<p>The issue of libation poses an important challenge to Christianity in Africa and, more specifically, among the Akan people in Ghana. Libation is traditionally a key ritual for the Akan as an ethnic group. However, the European missionaries who operated in West Africa condemned this ritual as idolatrous. Following the emergence of African Christian theology, especially within the Ghanaian context, various African theologians have contributed to a more systematic discussion of such libation practices. This thesis entails a critical comparison of the views of four Akan (in Ghana) theologians on Christian participation in libation practices. On this basis, the research problem in this thesis is stated in the following way: ―What are the points of divergence that lie beneath the different positions of Kwesi Sarpong, Kwesi Dickson, John Pobee and Kwame Bediako on the question of whether and in what forms Christian participation in libation practices in an Akan context in Ghana may be regarded as compatible with the Christian faith? This thesis describes analyses, compares and assesses the cultural and theological presuppositions of the views of these four Akan Ghanaian theologians on Christian participation in libation rituals. It shows how the views of these four theologians on libation are influenced by their views on the tatus which is attributed, both in Akan culture and in contemporary Christianity in Ghana, to abosom (lesser divinities) and nsamamfo (ancestors) in relation to Onyame (Supreme Being). The purpose of this thesis is therefore to clarify the cultural and theological assumptions underlying current debates on the observance of libation rituals by Christians in Ghana. The task is a description of the views of Sarpong, Dickson, Pobee and Bediako on the compatibility of Christian participation in libation practices in an Akan context with the Christian faith - just as they themselves understand its content and significance. In this thesis I approached the debate on libation in African Christian theology in two ways, namely following a direct and a thematic approach. In the direct approach the focus is explicitly on libation as a topic either in the context of African traditional religion and culture by itself or in its encounter with Christianity. In the thematic approach the focus is on libation within the context of its wider religious (with reference to God, the lesser divinities and ancestors) and cultural (the relationship between Christianity and African culture) contexts. The research indicates that the point of divergence amongst the four theologians mentioned above is almost always related to the invocation and petition of the lesser divinities and the ancestors. In addition to these major theological issues, ―ecclesiastical sanctions‖ also forms a major determining factor that influences the positions of these&nbsp / theologians. On their respective views, Sarpong asserts that libation in its present form is not incompatible with the Christian faith. By contrast, Bediako maintains that libation as is presently practiced among the Akan is not compatible with the Christian faith neither can it be adapted into the Christian faith. On the other hand, Dickson and Pobee maintain that libation rituals are not compatible with the Christian faith, but that it can be adopted and adapted into the Christian faith if the content of the accompanying prayer is made in consonance with Christian theology. The thesis is comprised of eight chapters and a postscript. In the postscript, I offer some personal views and argue that libation has to be adapted before it can be compatible with the Christian faith. I suggest that libation should be made only to God and to the ancestors. Petitions during libation rituals should be made only to God, while the presence of the ancestors should be recognized in a ―symbolic manner‖ by an invitation to join the living human beings to make such petitions.</p>

This paper looks at the relationship between gender equality and the legal system in Japan. The legislative and judicial histories of cases involving women's rights in employment and the family system are utilized to understand this relationship and explore areas for future development of gender equality in Japan.

Recusal, or judicial disqualification, occurs when a judge abstains from a particular legal proceeding because of a personal conflict of interest. All levels of the judicial system and some administrative agencies in the United States apply the concept of recusal, but this study focuses on the United States Supreme Court. Title 28 of the United States Code provides standards (not obligatory by legal means) on when Supreme Court Justices should recuse themselves. But Supreme Court Justices are themselves the arbiters of their own recusal and often these substantive standards are not met. The method of study applied is theoretical, using both quantitative and qualitative data from past Supreme Court cases.

In 1987, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians. A landmark decision, the case carried significant ramifications for tribal sovereignty and the creation of the Native American gaming industry. In response to the decision, the United States Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act the following year. Since the Supreme Court ruled in Cabazon, Native American gaming has grown into a multi-billion dollar industry and the most significant source of revenue for many tribes across the country. Given the complexity of Native American law and the controversial nature of casino gaming, the industry has resulted in many contentious legal battles between tribes and parties ranging from state governments to private corporations. As the Cabazon decision was the breakthrough for reservation gaming, this thesis will examine the Supreme Court’s rulings regarding tribal gaming and how they affected the Native American gaming industry and the doctrine of tribal sovereignty.

