For centuries, the theory and principles of diplomatics have played a role in the work of European archivists. In North America, however, its relevance is still under scrutiny. This thesis employs diplomatic analysis to test its validity when applied to modern documents and procedures. To investigate the significance of diplomatic methodology and analysis, this thesis first discusses the recent history and structure of the British Columbia court system. It then examines a selection of case files from the civil, probate and bankruptcy registries, and it assigns the documents within to one of the six phases of a procedure: initiative, inquiry, consultation, deliberation, deliberation control, and execution. The study concludes by discussing the diplomatic character of the procedures and its importance in the understanding of modern records. More specifically, it outlines how diplomatics and procedural analysis can assist records professionals in the development of classification systems and retention and disposition schedules; the design of automated records management systems; and archival appraisal, arrangement and description. / Arts, Faculty of / Library, Archival and Information Studies (SLAIS), School of / Graduate

Prostitution, sex in exchange for consideration, has never been illegal in Canada; however, activities surrounding prostitution have been criminalized in the Criminal Code. These prohibited activities include: working indoors (s. 210 keeping a common bawdy house), providing services to sex workers (s. 212(1)(j) living off of the avails of prostitution), and communicating in public for the purposes of prostitution (s. 213). In 2007 two former and one current sex worker, Terri Jean Bedford, Valerie Scott and Amy Lebovitch challenged the constitutionality of the above laws, arguing that they increased sex workers’ vulnerability to harm. Six years later on June 13th, 2013 the Supreme Court of Canada heard the landmark case Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford. Prior to hearing the case, the Supreme Court Justices read the submitted factums outlining the arguments of the appellants, respondents, and their interveners. The final decision was released on December 22nd, 2013 and the unanimous decision to strike down all three laws was made. Using a discourse analysis inspired by Michel Foucault, this study ‘unpacks’ the meanings that are constituted within the factums submitted to the Supreme Court regarding the people who engage in sex work and the institution of prostitution. The convergences and divergences within the discourses are presented. Drawing on these findings, while applying the work of Wedeking’s (2010) strategic legal framing alongside the governmentality perspective of risk, the tensions surrounding risk and choice are further explored. In doing so, the relationship between risk (taking/avoiding) and choice (making) is teased out. In this thesis I argue that risk and choice are strategically framed in the submitted factums to demonstrate the (un)constitutionality of Canada’s prostitution laws. Furthermore, I argue that both the appellants and respondents agree that risk avoidance is an acceptable self-governance strategy for sex workers, however they diverge on what they consider to be acceptable risk avoidance measures. The conclusion of this study discusses the decision of Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford to strike down the three prostitution laws and the subsequent introduction of the Protection of Communities and Exploited Persons Act.

This diploma thesis deals with historical development of the Czech Supreme Audit Office and its foreign analogies. The subject of the thesis is to evaluate the current legal status of the Supreme Audit Office and then propose possible modifications with reference to the regulatory audit institutions in European countries. The diploma thesis is divided into two parts. The theoretical part contains material study, theoretical introduction to the control and audit and then examines in detail the historical progress of the Supreme Audit Office in the Czech Republic to its current form. Other chapters are focused on different foreign institutions which are responsible for the national audit. The practical part highlights the differences between the control authorities. The comparison of individual offices is analysed on the basis of the Lima Declaration of Guidelines on Auditing Precepts.

This thesis deals with the boundary between technical improvement and repairs of fixed assets. This work aims to describe and evaluate the selected decisions of the Supreme Administrative Court, primarily in the area of technical improvements and repairs and on the basis of these decisions determine the principles and parameters that should be determinig for taxpayers when they are assessing the technical improvements and repair on fixed assets. The first part is theoretically focused on legislation of technical improvements and repairs. In the following part are described and evaluated selected decisions of the Supreme Administrative Court, on which are subsequently drawn rules and parameters for assessing the boundaries between technical improvement and repair.

Executive orders are a significant source of presidential power although scholars disagree on the nature of that power. It has been argued that executive orders are an indication of a president's failure to persuade others to act as he desires; others contend that executive orders offer "power without persuasion." This dissertation introduces the conditional model of executive order issuance and duration in order to offer a synthesis to these competing views, and to offer a better understanding of the opportunities and constraints faced by the president when choosing to act unilaterally through executive orders. The conditional theory holds that both the issuance and duration of executive orders is a function of the president's ideological proximity to Congress and the Supreme Court, and the availability of fresh policy space.

