This book examines social aspects of humour relating to the judiciary, judicial behaviour, and judicial work across different cultures and eras, identifying how traditionally recorded wit and humorous portrayals of judges reflect social attitudes to the judiciary over time. It contributes to cultural studies and social science/socio-legal studies of both humour and the role of emotions in the judiciary and in judging. It explores the surprisingly varied intersections between humour and the judiciary in several legal systems: judges as the target of humour; legal decisions regulating humour; the use of humour to manage aspects of judicial work and courtroom procedure; and judicial/legal figures and customs featuring in comic and satiric entertainment through the ages. Delving into the multi-layered connections between the seriousness of the work of the judiciary on the one hand, and the lightness of humour on the other hand, this fascinating collection will be of particular interest to scholars of the legal system, the criminal justice system, humour studies, and cultural studies.

This book offers a comparative analysis of traditional Asian legal systems. It combines methods from legal history, legal anthropology, legal philosophy, and substantive law, pursuing a comprehensive approach that offers readers a broad perspective on the topic. The geographic regions covered include the Near East, Middle East, Central Asia, India, China, Japan, and Southeast Asia. For each region, the book first provides historical and political context. Next, it discusses major milestones in the region's legal history and political institutions, as well as its forms of government. Readers are then presented with fundamental principles and terms needed to understand the legal arguments discussed. The book begins with the Ancient Near East and important topics such as Jewish law. The next part considers Islamic law, while also exploring modern issues. The third part focuses on Hindu and Buddhist law, while the fourth part covers China and Japan. The book's closing section examines tribal societies, e.g. Mongols, Pashtuns and Malays. Topics covered include the interaction of legal systems within a legal circle, inter-systemic interactions, reasons for the failure and success of legal modernization, legal pluralism, and its effects on Asian societies. Family law, law of obligation, criminal law, and procedural law are also explored.

This innovative volume examines the nexus between war crimes trials and the pursuit of collaborators in post-war Asia. Global standards of behaviour in time of war underpinned the prosecution of Japanese military personnel in Allied courts in Asia and the Pacific. Japan's contradictory roles in the Second World War as brutal oppressor of conquered regions in Asia and as liberator of Asia from both Western colonialism and stultifying tradition set the stage for a tangled legal and political debate: just where did colonized and oppressed peoples owe their loyalties in time of war? And where did the balance of responsibility lie between individuals and nations? But global standards jostled uneasily with the pluralism of the Western colonial order in Asia, where legal rights depended on race and nationality. In the end, these limits led to profound dissatisfaction with the trials process, despite its vast scale and ambitious intentions, which has implications until today.

This volume analyses the legal grounds, premises and extent of pecuniary compensation for violations of human rights in national legal systems. The scope of comparison includes liability regimes in general and in detail, the correlation between pecuniary remedies available under international law and under domestic law, and special (alternative) compensation systems. All sources of human rights violations are embraced, including historical injustices and systematical and gross violations. The book is a collection of nineteen contributions written by public international law, international human rights and private law experts, covering fifteen European jurisdictions (including Central and Eastern Europe), the United States, Israel and EU law. The contributions, initially prepared for the 19th International Congress of Comparative law in Vienna (2014), present the latest developments in legislation, scholarship and case-law concerning domestic causes of action in cases of human rights abuses. The book concludes with a comparative report which assesses the developments in tort law and public liability law, the role of the constitutionalisation of the right to damages as well as the court practice related to the process of enforcement of human rights through monetary remedies. This country-by-country comparison allows to consider whether the value of protection of human rights as expressed in international treaties, ius cogens and in national constitutional laws justifies the conclusion that the interests at stake should enjoy protection under the existing civil liability rules, or that a new cause of action, or even a whole new set of rules, should be created in national systems.

