211 |
Land Tenure Rights and Poverty Reduction in Mafela Resettlement Community (Matobo District, Zimbabwe)Ncube, Richmond January 2011 (has links)
In this research, I present critical facts about Land Tenure Systems and Poverty Reduction processes in Mafela Resettlement community. I focus mainly on the Post-Fast Track Land Reform (2004-2011) period and the interactive processes in this new resettlement area. The research - premised on the rights approach - sought to explore land tenure rights systems and poverty reduction mechanisms seen by the Mafela community to be improving their livelihoods; it also sought to find out if there is evidence linking tenure rights to poverty reduction and how land tenure rights governance systems affect their livelihoods. Suffice to say in both the animal kingdom and human world, territorial space and integrity, its demarcation as well as how resources are used within the space, given the area - calls for a - defined system of rights by the residents themselves. Whilst it is true that there is no one story about Zimbabwe's land reform (Scoones et al 2011), the contribution of this research towards insights emanating from the newly resettled farmers adds another invaluable contribution in the realm of rural development issues. / Magister Philosophiae (Land and Agrarian Studies) - MPhil(LAS)
|
212 |
Die grondwetlike beskerming van sosio-ekonomiese regte in Suid-Afrika : 'n teologies-etiese perspektief / Heinrich Martin ZwemstraZwemstra, Heinrich Martin January 2003 (has links)
On legal-philosophical grounds the constitutional protection of socio-economic rights
has been the subject of much debate. The question is whether socio-economical rights
should be protected by a constitution and, if so, to what extent. In this study a
theological-ethical evaluation is done about socio-economical rights and the
protection thereof. This is done by examining certain Biblical themes and parts of
Scripture of the Old and New Testament. From this investigation it is clear that socioeconomical
rights are very important human rights that must be protected as
effectively as possible.
Several points of view on the constitutional protection of socio-economical rights are
investigated and evaluated. These points of view are based on legal-philosophical
grounds and argue respectively against the constitutional protection of socioeconomical
rights, the protection of socio-economical rights as directive principles
and the protection of socio-economical rights as fundamental rights. From this
investigation it is clear that in principle the constitutional protection of socioeconomical
rights as fundamental rights is the most effective way to protect these
rights.
The current state of affairs with regard to socio-economical rights in the Constitution
of South-Africa is also investigated and evaluated. From this investigation it is clear
that the Constitution does protect certain socio-economic rights, but not all of them.
The rights to labour, clothing and scientific progress do not occur in the Constitution.
In principle the right to labour is a very important socio-economic right and it leads to
the realization of other socio-economic rights. The Constitution of South Africa also
has several measures in place to ensure the protection of socio-economic rights. In
spite of these measures, the socio-economic rights in the Constitution remain little
more than rights on paper. There state, private sector, church and each individual will
still have to do a lot to ensure the protection of socio-economic rights in South-Africa. / Thesis (M.Th. (Ethics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.
|
213 |
Labour, law and the state in Brazil : 1930-1950Paoli, Maria Celia Pinheiro-Machado January 1988 (has links)
No description available.
|
214 |
A relative affair : the Nearest Relative under the Mental Health Act 1983Rapaport, Joan January 2002 (has links)
No description available.
|
215 |
Provisional measures : a study of the impact of TRIPs on remedial measures in Thai lawOranonsiri, Chaiyos January 2001 (has links)
No description available.
|
216 |
Justice and egalitarianism : formal and substantive equality in some recent theories of justiceQuinn, Michael January 1988 (has links)
No description available.
|
217 |
The protection of innovation and musical instrument industryBatchelar, Timothy January 2001 (has links)
No description available.
|
218 |
UK immigration policy and practice : a study of the experiences of children and young peopleJones, Adele D. January 2000 (has links)
No description available.
|
219 |
A User Innovation Theory of the Numerus ClaususTheriault, Leah 26 July 2013 (has links)
Limitations on the customizability of property rights (the numerus clausus principle) are a puzzling feature of the common law conception of property. An economic rationale, built upon 1) the pivotal role that rules of exclusion play in fostering user innovation, and 2) the role that psychological ownership plays in preventing recontracting around governance rules, is offered to explain the modern persistence of the doctrine. Application of the numerus clausus principle limits the proliferation of governance rules in the economy (governance), replacing them with rules of exclusion (exclusion). Exclusion unifies rights of use and possession in assets, while governance separates, to a greater or lesser degree, possession from use rights. Full user, sale and the policy against restraints on alienation are the paradigmatic examples of exclusion; while governance is exemplified by servitudes and contractually-burdened assets. Exclusion plays a critical role in user innovation because it allows the possessors of assets to unilaterally seek out new uses of those assets. Whenever the law replaces governance with exclusion, user innovation is more likely to occur because the possessors of assets can apply their unique, rival and nontransferable human capital inputs to tangible assets, generating outputs (the new uses) that move resources to their higher-value uses. This is how all innovation, both high-tech and low-tech, occurs. In addition to negatively impacting user innovation, governance hinders recontracting because both possession and legal entitlements (rights of use in an asset) give rise to feelings of psychological ownership, and individuals will not recontract over uses that they feel they already ‘own’. The user innovation theory’s focus on search, innovation and human capital explains why the numerus clausus principle remains most robust in the areas of personal and intellectual property (where users generate a significant amount of innovation), and why it has been somewhat attenuated in the area of real property (where we restrict search in order to facilitate coordination of land uses). It also explains why the law enforces the principle even when the cost of providing notice of governance rules is low.
|
220 |
The convergence and divergence of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law.Loos, Clemens January 2005 (has links)
<p>In this minithesis, I demonstrate that International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law are two distinct but related fields of law. First, the examination deals with the instance that the aim of both branches of law, the protection of human rights, is common, but the approach to reach this aim is different. In this regard, I show numerous points of divergence of both branches of law which have their origin in the fundamentally different historical developments of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law. I give the main attention to the application of both sets of law, whereby the contractions and legal gaps of the protection of human rights become apparent. The proposals dealing with the solution of these issues are discussed. I argue that a new legal instrument for a comprehensive and compatible protection of human rights is necessary, especially in times of internal strife. Regarding the question as to whether International Humanitarian Law or International Human Rights Law should apply if both branches are applicable, I take the view to apply the roman principle of law lex specialis derogat legi generali in such a way that the more specific rule whenever they have a specific justification for dealing with specific problems is applicable. Both branches of law do not merge to one, but they converge to a harmonious relationship, where they complement each other and provide the highest protection of human rights.</p>
|
Page generated in 0.0465 seconds