State supreme courts are autonomous institutions with significant power. Yet, despite this authority, state supreme courts routinely rely on one another to explain why and how they reached their decisions. This puzzle of why state supreme courts cite each other in their opinions led me to pose two questions. First, under what conditions do state supreme courts cite other states supreme courts? And second, to whom do they turn for guidance? To answer these questions, I propose a new theory for evaluating state supreme court citations, the social learning model. I borrow policy diffusion’s learning mechanism and I pair it with network theory and methods to explain peer-to-peer state supreme court citations practices. I argue that courts are social actors who interact, influence, and learn from one another, and the citations are communications by and between the courts. To model citations between courts, I apply a temporal exponential random graph network analysis model or TERGM. TERGMs simulate the evolution of the state-to-state citation network by including aspects of both the courts and the network structure. I argue that only by understanding how networks and issue areas evolve can we begin to understand how courts and justices make decisions. The network approach to citations specifically tests these endogenous relationships, it also directly models the complex dependencies of citation networks. My findings demonstrate the courts became more connected over time and no single state supreme court leader emerges. I find that citations are endogenous; what one court does affects other courts. I also discover that the area of law matters a lot and it is insufficient to pool all legal issues into a single model. Finally, state supreme courts do not cite state supreme courts who look like them. Overall, the evidence suggests the courts are learning from each other. The courts’ written language discloses the mechanism. Courts state their own case law does not provide a solution to the question presented and they must seek answers elsewhere. Additionally, the courts do not always cite the same state, as we would expect from emulation. Together, these findings demonstrate that state supreme courts are connected, they learn from one another.

The question of whether increased funding pursuant to equity and adequacy court decisions has improved academic performance of at-risk students has sparked a lively and spirited debate. The landmark New Jersey case of Abbott v. Burke has been at the center of this debate. In Abbott, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that students in twenty-eight (28) “special needs” districts must receive the same funding per pupil as students in the two highest socio-economic district factor groups in the State. 149 N.J. 145 (1997) (Abbott IV). The question of whether the redistribution of State aid pursuant to Abbott IV has been efficiently and effectively managed has dominated public policy debates on education in New Jersey for the last two decades. The research questions are: 1. Did the court orders in Abbott v. Burke and subsequent reform policies adopted by the state in response to these orders increase funding and resources for economically disadvantaged students in the Abbott districts? 2. Have increased resources from Abbott v. Burke directly reached students in the classroom through enhanced instruction and student support services? 3. Have Abbott v. Burke and ensuing State reform policies improved the academic performance of economically disadvantaged students as compared to analogous low socioeconomic and working-class students in districts that are not covered by the court decision? 4. Have a specific set of programs and reforms, including intensive early literacy programs in the elementary grades mandated by the State pursuant to Abbott v. Burke been effective for at-risk students in Abbott districts? My study proceeds from descriptive analyses of revenues by source and expenditures per pupil by function to quasi-experimental models. My primary causal analyses involved applying a difference-in-differences (DD) approach using expenditures per pupil, student teacher ratio, state standardized assessment scores for fourth, eighth, and eleventh grade; SAT Verbal and Math district averages; and Graduating with the Class as outcomes. My secondary causal analyses entailed a comparative interrupted time series (CITS) approach using state standardized assessment scores for eleventh grades, SAT scores, graduation rates, and post high plans as outcomes. After an exhaustive study, wherein I built one of the most comprehensive district-level databases in the nation and utilized over twenty-five measures, I find that Abbott v. Burke as an intervention has strong positive effects on education spending, student performance (in the early stages), and the learning environment. Abbott v. Burke had a strong positive effect on education spending from the time the seminal case was decided in 1997 up until to the present date. The fact that Abbott districts are expending more on student support services per pupil in FY 17 than all other socio-economic districts across the State in raw dollars ($2,477) and on a percentage basis (12.7 percent) indicates that increased resources from Abbott v. Burke directly reach students through enhanced student support services. In New Jersey, increased funding and reform policies pursuant to the line of Abbott v. Burke court decisions has improved the academic performance of economically disadvantaged student in the Abbott districts as compared to low socioeconomic and working-class non-Abbott districts. The DD model suggests that Abbott IV increased the proficiency levels on fourth grade reading assessments of Abbott districts as compared to low socioeconomic districts between school year 1997-98 and 2001-02 (p<0.01). The DD model suggests that the IEL program increased fourth grade reading proficiency scores of the Abbott districts who were “high and medium implementers” of this policy as compared to low socioeconomic districts. In a confirmation that the IEL program is effective, the DD model also implies that the IEL program increased fourth grade reading proficiency scores of the Abbott districts who were “low implementers” of this policy as compared to low socioeconomic districts. Abbott IV increased the number of students in Abbott districts enrolling in two-year colleges as compared to low socioeconomic or working class districts between school year 1997-98 and 2001-02 means that Abbott students are more cognizant of the opportunities to attend college.

