La recherche proposée concerne « la dimension constitutionnelle de l’urgence en France et en Italie». Elle sera divisée en deux parties. La première concernera l’autonomie sémantique et la dimension théorico-juridique de la notion d’urgence. L’appréhension de la notion d’urgence, en effet, soulève la question de sa définition juridique, permettant de la distinguer d’autres notions juridiques proches, comme celles de la nécessité, de la rapidité ou du péril en la demeure. Définir l’urgence d’une façon rigoureuse est-elle une entreprise vouée à l’échec ? La deuxième concernera l’urgence dans les systèmes constitutionnels français et italien. On examinera les 47, al. 4, et 61, al. 3, de la Constitution française et les articles 13, 21, 72, 73 et 77 de celle italienne. Il nous a apparu intéressant, en outre, d’analyser la loi sur l’état d’urgence dans les deux ordres juridiques, pour se demander, finalement, s’il est possible d’envisager une "urgence démocratique". / The research concerns «the constitutional dimension of the emergency in France and Italy». The PhD Thesis will be divided into two parts.The first part is aimed at the theoretical definition of the emergency. We have paid priority attention to highlighting the difference between the emergency and the others “similar” legal notions (necessity, periculum in mora, celerity, etc. Is it possible defining the emergency in a rigorous way?In the second part we have examined the articles 47, al. 4, and 61, al. 3, of the French Constitution and the articles 13, 21, 72, 73 and 77 of the Italian Constitution. We have also analyzed the state of emergency law in France and in Italy. It is possible to envisage a «democratic emergency»

No description available.

Universities have traditionally stood as bastions of academic freedom and forums for open discourse and free expression. In recent years, however, this role has been questioned in instances where university administrators have, either directly or complicity, denied students the opportunity to express certain viewpoints they deem “controversial”. This research paper explores whether a university, or its delegates, should be allowed to deny students access to campus facilities and resources solely on the basis of ideological viewpoint. The relevance of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, statutory human rights provisions, and common law doctrines to the student-university relationship are explored in turn. It is argued that, notwithstanding the fact that universities may be “private” actors to whom the Charter does not directly apply, they are institutions invested with a public interest, and as such ought to be subject to special duties of non-discrimination.

The aim of this thesis is to provide an analytic framework for the governance of suspended declarations of invalidity in Canadian constitutional law. A suspended declaration is a remedial device by which a court strikes down a constitutionally invalid law, but suspends the effect of its order such that the law retains force for a temporary period. While introduced to Canadian law under circumstances of exigency, suspended declarations have grown to be used liberally by the courts, and the principles that previously confined them have been abandoned. As a result, constitutional rights have sometimes been suspended without just basis. I propose a means to reverse this trend: by adopting proportionality, a core feature of the analytic method used to adjudicate limitations on Charter rights, as a remedial principle guiding the use of suspended declarations. I review the jurisprudence of South Africa’s Constitutional Court to illustrate the merits of this approach.

This paper examines the Attorney General’s obligation, in Canada and New Zealand, to report on inconsistencies in proposed legislation with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. Although the obligations are similar, the Canadian and New Zealand Attorneys General have developed very different reporting cultures. The Canadian Attorney General has never issued a report; the New Zealand Attorney General has issued many. This paper’s thesis is that the different reporting cultures are attributable to the different constitutional structure in each jurisdiction and different understandings of the independence of the Attorney General. Under this analysis, the usefulness of comparative analysis between the two jurisdictions is limited: constitutional differences cannot be ignored. The paper evaluates proposed changes to the reporting obligation in each jurisdiction in light of this analysis.

The aim of this thesis is to provide an analytic framework for the governance of suspended declarations of invalidity in Canadian constitutional law. A suspended declaration is a remedial device by which a court strikes down a constitutionally invalid law, but suspends the effect of its order such that the law retains force for a temporary period. While introduced to Canadian law under circumstances of exigency, suspended declarations have grown to be used liberally by the courts, and the principles that previously confined them have been abandoned. As a result, constitutional rights have sometimes been suspended without just basis. I propose a means to reverse this trend: by adopting proportionality, a core feature of the analytic method used to adjudicate limitations on Charter rights, as a remedial principle guiding the use of suspended declarations. I review the jurisprudence of South Africa’s Constitutional Court to illustrate the merits of this approach.