The institutional legitimacy and impact of the Supreme Court, like all political institutions, ultimately depend on public support. However, unlike other political institutions, the Court does not draw that support directly from the democratic process. Scholars in the United States have examined this problem by analyzing the relationship between public perceptions of judicial institutions and their legitimacy, emphasizing the importance of myth in sustaining support for courts in the absence of democratic accountability. This thesis extends American research to the Canadian case, by examining the role of the media as a significant source of popular perceptions of the Canadian Supreme Court. The objective of this thesis is to provide a preliminary assessment of this role by analyzing newspaper coverage of three of the Court's important and high-profile decisions: The Morgentaler, Thibaudeau and Symes cases. The thesis contends that the media, at times through oversimplifications and mischaracterization of issues, help to perpetuate a positive myth of the Court. Through qualitative and quantitative analysis, this thesis shows that the public appears to base its support on this myth, which is built upon incomplete and oversimplified information. This distorted image of the Court helps to strengthen its legitimacy in the eyes of the public.

The idea that Canada was transformed into a "constitutional democracy" in 1982 is widely believed by the public, yet rarely examined in academic literature. This article identifies what it calls a "theory of Constitutional democracy" and then applies it to a test case, the Supreme Court of Canada's decisions on the equality claims of lesbians and gay men. It concludes that if the public expected such a transition, it has yet to be made.

Many Supreme Court followers contended that Judge John Roberts entered his Supreme Court confirmation hearings as a "stealth candidate" who lacked a paper trail the Judiciary Committee could vet to discern the interpretive approach, or judicial philosophy, to which Judge Roberts' subscribed. This dissertation used rhetorical criticism as a methodological approach for examining this claim. A close-reading of Roberts' law journal articles, his writings from his service during the Reagan and Bush (41) administrations, the text of his appellate court confirmation testimony and published opinions, and the text of his Supreme Court confirmation testimony and published opinions reveals that Roberts was not a "stealth candidate" but instead a jurist who resolved constitutional, judicial, political, and statutory issues by incorporating components of originalism and positivism into his prudentialist judicial philosophy. The first two chapters of the dissertation provide the requisite background for the study. Chapter I discusses the challenges of the nomination and confirmation processes for Supreme Court Justices, and the chapter discusses the crucial powers that the Chief Justice possesses. Chapter II introduces readers to legal arguments, argument modalities, and judicial philosophies, and the chapter offers a new definition for the terms "legal rhetoric" and provides a new methodology for studying judicial discourse. The subsequent chapters comprise the core of the study. Chapter III examines Roberts' law review articles and the letters, memoranda, and position papers he wrote while working for the Reagan and Bush administrations, Chapter IV investigates Roberts' appellate court confirmation testimony and his published opinions, and Chapter V investigates Roberts' Supreme Court confirmation testimony and his published opinions. Following a chronological approach reveals that Roberts consistently used certain argument types within corresponding argument modalities to formulate his argumentative strategies, and each chapter demonstrates that Roberts' adhered to a prudentialist interpretive approach to resolve constitutional and statutory questions. Finally, Chapter VI argues that scholars should examine judicial discourse from an interdisciplinary perspective and reevaluate their conceptions about legal rhetoric and rhetorical criticism.

[pt] O presente trabalho tem por foco primordial a demonstração do caráter antidemocrático da judicialização da política. Para tanto, parte-se de uma análise crítico-descritiva dos principais teóricos que se posicionam contra – reunidos no denominado eixo analítico procedimentalista – e a favor – representantes do chamado eixo explicativo substancialista – da judicialização da política, definindo-se, também, o conceito de democracia que servirá de parâmetro fundamentador dos juízos de valor a serem emitidos, a saber, o da democracia deliberativa, identificado como aquele que melhor se adéqua ao perfil das sociedades pluralistas contemporâneas. Para comprovar a constatação de que o Judiciário brasileiro tem operado a judicialização da política, citam-se alguns julgados do Supremo Tribunal Federal, como órgão representante da cúpula desse Poder, responsável pela última decisão em matéria constitucional, explicitando-se onde, como e por que essa atividade caminha de encontro aos ditames da democracia deliberativa. A título de conclusão, a participação popular no processo deliberativo democrático de formação da opinião e da vontade políticas, bem como a deferência a esse consenso discursivo pelas decisões judiciais são apontadas como a via democrática a ser trilhada. / [en] This work has as its primary focus the demonstration of the undemocratic character of judicialization of politics. Therefore, it starts up with a critical-descriptive analysis of the main theorists who are against – together termed as the proceduralist analytical axis – and in favor – representatives of the so-called substantialist explanatory axis – of the judicialization of politics, defining also the concept of democracy that will serve as the basic parameter for value judgments to be issued, namely, the deliberative democracy, identified as the one that best fits the profile of the contemporary pluralist societies. To prove the fact that the Brazilian judiciary has operated in judicialization of politics, it cites some Supremo Tribunal Federal’s (Brazilian’s Supreme Court) decisions, as the responsible for the final decision on constitutional matters, explaining where, how and why this activity goes against deliberative democracy. In conclusion, popular participation in deliberative democratic process of opinion formation and political will, and the deference to this discursive consensus by the judicial decisions are pointed as the democratic path to be trodden.

