Foreign policy has generally speaking been the traditional ‘responsibility of national governments’. This is particularly true of states with unitary systems of governments but is less true in federalist states.Federalist states are states which have adopted a system of government whereby ‘powers are divided and shared between constituent governments and a general government having certain nation-wide’ responsibilities’. Federalism is often adopted by pluralistic societies to ensure a system of uniformity while accommodating differences and to maintain national security and economic unity. By their nature, federalist states share responsibilities and powers between the central and constituent units. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2010. / A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Law University of Pretoria, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Masters of Law (LLM in Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa). Prepared under the supervision of Prof. Nico Steytler, Faculty of Law, University of Western Cape, South Africa. 2010 / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/ / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

Conflict Management in Pluralistic Societies: Aspect of Judgment Analysis. Abstract Interpersonal Conflict in pluralistic societies has been analyzed into¡§Fact Conflict¡¨(mutual interference in beliefs) and¡§Value Conflict¡¨ (mutual interference in preferences ), The interpersonal conflict can be caused by purely cognitive factors, that¡¦s to say, the fact conflict and value conflict can be treated together under the general rubric of¡§Cognitive Conflict¡¨. The growing of locally environmental disputes concerning large scale publicdecision-makings, such as the cases of constructions of Fifth Naphtha Cracking Plant,Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, and Meinung Dam etc., have raised enormous socialcost in recent years. One of the main causes of above mentioned disputes is cognitiveconflict. Among various efforts against problem of cognitive conflict, The Social JudgmentTheory, SJT, and the Cognitive Conflict Paradigm, CCP, have been confirmed to beone of the effective approaches to settle the problem of cognitive conflict. Social Judgment Theory is a descriptive and normative approach to judgment and decision making developed by Kenneth Hammond (1965,1975,1996) on the basis of Lens Model. Social Judgment Theory has been applied to the analysis of multiple cue probability learning, interpersonal conflict, interpersonal learning, and social policy decisions. It has also produced the policy decision aid. Moreover, Social Judgment Theory emphasizes that the¡§Judgment¡¨is generally more effective (reaches a higher achievement level), and more efficient(reaches a given achievement level more quickly) by utilizing of cognitive feedback while making decision. Cognitive Conflict Paradigm is to provide a scenario to uncover information concerning cognitive conflict. It¡¦s an experimental laboratory method that involves two stages: (1)Training stage in which two subjects are trained in such a way that each learns to think differently about a common set of problems, and(2)Conflict stage in which the two subjects are brought together and attempt to arrive at a joint decisions concerning the problems. Through Cognitive Conflict Paradigm, the investigator can observe two persons offering conflicting answers, efforts to cope with differences and arrive at a joint decision, in fact, observe the effect of the experience on their cognitive change and the efforts to solve subsequent problems. In this study, a series of simulated decision making task about Meinung Dam construction and the Social Judgment Theory & Cognitive Conflict Paradigm have been employed and tested by way of a laboratory quasi-experiment. The research fingings of this study include: 1. Dual cognitive feedback is more effective than outcome feedback in regard to the improvement of individual decision quality. 2. Single cognitive feedback is more effective than outcome feedback in regard to the improvement of individual decision quality. 3. Single cognitive feedback is as insignificant as outcome feedback in regard to the improvement of joint decision quality. 4. Dual cognitive feedback is more effective than outcome feedback in regard to the elimination of cognitive conflict. 5. Single cognitive feedback is as insignificant as outcome feedback in regard to the elimination of cognitive conflict. 6. The most constructive result obtained in this study was that we had presented a conceptual framework, research paradigm, and conflict management procedure generated from the application of Social Judgment Theory & Cognitive Conflict Paradigm to analyze and solve the conflict problems in pluralistic societies. These framework, paradigm, and procedure should be useful to subsequent cognitive conflict researchers and practical public decision making. Keywords¡GPluralistic Societies, Judgment Analysis ,Lens Model, Social Judgment Theory, Cognitive Conflict Paradigm, Outcome Feedback, Cognitive Feedback.