The Case of <Emphasis Type="Italic">variae lectiones</Emphasis> in Classical Islamic Jurisprudence: Grammar and the Interpretation of Law

The qirā?āt or variae lectiones represent the vast corpus of Qur?ānic readings that were preserved through the historical processes associated with the textual codification and transmission of the Qur?ān. Despite the fact that differences among concomitant readings tend to be nominal, others betray semantic nuances that are brought into play within legal discourses. Both types of readings remain important sources for the history of the text of the Qur’ān and early Arabic grammatical thought. While some recent scholars have questioned the historical function and nature of the corpus of qirā?āt, others have argued that specific types of variant readings were the resultant products of attempts to circumvent legal inconsistencies which were found in text of the Qur?ān or were generated through legal debates. Following a preliminary review of the historical framework of the genesis of qirā?āt through reference to early grammatical literature, an attempt will be made to shed some light on the role that semantic variation among concomitant readings played in the synthesis and interpretation of law. The aim will be to draw attention to the subtle theoretical frameworks employed by jurists for their contextualization and analysis. This will also include a review of attitudes towards the forms of qirā?āt that classical scholarship designated as being anomalous or shādhdha.     

Reflections on <Emphasis Type="Italic">Prince</Emphasis>, Public Welfare Offenses, <Emphasis Type="Italic">American Cyanamid</Emphasis>, and the Wisdom of the Common Law

The fundamental requirement of Anglo-American criminal law is that crime must consist of the concurrence of a guilty mind—a mens rea—with a guilty act—an actus reus. And yet, the criminal law is shot through with discordant lumps of strict liability—crimes for which no mens rea is required. Ignoring the conventional normative objections to this aberration, I distinguish two different types of strict criminal liability: the type that arose at common law and the type associated with the public welfare offenses that are the product of twentieth and twenty-first century legislation. Using famous cases as exemplars, I analyze the two types of strict liability, and then examine the purposes served and incentives created by subjecting individuals to strict liability. I conclude that common law strict liability is rational in that it advances the purposes of the criminal law, while the public welfare offenses are at best pointless and at worst counterproductive. I suggest that in this respect the common law contains more wisdom than the results of the legislative process.     

<Emphasis Type="Italic">The Lesser Evil Dilemma for</Emphasis> Sparing Civilians

The rule I call ‘Civilian Immunity’ – the rule that prohibits targeting civilians in war – is the heart of the accepted jus in bello code. It prohibits targeting (viz., intentionally killing) civilians in a wide variety of war circumstances. Seth Lazar's brilliant book, Sparing Civilians, attempts to defend Civilian Immunity. In this essay I show, first, that his ‘Risky-Killing based argument’ fails to provide civilians with the robust protection Sparing Civilians promises. I argue, secondly, that the moral framework that Sparing Civilians employs, a moral framework that centralizes the Deontological Clause (stating that one's intentional killing is worse than enabling others to kill), leaves the immunity of civilians against Leaders unexplained.     

The Horizons of the Constitution: <Emphasis Type="Italic">Politeia</Emphasis>, the Political Regime and the Good

How do we think about the word politeia when this involves a reaching back to the past? The response, pursued in this paper, is that in the classical understanding of politeia there is a significant connection between the question of the ‘good’ and the constitution; a connection which has become occluded or obscured by modern constitutional thought. In support of this understanding of politeia it must be acknowledged that what is meant, in this paper, by ‘good’ is very different from that conventionally found in contemporary constitutional, legal or political theory. In an effort to disclose how politeia unravels this novel sense of ‘the good’ the paper will closely consider the philosophical work of Hans-Georg Gadamer on Plato. The paper claims that this largely neglected work is of importance to contemporary constitutional philosophy, particularly in so far as it focuses, as in this paper, on classical traditions or origins within constitutional thought.     

Psychological Testimony and the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Daubert</Emphasis> Standard

In the legal system, mental health professionals are now a primary source for expert information. Because potentially every psychologist might be drawn into a legal situation, competency requires accommodation of the nexus between the legal system and professional ethics and standards. Three particular Supreme Court cases create a framework for testifying about psychological information. This article reviews those three cases, defines the commitment to evidence-based (scientific) testimony, and explains how psychological ethics and standards should be accommodated. It reviews the major issues that psychologists face in Daubert admissibility challenges. Finally, it makes pertinent recommendations to help avoid the pitfall in dealing with court.     

Law,the Digital and Time: The Legal Emblems of <Emphasis Type="Italic">Doctor Who</Emphasis>

This article is about time. It is about time, or more precisely, about the absence of time in law’s digital future. It is also about time travelling and the seemingly ever-popular BBC science fiction television series Doctor Who. Further, it is about law’s timefullness; about law’s pictorial past and the ‘visual baroque’ of its chronological fused future. Ultimately, it is about a time paradox of seeing time run to a time when time runs ‘No More!’ This ‘timey-wimey’ article is in three parts. The first part looks to a hazy remembered past of the legal emblem tradition as presented in Peter Goodrich’s Legal Emblems and the Art of Law to learn visual literacy and also to glimpse the essential elements of modern legality with authority, decision and violence. The second part maps how these images and icons of modern legality are manifest in the Doctor Who fiftieth year anniversary special ‘The Day of the Doctor.’ The third stage looks beyond these first order meanings to understand the chronological chaos of ‘The Day of the Doctor.’ The technicity of the image as a portal through time and space that the narrative revolves around charts the implications for the digital end of time for law.     

