociologists in terms of the contribution of social sciences in a Maghreb country. However, these sociological studies are still focused on a very precise period which pointed out the existence of an authoritarian power and the abuses of the government. The Western debate then froze on the form of the regime and protests in Tunisia. It was not until January 13, 2011 that the issue of questioning arises unequivocally, during the speech at the palace of Carthage. President Ben Ali had reached the limits of his abusive authority with this ultimate outrage to Tunisian citizens. On January 14, 2011, the flight of the deposed President Ben Ali consumed the break with the old regime and created this phenomenon that is rightly or wrongly called transitology. For the first time in the country, elections were open to different socio-professional categories, from different political cultures, to all parties except the former RCD party of the regime, and to both women and men. This initiative has created such a craze, that the day of entry of elected MPs in the Palace of Bardo, it was necessary to determine who were these new tenants of the palace. This is how this research begins

Questions the viability of Kenya’s transitional justice mechanisms as vehicles for social and political transformation? In particular, the dissertation assesses the efficacy of transitional justice mechanisms adopted by Kenya as a tool for democratic transformation. By focusing on the current delicate political situation in Kenya and the different approaches adopted in various contexts, the study could make a contribution by providing clarity on these issues. / Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Law University of Pretoria, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Masters of Law (LLM in Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa). Prepared under the supervision of Dr. Atangcho N Akonumbo, Faculte de Sciences Sociales et de Gestion Universite Catholique D’Afrique Centrale Yaounde Cameroun. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa))--University of Pretoria, 2009. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/ / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

Le dialogue des juges recouvre plusieurs réalités. L'aspect qui est étudié ici est le dialogue qui s'instaure entre la Cour de cassation et les autres juges : nationaux, européens, internationaux et étrangers. Ce dialogue se fait à travers la décision de justice, qui est désormais accessible et diffusée dans le monde entier grâce à internet et aux sites de la juridiction. Ce phénomène, appelé aussi « influence croisée des jurisprudences », prend naissance avec l'expansion de la science comparative et commence à se manifester dans la jurisprudence de la Haute juridiction judiciaire. Encore en voie de développement, le dialogue des juges n'est pas sans produire certaines conséquences quant à la place de la Cour de cassation sur la scène nationale, mais aussi sur la scène internationale. Par ailleurs, il devrait se révéler prochainement comme un nouvel instrument au service des magistrats. / The dialogue between judges covers several realities. The aspect studied in this thesis is the dialogue between the French Court of Cassation and the other judges: national, European, international and foreign judges. This dialogue between judges takes place through the courts decisions which can be available and read on internet. This phenomenon is recent and was born with the growth of the comparative science. We can establish that the dialogue between judges in France is going to grow in a near future. We can also see that the dialogue between judges as already made some consequences. First, it has given a new place for the French court in the national and international stage. Then, it can be used as an actual instrument for judges.

La nature du rôle joué par les institutions militaires dans les États démocratiques se diffère de celui joué dans les États en développement et/ou en période de transition politique. Dans le premier cas, les institutions militaires ont un rôle professionnel qui consiste à protéger l'État contre toute agression extérieure. Alors qu'au cas second, l'institution militaire dépasse ses taches professionnelles jusqu'à l'intervention sur la scène politique via le pouvoir militaire direct ou indirect. Prenant en considération le fait que l'institution militaire dans la deuxième catégorie des pays, n'a pas toujours confiance en le régime démocratique, - souvent considéré comme une menace à la sécurité nationale-, l'exigence de la démocratie reste donc en report permanent. Le débat académique autour de la relation la démocratie et l'arrivée des militaires au pouvoir s'accroît depuis le déclenchement des révolutions du printemps arabe, bien que la question de la transition-même a été au centre des recherches politiques depuis la seconde moitié des années 60-70. Les peuples sont à la recherche des régimes démocratiques basés sur la loi, la citoyenneté le respect des libertés et des droits de l'homme et qui mènent des politiques de développement au profit des niveaux pauvres avant les autres riches. Cependant, un nouveau problème est apparu ; trouver une formule approprié pour la place de l'Armée dans les nouveaux régimes démocratiques. Comment contrôler le rôle croissant de l'institution militaire sans exposer l'État au danger de la division interne ni de l'agression venant de l'extérieur ? Cette recherche se focalise sur les relations civilo-militaires en Libye ainsi que le rôle de l'institution militaire dans les transitions politiques qu'a connues le pays depuis son indépendance, ainsi que les facteurs historique, économiques, géopolitiques et sociaux, qui ont parfumé ces relations par la particularité libyenne. De plus, depuis 2014, durant le dialogue national libyen entre les parties hostiles, la question de l'institution militaire a posé de réels obstacles devant un consensus national, parce que les partie étaient, et le sont toujours, divisé autour de l'article 8, concernant l'Armée dans le projet signé du consensus. Dans ce cadre, le problématique de l'étude tourne autour une interrogation générale ; dans quelle mesure l'institution militaire peut-elle permettre ou contribuer à une transition vers un régime démocratique basé sur le pluralisme et non le tribalisme ni l en Libye ? / The nature of the role played by military institutions in democratic states differs from that one played in developing States and / or those in times of political transition. In the first case, military institutions have a professional role of protecting the state against external aggression. Whereas in the second case, the military institution goes beyond its professional tasks until intervention on the political scene via direct or indirect military power. Taking into account the fact that the military institution in the second category of countries does not always trust the democratic regime, often considered as a threat to national security, the requirement of democracy therefore remains in permanent postponement. The academic debate on the relationship between democracy and the arrival of the military in power has increased since the start of the Arab Spring revolutions, although the question of transition itself has been at the center of political research since the the 1960s and 70s. People are seeking democratic regimes based on law, citizenship, respect for human rights and freedoms, and pursuing development policies to benefit the poor before the other rich. However, a new problem arose; How to find a suitable formula for the place of the Army in the new democratic regimes. How can we control the growing role of the military institution without exposing the State to the danger of internal division or aggression from outside? This research focuses on civil-military relations in Libya and the role of the military institution in the political transitions that the country has undergone since independence, as well as the historical, economic, geopolitical and social factors that have perfumed these relations by the Libyan peculiarity. Moreover, since 2014, during the Libyan national dialogue between hostile parties, the question of the military institution posed real obstacles to a national consensus, because the parties were, and still are, divided around the article 8, concerning the Army in the signed draft of the consensus. In this context, the problem of study revolves around a general question; to what extent can the military institution allow or contribute to a transition to a democratic regime based on pluralism and not tribalism or Libya ?