Controversial Issues Surrounding Necessary Defense in Judicial Practice The purposes of this essay are to point out some of the controversial issues surrounding the legal institute of self-defense in Czech law (Czech law uses the term "necessary defense") and to analyze judicial practices that deal with those controversial issues. Moreover, this essay will explore the institute of self-defense in a broader context. This essay is composed of six chapters, each of which dealing with different aspects of self- defense. Chapter 1 consists of an introduction that sets the aims and purposes of this essay, as well as introduces the institute of self-defense as a fundamental element of any democratic society. Chapter 2 deals with self-defense as a sociological phenomenon. The chapter is subdivided into three subchapters. Subchapter 2.1 focuses on the importance of self-defense in society. Subchapter 2.2 analyzes the problems associated with an insufficient usage of the institute of self-defense. Lastly, Subchapter 2.3 focuses on issues of legal consciousness in matters of self-defense. Chapter 3 briefly introduces the historical development of self-defense. It is subdivided into two parts. Subchapter 3.1 focuses on the ancient roots of the institute of self-defense, and Subchapter 3.2 describes the...

Narratives are a very important part of public policy negotiations and deliberations. Public policy research has shown that policy narratives are manipulated to fit the motives of the creators and enforcers of that narrative (Stone, 2002). The creators and enforcers of these narratives use symbols, language, and other techniques to ensure that the narrative survives and dominates the political and social environment by becoming the favored policy prescription (Stone, 2002; Miller, 2012; Jones & McBeth, 2010; Schneider & Ingram, 1993). This study employs a qualitative content analysis to trace the genealogy of the following narratives that make up the “Stand Your Ground” discourse from 2005-2013: (1) Prosecutorial Discretion Narrative, (2) Vigilante Justice Narrative, (3) Race Narrative, and (4) Law-abiding Citizen Narrative. The “Stand Your Ground” discourse is used to test what this dissertation terms the “institutionalized policy narrative” thesis which states, Policymakers and policy advocates use policy narratives which consist of powerful symbols, politically motivated language, and ideographs to both shape and respond to public opinions by appealing to both the heart and intellect of the public. Once a winning narrative becomes institutionalized it is nearly impossible to replace that winning narrative even in the wake of a powerful new emerging narrative. / Includes bibliography. / Dissertation (Ph.D.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2014. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection

This workshop will prepare academic advisors to operate effectively while protecting themselves from becoming embroiled in controversy.

The aim of this thesis is to evaluate the lawfulness of the use of force by the United States of America against the so-called Islamic State in the territory of Syria, in terms of Ius ad bellum. For this purpose, the thesis is divided into three parts. The first part focuses on assessing the subjectivity of the Islamic State. In particular, the subjectivity is examined with regard to the criteria arising from the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States and from professional experience. The Islamic State is assessed in terms of defined territory, permanent population, effective government, capacity to enter into relations with other states, independence and legitimacy. The second part deals with the legal regulation of the use of force in international relations. After the presentation of the historical development, the attention is paid especially to the UN Charter and the ensuing prohibition of the threat or use of force in international relations. In the context of the use of force against the Islamic State, legal exceptions to this prohibition, which could be used in the fight against the Islamic State, are presented. First, attention is paid to the exceptions resulting from the UN Charter, which are self-defense under Article 51 and actions under Chapter VII. Two types of...

Do the Palestinians deserve a state? To answer this question, one must first provide an account of collective self-determination (CSD) and when a group is entitled to it. This starts with looking at the origins of CSD, both to see if it truly is a right and, if so, what its nature is. I will argue that there is such a thing as a right to CSD, but due to its nature, it is not a universal right of all groups. Whether a group has a right to CSD depends on the conditions in which the group lives, and in this paper, I will tease out what these conditions are. The result of such an analysis will be a set of criteria by which one can judge whether or not a group is entitled to CSD, given the conditions in which the group lives. With this criteria, I will look at the Palestinian case in particular and determine whether or not the Palestinians have a right to CSD. If so, they have a right to an independent state, since any group that exercises true CSD can determine whether or not they choose to live in such a state.

Ad hominem argument is an argument that attacks the defender of a claim rather than the claim in dispute. The purpose of my dissertation is to answer the question of whether ad hominem argument is fallacious. I search for the answer by exploring several areas of philosophy and discussing ad hominem argument from historical, logical, epistemological, and linguistic perspectives. I reach the following conclusions: First, since the conclusion of an ad hominem argument does not appear explicitly in actual argumentation, how to formulate the conclusion plays a crucial role in judging the legitimacy of ad hominem argument; Second, there is no type of logical fallacy unified under the name of “ad hominem” because, at least, some instances of so-called ad hominem fallacy are epistemically justifiable arguments; Third, since an ad hominem argument is used to refute a person’s testimony by attacking his trustworthiness, an ad hominem argument playing a role of undercutting defeater of a speaker’s testimony is legitimate from the perspective of epistemology of testimony; Fourth, since ad hominem argument can be treated as a speech act of argumentation, an ad hominem argument that satisfies the felicity conditions for argumentation is legitimate from the perspective of speech act theory and an ad hominem argument can be legitimately used to reveal the infelicity of the opponent’s argument. / text