Organizational Justice Comes of Age: Review of the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Oxford Handbook of Justice in the Workplace</Emphasis> Edited by Russell Cropanzano and Maureen Ambrose

The subfield of organizational justice has entered young adulthood. Its scientific achievements from conception to contemporary applications are represented in The Oxford Handbook of Justice in the Workplace, edited by Russell Cropanzano and Maureen Ambrose. The Handbook highlights advances in the field’s theoretical foundations, measurements, and applications. This Handbook follows a decade on the heels of its predecessor, Handbook of Organizational Justice, edited by Jerald Greenberg and Jason Colquitt. In 2005 the justice field was dominated by developmental debates over esoteric definitions of various facets of organizational justice, whereas the present Handbook reflects construct refinement, orientation to detail, and theoretical nuance that comes with maturation. This timely release therefore offers a fitting opportunity to reflect on key trends over the last 10 years and to consider the future of organizational justice research. This collection of comprehensive chapters meticulously compiled by the luminaries of organizational justice shows that organizational justice is still young, developing, and full of potential to influence the world.     

In Defence of <Emphasis Type="Italic">Punishment</Emphasis> and the Unified Theory of Punishment: A Reply

My book, Punishment, has three aims: to provide the most comprehensive and updated examination of the philosophy of punishment available, to advance a new theory—the unified theory of punishment—as a compelling alternative to available theories and to consider the relation of theory to practice. In his recent review article, Mark Tunick raises several concerns with my analysis. I address each of these concerns and argue they rest largely on misinterpretations which I restate and clarify here.     

<Emphasis Type="Bold">Verfahrensrecht</Emphasis>

Rechtsprechung

Verfahrensrecht     

<Emphasis Type="Bold">MRG</Emphasis>

Rechtsprechung

MRG     

<Emphasis Type="Bold">WEG</Emphasis>

Rechtsprechung

WEG     

<Emphasis Type="Bold">WEG</Emphasis>

Rechtsprechung

WEG     

On the Value of Constitutions and Judicial Review

In his thought-provoking book, Why Law Matters, Alon Harel defends two key claims: one ontological, the other axiological. First, he argues that constitutions and judicial review are necessary constituents of a just society. Second, he suggests that these institutions are not only means to the realization of worthy ends, but also non-instrumentally valuable. I agree with Harel that constitutions and judicial review have more than instrumental value, but I am not persuaded by his arguments in support of this conclusion. I argue that Harel’s ontological claim is unsustainable, and that his axiological claim needs revision. Regarding the former, I show that constitutions and judicial review are only contingent constituents of a just society. Regarding the latter, I contest Harel’s specific account of the value of constitutions and judicial review. Harel grounds the non-instrumental value of constitutions in freedom as non-domination but, upon scrutiny, it emerges that their non-instrumental value lies elsewhere. Further, Harel holds that the non-instrumental value of judicial review stems from its embodying a right to a fair hearing. I argue that this right has non-instrumental value only under a particular set of circumstances. I thus conclude, contrary to Harel, that the non-instrumental value of judicial review is contingent on those circumstances obtaining.     

<Emphasis Type="Bold">Grundbuchsrecht</Emphasis>

Rechtsprechung

Grundbuchsrecht     

<Emphasis Type="Bold">MRG</Emphasis>

Rechtsprechung

MRG     

<Emphasis Type="Bold">MRG</Emphasis>

Rechtsprechung

MRG     

<Emphasis Type="Bold">ABGB</Emphasis>

Rechtsprechung

ABGB     

Policing through misunderstanding: <Emphasis Type="Italic">insights from the configuration of financial policing</Emphasis>

How does a configuration of policing work regardless of the differences among its constituent members, who may relate to various social fields and range from for-profit organizations to law-enforcement and other state agencies? The article aims at providing some of the answers to this critical question in the light of financial policing, at the interface between the fields of finance and security. With the emphasis on money laundering and terrorist financing, financial policing resonates with other policing configurations that are ‘partly detached from the institutions of the police and start referring to a more general associative practice of assembling risk knowledge, technologies and agencies into networks that govern through rendering and distributing risks’ (Huysmans 2014). The paper argues that everyday financial policing is based on a misunderstanding, as both its current condition of possibility and the fundamental structure of communication between the involved parties. This focus on misunderstanding contributes to question traditional interpretations of (national and/or international) partnership against policing-related public problems. To help understand the paradoxical and controversial productivity of misunderstanding as a sine qua non condition of policing, the article draws on a transatlantic perspective with empirical research in the European Union Institutions, the United Kingdom and Canada.     

<Emphasis Type="Italic">Designing the New American University</Emphasis> by Michael Crow and William Dabars: a primer for technology transfer academics,agencies, and administrators

You should read this book if you identify with one or more of the following groups. The first group is the academic readership of The Journal of Technology Transfer, mostly organizational economists and policy analysts, who should read the book because it presents some compelling ideas for research and theory. The second audience is the journal’s policy making readership concerned with return-on-investment from universities, who should view the institutional design process touted by the authors with skepticism. The third audience is comprised of university administrators, who might be inspired by the book to reevaluate what they’re doing structurally at their own institutions.