Thesis advisor: Robert C. Bartlett / At the beginning of the fifth book of the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle tells us that, according to common opinion, justice is lawful and fair. He concludes his examination of justice with a discussion of equity, which proves to be neither strictly lawful nor strictly fair—and yet Aristotle tells us that equity is, in a certain sense, the highest form of justice. This dissertation explains how Aristotle reaches this startling conclusion. I begin with an exploration of the careful taxonomy of justice that Aristotle lays out in the first half of book five. But Aristotle abruptly abandons this taxonomy midway through the book when he turns from the simply just to the politically just. For this reason and others, I argue that the second half of the book is not, as some have asserted, the application of the universal principles of justice to a political situation, but a new beginning and a fresh attempt to articulate the virtue of justice, free from the flaws we discover through a careful study of the first half of the book. Aristotle’s political justice takes its bearings from the health of a republican government, that is, a government of free and equal citizens. And yet political justice, like political courage, remains on the level of politics. Aristotle’s discussion of equity at the end of the book presents the virtuous form of justice, which corrects the flaws of justice as lawfulness and justice as fairness and permits justice to take its place in the economy of a noble human life. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2016. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Political Science.

Submitted by Silvana Teresinha Dornelles Studzinski (sstudzinski) on 2017-04-12T13:13:49Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Carlos Eduardo Pereira Siqueira_.pdf: 1099943 bytes, checksum: f6c324f7140075f934d8ca1da0db30ac (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-04-12T13:13:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Carlos Eduardo Pereira Siqueira_.pdf: 1099943 bytes, checksum: f6c324f7140075f934d8ca1da0db30ac (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-12-20 / Nenhuma / Partindo de uma concepção de teoria crítica da sociedade, este trabalho problematiza a relação entre direito e política segundo a teoria “political justice”, a atuação do judiciário brasileiro realizada em zonas de autarquia, a suposta “invasão” da arena judicial pela política e o “ativismo” que faz os tribunais serem acusados de substituírem o legislador (e, portanto, desrespeitar a vontade do povo). O problema central da pesquisa é traduzido, pois, na seguinte pergunta: como a jurisdição brasileira se manifesta e se relaciona com o poder político, numa perspectiva teórica de “political justice”, diante de litígios nos quais magistrados são parte e discutem atos relacionados, direta ou indiretamente, à administração da justiça? Para analisá-lo, porém, partiu-se de casos concretos que permitam enxergar esses fenômenos na práxis cotidiana do judiciário. Os casos estudados colocam em teste se, em demandas judiciais envolvendo interesses de magistrados, o aparato judicial pode ser mais facilmente mobilizado em benefício dos julgadores. Para tanto, a fim de contribuir com a busca por emancipação social a partir da democratização radical das esferas públicas, limitações da teoria tripartite dos “poderes do estado” e alguns bloqueios institucionais apresentados pelo judiciário foram trazidos à tona. Ao final, foi apontado que o judiciário nacional tem um comportamento de proteção de sua posição privilegiada de exercício do poder soberano, chegando a concentrar em si todas as funções estatais de uma só vez. Quando se coloca em foco a distribuição de poder entre os órgãos jurisdicionais e outros atores político-sociais, o judiciário costuma reforçar seu poder, resguardando os interesses de seus membros e afastando da disputa agentes que pretendam colocá-los em xeque. / Starting from a conception of critical theory of society, this work problematizes the relation between law and politics according to the "political justice" theory, the actuation of Brazilian judiciary in autharchy zones (zonas de autarquia), the supposed "invasion" of the judicial arena by the politics and the "Activism" that makes the courts be accused of replacing the legislator (and therefore disrespecting the will of the people). Then, the central problem of the research is translated into the following question: how Brazilian jurisdiction manifests itself and relates to political power, in a theoretical perspective of "political justice", in the face of disputes in which magistrates are litigants and discuss acts directly or indirectly related to the administration of justice? In order to analyze it, however, it was based on concrete cases that allow to see these phenomena in the daily praxis of the judiciary. The cases studied test whether, in lawsuits involving magistrates' interests, the judicial apparatus can be more easily mobilized for the benefit of the judges. To this end, in order to contribute to the quest for social emancipation with the radical democratization of the public spheres, limitations of the tripartite theory of the "powers of the state" and of some institutional blockades presented by the judiciary were brought to light. Finally, it was pointed out that the national judiciary has a protective behavior of its privileged position of exercising sovereign power, getting to concentrate in itself all the state functions at once. When the distribution of power between the courts and other political-social actors is focused, the judiciary usually reinforces its power, protecting the interests of its members and removing agents who want to put them in doubt.

Call number: LD2668 .T4 1966 P499 / Master of Science

A proliferation of social movements and a large group of young, politically active individuals have pushed corporate firms to pay more attention to increase resource allocation to corporate social responsibility. As of now, corporate social responsibility refers to a wide definition of general efforts made by firms to support society through social impacts. A review of current literature on corporate social responsibility reveals a gap in the way the quality is calculated as well as does not take into account the influence of social movements in the past couple of years. This paper assesses the specific social and political justice positions that firms have taken and whether these positions have had an effect on financial performance given the more actively conscious consumer base. Tobin’s Q is used to quantify these effects and show that positive corporate social responsibility increases financial performance, supporting the hypothesis, while negative corporate social responsibility does not significantly affect financial performance. Future research recommends a closer look at the industry differences in the subject as well as a clearer definition of the variance between the different issues that constitute corporate social responsibility.