Prillaman argues that a sound judiciary is critical for building popular support for democracy and laying the foundations for sustainable economic development, but that most Latin American governments have made virtually no progress toward building a more effective judiciary. He shows that the traditional approach to judicial reform is flawed on several levels. Reformers are wrong to focus on a single aspect of the judiciary on the assumption that one reform naturally leads to another. In fact, all aspects of the courts are so closely related that failure to reform one aspect creates a "negative synergy" that ultimately undermines the reformed areas. Instead, a successful reform strategy must simultaneously tackle independence, accountability, access, and efficiency; otherwise, it is virtually assured of failure. As Prillaman points out, judicial reform is not merely a technical process that can be isolated from broader economic and political forces. Rather, it is an inherently political process that will be opposed by forces ranging from politicians accustomed to stocking the courts to judges and court personnel reluctant to accept greater oversight and professional norms. Based on four case studies, Prillaman concludes that failed judicial reforms have led to growing support for mob lynching and vigilante justice that promises to fill the void created by ineffectual courts--ultimately challenging the quality and sustainability of democracy. An invaluable survey for political scientists, students, and researchers involved with democratic consolidation, institution building, and comparative judicial politics in Latin America specifically and the developing world in general.

Constitutional litigation in general attracts two distinct types of conflict: disputes of a highly politicized or culturally controversial nature and requests from citizens claiming a violation of a fundamental constitutional right. The side-by-side comparison between the U.S. Supreme Court and the German Federal Constitutional Court provides a novel socio-legal approach in studying constitutional litigation, focusing on conditions of mobilisation, decision-making and implementation. This updated and revised second edition includes a number of new contributions on the political status of the courts in their democratic political cultures.

Introduction to Policing: Perceptions Versus Reality provides students with a comprehensive and insightful overview of the policing profession. The text combines scholarly research and accounts from the author's personal experience as a police officer to provide a balanced and authentic look into the everyday realities of the law enforcement profession. The opening chapter explores the history and evolution of policing, detailing key players and significant eras that have advanced the profession. Later chapters outline historical and contemporary perceptions of policing, including common viewpoints from specific populations and the efforts many organizations have undertaken to rebuild trust and positive perception in the police. Students learn about the requirements and process for becoming a police officer, the basics of law enforcement administration, and how police organizations interact with homeland security. The text closes with chapters that discuss legal procedures, professionalism, and future initiatives. The revised first edition includes a new chapter titled Policing in the 21st Century, which discusses citizens review boards, choke holds, no-knock warrants, the Community Policing Act, calls to disband the police, and other contemporary developments within the discipline. Equal parts academic and engaging, Introduction to Policing is an ideal resource for foundational courses in criminal justice, law enforcement, and policing.

"Written for a general audience. . . . Excellent. . . . If enough American judges and law professors read his book, some of the silly rules that he criticizes will be discarded."
"--Judge Richard A. Posner, Times Literary Supplement"

"A beautifully written, finely nuanced work, a marvelous comparative constitutional study of criminal procedure that seeks to understand the larger culture."
"--Lawrence Fleischer, New York Law Journal"

"In a cogent, direct argument, Pizzi inveighs against the triumph of the law of unintended consequences over the law of practicality. . . . An important book."
"--Publishers Weekly"

"Pizzi is certainly convincing in his argument that the American trial system is in dire need of overhaul. "
--"Law Society Journal," July 2002 Rodney King. Reginald Denny. O. J. Simpson. Colin Ferguson. Louise Woodward: all names that have cast a spotlight on the deficiencies of the American system of criminal justice. Yet, in the wake of each trial that exposes shocking behavior by trial participants or results in counterintuitive rulingsaoften with perverse resultsathe American public is reassured by the trial bar that the case is not "typical" and that our trial system remains the best in the world.

William T. Pizzi here argues that what the public perceives is in fact exactly what the United States has: a trial system that places far too much emphasis on winning and not nearly enough on truth, one in which the abilities of a lawyer or the composition of a jury may be far more important to the outcome of a case than any evidence.

How has a system on which Americans have lavished enormous amounts of energy, time, and money been allowed todegenerate into one so profoundly flawed?

