Referendums have become an undeniably important, and perhaps inescapable, peacemaking tool in contemporary peace processes. As such, understanding the ways in which referendum outcomes are shaped by peace negotiations is vital. Drawing upon two case studies, Amaral presents an empirically rich comparative analysis of the Annan Plan in Cyprus and the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland. She examines the negotiations, offering new interview material with key political and civil figures involved in the peace negotiations and referendum campaigns in both cases. Amaral argues that referendums are unsuitable for traditional secretive and exclusionist peace negotiations that fail to engage and educate the public. They rather require inclusive negotiations that involve a broad spectrum of political stakeholders and civil society at the early stages of the process. This collaborative approach can allow referendums to positively shape societies in conflict and be a crucial step toward lasting peace.

Building on earlier work in the anthropology of law and taking a critical stance toward it, June Starr and Jane F. Collier ask, "Should social anthropologists continue to isolate the 'legal' as a separate field of study?" To answer this question, they confront critics of legal anthropology who suggest that the subfield is dying and advocate a reintegration of legal anthropology into a renewed general anthropology. Chapters by anthropologists, sociologists, and law professors, using anthropological rather than legal methodologies, provide original analyses of particular legal developments. Some contributors adopt an interpretative approach, focusing on law as a system of meaning; others adopt a materialistic approach, analyzing the economic and political forces that historically shaped relations between social groups. Contributors include Said Armir Arjomand, Anton Blok, Bernard Cohn, George Collier, Carol Greenhouse, Sally Falk Moore, Laura Nader, June Nash, Lawrence Rosen, June Starr, and Joan Vincent.

This work seeks to determine the roles played by the paramount judiciary in the Indian polity between 1937 and 1964. The discussion starts with an examination of the Federal Court, the establishment of which in 1937 brought into existence Indias first central judicial institution. After a consideration of events leading to the creation of the Federal Court, the nature of its jurisdiction and representative decisions are analysed. Other matters considered include the relationship of the Federal Court with the Privy Council, and the unsuccessful efforts made to empower the Federal Court with a jurisdiction to hear civil appeals. In addition, the major part of this work is devoted to the present Supreme Court of India, which replaced the Federal Court in 1950. After discussing the general features of the new judicial establishment, attention is focused upon the nature of its review powers and the manner in which the Court can exercise these powers. Against the background of debates in the Constituent Assembly that reflect the attitudes of the Constitution-makers towards judicial review, the important decisions which provoked clashes between the judges and politicians have been analysed.

The Continuity of Legal Systems in Theory and Practice examines a persistent and fascinating question about the continuity of legal systems: when is a legal system existing at one time the same legal system that exists at another time? The book's distinctive approach to this question is to combine abstract critical analysis of two of the most developed theories of legal systems, those of Hans Kelsen and Joseph Raz, with an evaluation of their capacity, in practice, to explain the facts, attitudes and normative standards for which they purport to account. That evaluation is undertaken by reference to Australian constitutional law and history, whose diverse and complex phenomena make it particularly apt for evaluating the theories' explanatory power. In testing whether the depiction of Australian law presented by each theory achieves an adequate 'fit' with historical facts, the book also contributes to the understanding of Australian law and legal systems between 1788 and 2001. By collating the relevant Australian materials systematically for the first time, it presents the case for reconceptualising the role of Imperial laws and institutions during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and clarifies the interrelationship between Colonial, State, Commonwealth and Imperial legal systems, both before and after Federation.

To honour this great scholar, this book gathers essays from admirers and friends who add their own contributions on legal pluralism, transnationalism and culture in Asia. The book opens with an account of M.B. Hooker colourful and prolific career. The authors then approach legal pluralism through legal theory, legal anthropology, comparative law, law and religion, constitutional law, even Islamic art, thus reflecting the broad approaches of Professor Hooker's scholarship. While most of the book focuses mainly on Southeast Asia, it also reaches out to all of Asia up to Israel, and even includes a chapter comparing Indonesia and Egypt.