This paper examines the Attorney General’s obligation, in Canada and New Zealand, to report on inconsistencies in proposed legislation with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. Although the obligations are similar, the Canadian and New Zealand Attorneys General have developed very different reporting cultures. The Canadian Attorney General has never issued a report; the New Zealand Attorney General has issued many. This paper’s thesis is that the different reporting cultures are attributable to the different constitutional structure in each jurisdiction and different understandings of the independence of the Attorney General. Under this analysis, the usefulness of comparative analysis between the two jurisdictions is limited: constitutional differences cannot be ignored. The paper evaluates proposed changes to the reporting obligation in each jurisdiction in light of this analysis.

Universities have traditionally stood as bastions of academic freedom and forums for open discourse and free expression. In recent years, however, this role has been questioned in instances where university administrators have, either directly or complicity, denied students the opportunity to express certain viewpoints they deem “controversial”. This research paper explores whether a university, or its delegates, should be allowed to deny students access to campus facilities and resources solely on the basis of ideological viewpoint. The relevance of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, statutory human rights provisions, and common law doctrines to the student-university relationship are explored in turn. It is argued that, notwithstanding the fact that universities may be “private” actors to whom the Charter does not directly apply, they are institutions invested with a public interest, and as such ought to be subject to special duties of non-discrimination.

In this thesis I address the question of sympathetic action - action by one group of workers designed to aid another group of workers in their struggle with an employer, manifested most obviously through refusals by workers to cross a picket line - through the lens of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As the law currently stands in Canada, undertaking sympathetic action collectively is invariably illegal as it is considered an illegal "strike" under Canadian labour legislation. Further, workers who undertake sympathetic action - whether collectively or individually - can be subject to discipline or discharge by their employer. I argue that workers who undertake sympathetic action can have numerous motivations, ranging from economic self-interest to deeply-held political or moral beliefs (the latter manifested through the concept of "solidarity"), and that when those motivations include expressive or conscientious interests, sympathetic action should be entitled to protection by the fundamental freedoms of conscience, expression, and association found in section 2 of the Charter. I further argue that a each of these freedoms represents a different aspect of the inherent dignity and worth of an individual, and that a right to sympathetic action promotes both those freedoms and Charter values. Finally, I argue that a constitutional right to sympathetic action is a free-standing right that can exist even in the absence of a constitutional right to strike. This thesis reviews the current and historical state of Canadian law (in both the statutory labour relations regimes and in common law) regarding sympathetic action, the potential application of the Charter freedoms of conscience, expression, and association to sympathetic action, and finally options for reform that reduce or eliminate restrictions on sympathetic action and therefore make our labour relations system more in keeping with Charter values.

I studien undersöks individers olika behandling i det svenska skolsystemet utifrån etnisk, kulturell och religiös härkomst. Fokus ligger på skolans styrdokument och den teoretiska utgångspunkten är den universalistiska och mångkulturalistiska perspektiven på hur en individ ska behandlas och vilka fri- och rättigheter den ska kunna åtnjuta. Studien belyser de olika perspetiven och eventuella spänningar dem emellan. Slutsaten är att båda perspektiven finns representerade i styrdokumenten och att spänningar faktiskt existerar. Där till konstateras det att det universalistiska perspektivet alltid har ett övertag gentemot det mångkulturalistiska. Det redogörs vidare för hur riksdag och regering gjort det omöjligt för rektorer att bevilja befrielse från undervisning på etnisk, kulturell och/eller religiös grund. Avslutningsvis förs en diskussion om möjliga orsaker till den problematik som existerar i de svenska skolorna och vad vidare forskning inom området skulle kunna fokusera på för att lösa dessa problem. / The study examines differences in treatment on grounds of ethnic, cultural and/ or religious group affiliation in the Swedish school system. The aim is to highlight these issues from perspectives of universalism and multiculturalism, focusing on the school's policy documents. The study is carried out by highlighting the representation of the perspectives and the tensions that may arise between them. The conclusion is that there are representations of both perspectives and that tensions do exist. In addition, it is concluded that the universalist approach has a clear advantage and that differences in treatment based on the above reasons do not find support in the school’s policy documents. Finally, possible causes for the situation found in the Swedish school system where differences in treatment do exist are discussed.