Šiame diplominiame darbe nagrinėjamas civilinių teisių gynybos institutas – savigyna. Lietuvoje ji buvo žinoma nuo seniausių laikų. Sovietų Sąjungai okupavus Lietuvą, savigyna buvo uždrausta. Kadangi šiuolaikinėje Lietuvos civilinėje teisėje šis institutas atsirado kartu su naujuoju Civiliniu kodeksu, Lietuvos teisės teoretikų jis dar beveik neanalizuotas. Teismų praktika taikant savigyną reglamentuojančias teisės normas irgi labai nedidelė. Visa tai nulėmė autoriaus pasirinkimą plačiau paanalizuoti savigyną Lietuvos civilinėje teisėje. Darbe magistrantas atskleidžia savigynos teisinę prigimtį, t. y. nurodo jos vietą civilinių teisių gynybos sistemoje. Autorius prieina išvadą, kad Lietuvos Respublikos civiliniame kodekse savigyna įtvirtinta kaip viena iš neteisminių civilinių teisių gynybos formų. Magistrantas analizuoja savigynos sąvokos ir turinio probleminius aspektus. Atsižvelgdamas į tai, kaip savigyna Lietuvoje buvo suprantama Statutų galiojimo ir vėlesniais laikais, ir remdamasis savigynos samprata kitų valstybių civiliniuose įstatymuose, jis konstatuoja, kad Lietuvos Respublikos civiliniame kodekse savigynos samprata yra nepagrįstai susiaurinta. Remiantis atliktu tyrimu, siūloma keisti kai kurias savigyną reglamentuojančias teisės normas. Darbe pateikiama savigynos būdų samprata. Plačiau analizuojamas vienas iš jų – daikto sulaikymas. Magistro darbo autorius atkreipia dėmesį į tai, kad, taikant daikto sulaikymo teisę reglamentuojančias normas praktiškai gali kilti tam... [to full text] / Presented work analyses the institute of the defence of civil rights – self-defence. It has been known in Lithuania for a very long time. Self-defence was forbidden when Lithuania was occupied by the Soviet Union. As this institute only appeared in the modern civil law in Lithuania together with the new Civil Code, it has not yet been analyzed by Lithuanian law theoreticians in more detail. Practice of courts applying legal norms which regulate self-defence is also limited. All the above mentioned reasons have influenced the author’s decision to analyze civil-defense in the Lithuanian civil law in greater detail.

After the terrorist attacks that took place on September 11, 2001, on American soil, a plethora of norms that enable military forces to shoot-down hijacked civil aircraft have been passed in several countries. Although these laws, decrees and executive orders are grounded on security reasons and they are allegedly aimed to protect people and vital interests on ground, this assertion does not emasculate the main difficulty they face in legal terms, which is the existence of an international provision that forbids the use of force against civilian aircraft. This thesis contains a detailed list of such domestic norms and conducts an analysis of their validity from the perspective of Article 3bis of the Chicago Convention and the right of self-defense granted to states by the Charter of the United Nations.

Abstract: When former President Calderón declared war on the cartels in 2006, Mexico was plunged into insecurity, and the government has been trying to reassert control of the security situation ever since. While the situation has improved, the fight will not be over until the police are in control of the streets. Historical and structural problems have plagued the police, forcing the military to play a central role in internal security operations. While a number of positive reforms have been implemented in recent years, there is still much work to do. This paper will examine some of these past reforms and their effects. Current tactics as well as potential reforms and strategies for the future will also be discussed, with a focus on the police reassuming the central role in internal security.

This piece tries to determine whether or not Japan’s movement towards rearmament is indicative of a renewed militaristic sentiment or driven by the necessity of improving its defense in view of mounting threats from its age-old enemy, China. The goal of this work is to create a framework using both international events and domestic responses in which to ascertain whether or not the reformation of Article 9 is, in of itself, a reemergence of pre-war bushido/nationalist sentiment or a response to both outside and inside influences necessitating the need for a “normalized” state. The work focuses on three distinct time periods – early 2000s, latter 2000s, and the 2010s – in which to highlight the initial development, progression, and foreseeable resolution to the Article 9 debate. These stages emphasize several elements persistent in Japan’s quest for a more normalized state, including: the hostile external environment created by the rise of foreign assertiveness, and internal domestic pressures (which to some extent are driven by external pressures) along with its own desire to seek a more normalized position in the international community as well as to gain an enhanced sense of national pride. Additionally a brief synopsis of both the foreign and domestic entities which have contributed to the Japanese reformation movement has been included for better foundational understanding of the question at hand. In general, results suggested that, though there is some merit towards a reemergence of pre-WWII nationalistic sentiment (especially in the case of the Net Uyoku), the reformation of Article 9 is primarily driven in response to growing tensions – both within East Asia as well as world-wide – as well as a need to assert some semblance of nationalistic identity (an area seriously lacking in Japanese society). Results further implicate that, though the process of reforming Article 9 and thereby revising Japan’s anti-war policy may not be immediate, movement within the Japanese state towards constitutional reformation is indeed on the rise – rearmament being the primary target of said reforms.