The influence of corporate money in politics is one of the most studied topics in political science in the U.S., although not so much so in recent democracies. Using new and public data from Brazilian elections, this dissertation investigates the process of institutional change that culminated in a 2015 decision by the Brazilian Supreme Court to ban corporate donations as a legal source of financing to politicians and parties. The episode exemplifies the worldwide tendency of judicialization of politics and fits the pattern of change identified by the literature as a critical juncture, understood as a relatively short period of time in which there is a heightened probability that agents' choices will affect the outcome of interest. Under exceptional circumstances of political and economic crisis, actors not institutionally in charge of law making set in motion a process of legislative change whose final outcome was not a faithful reflection of their preferences, but was deeply influenced by contingent elements. Public support in a context of severe revelations of corruption schemes explain how the Supreme Court was able to rule against the immediate interest of politicians and how the latter, having adjusted to find additional sources of money, were unwilling to reinstate corporate donation as a legal means of campaign financing. Having confirmed in Chapter two that incumbency is associated in Brazil with a negative effect on the electoral performance of office holders while the use of corporate money by candidates is legal, the dissertation examines the effects of the Supreme Court decision on municipal elections held after it came into effect. We investigate whether removing this important source of funding for both incumbents and challengers swings the balance in favor of office holders in both majority and proportional elections held in 2016. We find evidence that the ban on corporate donations favored incumbent mayors, suggesting that the historic decision, instead of levelling the playing field between incumbents and challengers, in reality helped office holders to win an additional term. It was not immediately visible due to the particular conditions in which the 2016 elections took place, when voters were particularly angry at incumbents due to the widespread news of corruption involving party officials. These findings indicate that, despite its intention to make Brazilian elections more competitive and open, the historic Supreme Court decision might have had the exact opposite effect, helping perpetuate in power politicians already in office.

1 Abstract My master's thesis is focused on analysis of extraordinary appeal in criminal procedure. Extraordinary appeal is one of extraordinary remedial measures which was introduced into the Czech Criminal Procedure Code with effect from 1 January 2002. The thesis is devided into 6 chapters and the main chapter of the thesis is focused on in-depth analysis of the grounds of an extraordinary appeal and the issue of so called extreme discrepancy. So far, the issue of so called extreme discrepancy has not yet been subject to in-depth analysis in professional literature, therefore I pay more attention to this matter. The importance of so called extreme discrepancy is significant for the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic and its decisions. It is a concept arising from the case law of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic, which extends the grounds of an extraordinary appeal despite the grounds laid down in the Czech Criminal Procedure Code. Based on this concept the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic is obliged not only to review questions of law but also questions of fact in cases with so called extreme discrepancy. The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic defends this concept saying it is neccessary to keep this approach in order to respect the fair trail within the meaning of the European...

The Role of the Grand Chambers of the Supreme Courts and of the Plenum of the Constitutional Court in Judicial Law-Making Abstract Grand Chambers (GCs) are considered to be the most authoritative judicial bodies within multi-panel supreme courts. They are said to secure the unity, continuity, and quality of these courts' decision making. This thesis explores these claims in relation to GCs of three Czech highest courts - the Supreme Court, the Supreme Administrative Court, and the Constitutional Court. What is the role of the GCs in the decision-making of these Courts and how do the GCs fulfil their role? The thesis addresses these questions from both doctrinal and empirical angles. Doctrinally, it analyses with respect to all three courts the criteria for selecting GC cases, the character of GC decisions, and the status of GC precedents. Empirically, it explores how many and what type of cases the case-selection mechanism generates and how the GC's decisions influence the decision- making of other Court formations. On the basis of this analysis, the main argument of the thesis is that courts' use of GCs influences the way the multi-panel courts develop the law. The three key parameters of any GC that the thesis identifies are (i) the justification of its authority, (ii) the means of asserting its authority...