Acting as an informal tour guide, and bringing to bear his experiences as both insider and outsider, prosecutor and academic, Pizzi here exposes the structural faultlines of our trial system and its paralyzing obsession with procedure, specifically the ways in which lawyers are permitted to dominate trials, the system's preference for weak judges, and the absurdities of plea bargaining. By comparing and contrasting the U.S. system with that of a host of other countries, Trials Without Truth provides a clear-headed, wide-ranging critique of what ails the criminal justice systemaand a prescription for how it can be fixed.

Regulating Judges presents a novel approach to judicial studies. It goes beyond the traditional clash of judicial independence versus judicial accountability. Drawing on regulatory theory, Devlin and Dodek argue that judicial regulation is multi-faceted and requires us to consider the complex interplay of values, institutional norms, procedures, resources and outcomes. Inspired by this conceptual framework, the book invites scholars from 19 jurisdictions to describe and critique the regulatory regimes for a variety of countries from around the world. This innovative and provocative analysis of the many different ways that judiciaries around the world are regulated covers common law, civil law and other legal systems, and the developed and developing world. Contributors include a diverse talent pool of established scholars and new voices for a globally inclusive comparative examination of judiciaries in Europe, Asia, Africa, the Americas and Australia. The overall conclusion is that the regulation of judges is very much a work in progress, and that a variety of actors bear responsibility for moving the project forward. Scholars in the fields of law, social sciences, regulation theory, and public administration will find Regulating Judges an impactful read, as will regulators, public policy makers and analysts, and judges themselves. Contributors include: D. Aksamovic, G. Appleby, R.W. Campbell, K.-W. Chan, H. Corder, S.M.R. Cravens, T. Dare, R. Devlin, F. Dias Simoes, A. Dodek, M. Fabri, D. Fennelly, G. Gee, R. Goldstone , M.A. Jardim de Santa Cruz Oliveira, F. Klass, S. Le Mire, J.L. Neo, T.G. Puthucherril, A. Trochev, H. Whalen-Bridge, C. Wolf, F. Yulin, L. Zer-Gutman

Accompanied by a podcast called "The Cannabis Criminology Podcast." As a limited series podcast, the authors will review key aspects of the book and interview scholars and activists working in this area. Very timely as the (potential) legalisation of cannabis has received much attention across the globe in recent decades/years, and this interest is set to continue for many years to come. Most research tends to focus on drugs as a whole, whereas this book focus solely on cannabis, and as such offers the depth needed to grasp the topic more effectively. Fits into several topics/modules within criminology, sociology, law, drug policy and public health. Comprehensive in its coverage, exploring history, frameworks of analysis, evidence to date, key initiatives, and providing examples from relevant jurisdictions.

The essays in this volume reflect the wider concept of legal history - how legal processes fitted into the social and political life of the community, and how courts and other legal processes were used by contemporaries - rather than the more traditional but narrower study of internal procedural development interpretation. In doing so, they both aim to justify the study of legal history in its own right and to show how legal records, including those of a variety of central and local courts can be used to further the understanding of a range of social, commercial, popular and political history.

This book details possible ethical situations and pitfalls that forensic psychiatric experts would commonly encounter when making a court testimony. Richly illustrated with cases from medicine, psychiatry, and law, this elegantly written volume examines the common moral ground that links these usually separate domains, and relates forensic ethics to larger concepts of morality and justice.