La « responsabilité de protéger », concept politique adopté en 2005 pour prévenir et mettre fin aux atrocités criminelles, repose sur un premier pilier —l'obligation de l'Etat de protéger ses populations— dont le consensus apparent a conduit à un manque d’analyse institutionnelle dans sa double dimension constitutionnelle comparée et internationale. Or, l’obligation de l’Etat incombe enparticulier au chef d'Etat. Son obligation de protéger est un élément commun de définition de sa fonction, mais aussi un critère essentiel de différenciation —selon que le chef d’Etat relève d’un modèle étatiste, privilégiant la protection de l’Etat quitte à suspendre le droit, ou d’un modèle libéral, privilégiant la protection de la Constitution et la soumission permanente de l’action politique au droit. La thèse analyse d'abord les sources de l'obligation de protéger du chef d’Etat,successivement théorisée, constitutionnalisée et internationalisée, puis l'exécution de cette obligation résultant de prérogatives, d'immunités et de contrôles de la protection. Les sources de l’obligation révèlent que le chef d’Etat, à l’interface des ordres juridiques interne et international, aune obligation spécifique, non réductible à celle de l’Etat ou de l’individu, qui comporte à la fois une dimension négative (ne pas commettre de crimes contre la population) et une dimension positive(empêcher la commission de tels crimes) et dont l’internationalisation permet de combler les lacunes des Constitutions. Si l’exécution par le chef d’Etat de son obligation de protéger, par la mise en oeuvre de ses prérogatives de protection, est soumise à un contrôle croissant, tant politique que juridictionnel, ce processus reste néanmoins inachevé, faute d'une responsabilité politique internationale, systématique et institutionnalisée. La thèse conclut à l’utilité d'une individualisation de la « responsabilité de protéger » et à l’enrichissement de ce concept par le contrôle de l’obligation de protéger du chef d’Etat. / The political concept of the “responsibility to protect” was adopted in 2005 to prevent and p ut anend to criminal atrocities. The apparent consensus over its first pillar, the State’s obligation to protect its populations, has resulted in a lack of institutional analyses regarding its combined comparative constitutional and international aspects. Importantly, the State’s obligation rests in particular with the Head of State. The obligation to protect is common to all heads of state, but it also differentiates among them, depending on whether their obligation is State-oriented (with the aim to protect the State, even if that requires the suspension of the rule of law) or Rule-of-law oriented (with the aim to protect a liberal constitutional order while always subjecting political actionto the rule of law). The thesis begins with an analysis of the sources of law relating to the Head of State’s obligation to protect, as it was successively theorised, constitutionalised and internationalised. It then turns to the execution of this obligation, which derives from the Head of State’s prerogatives, the relevant immunities involved and available institutional review over his orher activities. The study of the sources reveals that the Head of State (at the interface between the domestic and the international legal orders) is bound by a specific obligation, which exceeds the confines of the obligations of either the State or the individual. This obligation is both negative and positive as it requires both not to commit crimes against the population, and to prevent and put an end to such crimes. Its international dimension supplements the missing parts in the Constitutions.The execution of this obligation, by the implementation of the Head of State’s prerogatives, is subject to an increasing political and judicial control. However, this control remains under construction due to a lack of systematic and institutionalized international political responsibility. The thesis concludes that the “responsibility to protect” could be usefully “individualized” and enriched by institutional supervision and judicial review of the Head of State’s obligation to protect.

This study addresses the concept of fair governance based on an empirical study with marginalized groups, primarily Muslims, and their interaction with government agencies as its salient locus of investigation. Employing the research method of in-depth interviewing, I present a qualitative analysis of 35 semi-structured interviews with Muslims and government administrators. The methodological framework based on which these interviews are interpreted is rooted in the tradition of social constructivism as manifested in the grounded theory perspective of Charmaz. My examination of the hitherto unspoken political visions of the study participants and their shared perspectives offers pragmatic solutions to create greater equity and fairer inclusion of the marginalized in civic and political dialogues and in the administrative practice of government. Remarkably, the cultural changes towards justice and inclusion in the Government of British Columbia manifest that fair government is committed to creating a fundamental transformation in favour of marginalized groups. I find the most promising approach for such transformation occurs where bottom up and dynamic approaches of civil society are aligned with top down approaches of government to justice. The findings suggest that fair governance enhances its functionality and capacity through reflecting universal universalism in its policies and practices, heartening public spirituality and moving towards a more humane modernity rather than the extant western model of modernity. Thus, fair governance calls for diversity in expression of religious identity and challenges the mistaken images of Muslim women. Subsequently, fair government welcomes female religious actors, who act upon religious values, to its administration and respects their choice of clothing encompassing the scarf. Fair government, at all levels, ameliorates the ethical standards of its employees and employs authentic leaders, who act in a virtuous manner, care about employees’ deeply held values, and implement direct communication with staff. Such government supports legislative and constitutional reforms to consider a different outlook of the marginalized on political and social concerns, respects religious practices, honours Muslims’ identity and interpretation of life, and supports individuals who aim to improve humanity in Canada and its occupational settings. Rethinking Islamophobia in the context of the distinct need of government administrators for the institutional education about Islam, as a key finding of the study, depicts the emergence of “Islamoexploria”, as a new expression, which I coin. In my study, there is ample evidence to suggest that a sample of government administrators in British Columbia is in the age of post Islamophobia since they, as pioneers, have passed the stage of Islamophobia and entered a new era of “Islamoexploria”. Thus, they have produced the profound socio-cultural changes towards understanding Islam by shifting from fear of, ostensibly, the unknown to knowledge about the unknown and to approaches that are more sympathetic to Muslims. This finding suggests that fair government facilitates the journey from western Islamophobia, a demonstration of old racism, to “Islamoexploria”, a contemporary thirst for knowledge about Islam. Concurrently, Muslims remain responsible to contribute to fairness at large by role modeling their religious values, which greatly promote justice, compassionate attitudes, and humanitarian actions. / Graduate / 2022-12-07