Submitted by Oliveira Santos Dilzaná (dilznana@yahoo.com.br) on 2013-11-04T16:05:16Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Agindo como experts... Israel de Jesus Rocha.pdf: 1585712 bytes, checksum: fe3c799c892bc9a21686aa216b69fddc (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Ana Portela (anapoli@ufba.br) on 2013-11-18T18:48:53Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Agindo como experts... Israel de Jesus Rocha.pdf: 1585712 bytes, checksum: fe3c799c892bc9a21686aa216b69fddc (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2013-11-18T18:48:54Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Agindo como experts... Israel de Jesus Rocha.pdf: 1585712 bytes, checksum: fe3c799c892bc9a21686aa216b69fddc (MD5) / A Lei de Biossegurança brasileira, após aprovação, iniciou um longo percurso pelo judiciário que se encerraria três anos mais tarde com a audiência pública e a votação sobre a constitucionalidade da referida lei. Entre uma e outra, uma série de mobilizações em torno da questão envolvendo o uso de embriões para obtenção de células-tronco ganhou os espaços midiáticos, políticos e jurídicos. O objetivo deste trabalho é analisar a controvérsia envolvendo a lei de biossegurança a partir da audiência pública, convocada a partir da ação direta de inconstitucionalidade 3510, no Supremo Tribunal Federal, descrevendo os modos de ação dos cientistas envolvidos com o tema. Para isso, procura recompor a partir de materiais audiovisuais e rastros documentais os traços deixados desde a votação no Congresso até a audiência, ao passo que tenta mostrar como as apresentações dos cientistas são pontualizações que evidenciam e mobilizam uma série de redes sociotécnicas formadas por atores humanos e não-humanos. Nosso ponto de partida considera que as relações entre a ciência e o direito não podem ser concebidas como esferas desarticuladas. Antes, elas são parte do esforço de composição de um mundo em comum para o qual escolhemos aqueles que farão parte ou não de tais arranjos. Conclui-se, então, que os vínculos estabelecidos pela ciência a partir da mobilização dos atores que a sustentam não podem ser vistos de maneira isolada da sociedade, pois há neste processo um esforço de mobilização de outros atores, como o sistema jurídico, que atuam diretamente no sentido de lançar perspectivas de significação e contextos de uso sobre os resultados alcançados pela ciência, sobretudo quando os objetos oferecem riscos e afetam diretamente um número significativo de pessoas. After approval The Biosafety Bill Law in Brazil began a long journey for judiciary that would end three years later with a public hearing and vote on the constitutionality of that law. Between them, a series of demonstrations around the issue involving the use of embryos to obtain stem cells gained the media, political and legal spaces. The objective of this study is to analyze the controversy surrounding the law biosecurity from the public hearing, requested from the direct action of unconstitutionality 3510, in Brazil’s Federal Supreme Court, describing the modes of action of the scientists involved with the topic. For this, demand recover from audiovisual and documentary materialsthe traces left from the vote in Congress by the audience, while trying to show how scientists are punctualizations presentations that highlight and mobilize a range of socio-technical networks formed by human and non-human actors. In this case we consider that the relationship between science and law can not be conceived as disjointed spheres. Rather, they are part of the effort of composing a common world in which we choose those who will be part or not of such arrangements. We conclude that the bonds established by science from the mobilization of actors that support can not be seen in isolation from society, because this process is an effort to mobilize other actors such as the legal system, which act directly to launch perspectives of meaning and contexts of use on the achievements of science, especially when objects pose risks and directly affect a significant number of people.

Présidé par la Cour Suprême, le système judiciaire Libyen est caractérisé par le principe de l'unité de la justice qui n’a pas impliqué la création de tribunaux administratifs parallèlement aux tribunaux civils. La Cour exerce ses fonctions à travers ses Chambres «constitutionnelles, administratives, civiles, pénales et du statut personnel». Ainsi, l'approche libérale de cette Cour est fondée sur les principes de la justice, de l'égalité et de la liberté. S'il apparait que l'action principale de Cour Suprême est limitée dans ses pouvoirs et sa compétence, il s'avère qu'elle tend vers un élargissement progressif de sa capacité à protéger les droits individuels. Celui-ci se manifeste à travers le jugement obligatoire sur l’inconstitutionnalité des lois ou règlements qui s’opposent aux documents constitutionnels Libyens durant toutes les périodes ( Monarchie, Jamahiriya et transition). / Headed by the Supreme Court, the Libyan judicial system is based on the principle of the unity of justice, which does not involve the establishment of administrative courts alongside civil courts. The Court exercises its functions through its constituencies (constitutional, administrative, civil, criminal and personal). Thus, the liberal approach of this court is based on the principles of justice, equality and freedom. While the main procedure of the Supreme Court appears to be limited in its powers and jurisdiction, it appears to tend to gradually expand its ability to protect individual rights. This is reflected in its binding provisions on the unconstitutionality of laws or regulations that oppose Libyan constitutional documents during all periods (monarchy, mass, and transition).