This book examines matters of religious freedom in Europe, considers the work of the European Court of Human Rights in this area, explores issues of multiculturalism and secularism in France, of women in Islam, and of Muslims in the West. The work presents legal analysis and ethnographic fieldwork, focusing on concepts such as laicite, submission, equality and the role of the state in public education, amongst others. Through this book, the reader can visit inside a French public school located in a low-income neighborhood just south of Paris and learn about the complex dynamics that led up to the passing of the 2004 law banning Muslim headscarves. The chapters bring to light the actors and cultures within the school that set the stage for the passing of the law and the political philosophy that supports it. School culture and philosophy are compared and contrasted to the thoughts and opinions of the teachers, administrators and students to gage how religious freedom and identity are understood. The book goes on to explore the issue of religious freedom at the European Court of Human Rights. The author argues that the right to religious freedom has been too narrowly understood and is being fenced in by static visions of Islam. This jeopardizes the idea of religious freedom more broadly. By becoming entangled with regional and domestic politics, the Court is neglecting important nuances and is jeopardizing secularism, pluralism and democracy. This is a highly readable and accessible book that will appeal to students and scholars of law, anthropology, religious studies and philosophy of religion. 2004

Recent high-profile lawsuits involving cigarettes, guns, breast implants, and other products have created new frictions between litigation and regulation. Increasingly, litigation is being used as a financial lever to force companies to accept negotiated regulatory policies --policies that invariably involve less public input and accountability than those arising from government regulation. The process not only usurps the traditional governmental authority for regulation, but also shifts the locus of establishing tax policy from the legislature to the parties involved in the litigation. Citizen interests are not explicitly represented and there is no mechanism to ensure that these outcomes are in society's best interests. By focusing on case studies involving the tobacco industry, guns, lead paint, breast implants, and health maintenance organizations, the contributors to this volume collectively shed light on the likely consequences of regulation through litigation for insurance markets and society at large. They analyze the ramifications of large-scale lawsuits, mass torts, and class actions for the insurance market, and advocate increased public scrutiny of attorney reimbursement and a competitive bidding process for all lawsuits involving government entities as the plaintiffs.

Students learn about the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment and discover how just 16 words in the U.S. Constitution inaugurated a debate that continues to this day. The author objectively follows the debate in relation to prayer in public schools, government support for religious schools, the right to speak and raise money for religious causes, when religion conflicts with the law, and where this issue stands today.

Expert testimony relying on scientific and other specialized evidence has come under increased scrutiny by the legal system. A trilogy of recent U.S. Supreme Court cases has assigned judges the task of assessing the relevance and reliability of proposed expert testimony. In conjunction with the Federal judiciary, the American Association for the Advancement of Science has initiated a project to provide judges indicating a need with their own expert. This concern with the proper interpretation of scientific evidence, especially that of a probabilistic nature, has also occurred in England, Australia and in several European countries. Statistical Science in the Courtroom is a collection of articles written by statisticians and legal scholars who have been concerned with problems arising in the use of statistical evidence. A number of articles describe DNA evidence and the difficulties of properly calculating the probability that a random individual's profile would "match" that of the evidence as well as the proper way to intrepret the result. In addition to the technical issues, several authors tell about their experiences in court. A few have become disenchanted with their involvement and describe the events that led them to devote less time to this application. Other articles describe the role of statistical evidence in cases concerning discrimination against minorities, product liability, environmental regulation, the appropriateness and fairness of sentences and how being involved in legal statistics has raised interesting statistical problems requiring further research.

This volume presents a variety of both normative and descriptive perspectives on the use of precedent by the United States Supreme Court. It brings together a diverse group of American legal scholars, some of whom have been influenced by the Segal/Spaeth "attitudinal" model and some of whom have not. The group of contributors includes legal theorists and empiricists, constitutional lawyers and legal generalists, leading authorities and up-and-coming scholars. The book addresses questions such as how the Court establishes durable precedent, how the Court decides to overrule precedent, the effects of precedent on case selection, the scope of constitutional precedent, the influence of concurrences and dissents, and the normative foundations of constitutional precedent. Most of these questions have been addressed by the Court itself only obliquely, if at all. The volume will be valuable to readers both in the United States and abroad, particularly in light of ongoing debates over the role of precedent in civil-law nations and emerging legal systems.

This work analyzes the weaknesses in the established political approaches to reform of the provision of justice, judging them as being either too overtly concerned with inappropriate free market structures, or too wedded to legal procedural rules. It argues that the most efficient solution is an adapted version of legal aid as a kind of welfare state benefit and more integrated public services aimed at providing justice for the citizen. The discussion traces the history of the Labour Party's legal affairs policy and examines some of the fault lines in the programme put forward by Lord Irvine, in particular, the tension between combatting social exclusion with a rights-based rhetoric and a policy based on crude cost management initiatives. The analysis applies emerging political concepts of globalization, hegemony and a closed legal system to this debate, while considering the conflicting principles of community, individual autonomy and public service accountability, to conceive both of the nature of the Blair project and the feasibility of creating the "just society" set out in Labour's new constitution. A model for an integrated justice is proposed, centred on a Ministry of Justice administering legal aid through a community legal service, activating technological and structural reforms through a law foundation, and providing advice to citizens through a national advisory service.

Suffering from a bad heart, emphysema, glaucoma, and deafness, Thurgood Marshall finally retired from the Supreme Court at the age of 82 in spite of having always claimed "I was appointed to a life term, and I intend to serve it." Many observers felt he should have left much earlier.

Life appointments make Supreme Court justices among the most powerful officials in government and allow even dysfunctional judges to stay on long after they should have departed. For that reason, when a justice leaves the bench is often as controversial as when he's appointed. This first comprehensive historical treatment of their deaths, resignations, and retirements explains when and why justices do step down. It considers the diverse circumstances under which they leave office and clarifies why they often are reluctant to, showing how factors like pensions, party loyalty, or personal pride come into play. It also relates physical ailments to mental faculties, offering examples of how a justice's disability sometimes affects Court decisions.

David Atkinson examines each of the nearly 100 men who have left the bench and provides anecdotal glimpses into the lives of famous and obscure justices alike. He reveals how men like Salmon Chase and William O. Douglas determinedly continued to serve after suffering strokes, how Joseph McKenna persevered despite knowing he was professionally unqualified, and how, long before Thurgood Marshall, the ailing octogenarian Gabriel Duvall finally retired after struggling to protect another ideological position on the Court.

Ultimately, Atkinson shows just how human these people are and enhances our understanding of how the Court conducts its business. He also suggests specific ways to improve the present situation, weighing the pros and cons of mandatory retirement and calling for reform in the delegation of duties to law clerks--who in recent years have dominated the actual writing of many justices' decisions.

As the current Court ages, how long might we expect justices to remain on the bench? Because our next president will likely make several appointments, now is the time to consider what shape the Supreme Court will take in the next century. Offering a wealth of information never before collected, "Leaving the Bench" provides substantial grist for that debate and will serve as an unimpeachable reference on the Court.

This book explores pathways to redress for main groups of victims/survivors of the 1992-5 Bosnian war -families of missing persons, victims of torture, survivors of sexual violence, and victims suffering physical disabilities and harm. The author traces the history of redress-making for each of these groups and shows how differently they have been treated by Bosnian authorities at the state and subnational level. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, thousands of war victims have had to suffer re-traumatising ordeals in order to secure partial redress for their suffering during 1992-1995 and after. While some, such as victims of sexual violence, have been legally recognised and offered financial and service-based compensation, others, such as victims of torture, have been recognized only recently with a clear geographical limitation. The main aim of the book is to explore the politics behind recognizing victimhood and awarding redress in a country that has been divided by instrumentalized identity cleavages, widespread patronage and debilitating war legacies. It shows how war victims/survivors navigate such fragmented and challenging public landscape in order to secure their rights.

This book is the second in a series of essay collections on defences in private law. It addresses defences to liability arising in unjust enrichment. The essays are written from a range of perspectives and methodologies. Some are doctrinal, others are theoretical, and several offer comparative insights. The most important defence in this area of the law, change of position, is addressed in detail, but many other defences are treated too, as well as the interrelations between these defences within the law of unjust enrichment. The essays offer novel claims and ways of looking at problems in this challenging area of legal study.