The Quest for a Satisfactory Definition of Terrorism: R v Gul

The UK Supreme Court judgment in R v Gul presented a unique opportunity for a judicial appraisal of the definition of terrorism contained in section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000. While the applicant was ultimately unsuccessful in his challenge, the Supreme Court's rejection of the state's argument that reliance on prosecutorial discretion could mitigate certain absurd applications of the section 1 definition of terrorism, eg the labelling of acts of UK or other military forces as terrorist, has potentially wide‐raging implications for the UK's counter‐terrorism measures. In addition, the powerful obiter dictum arguing in favour of a reform of this definition and a ‘root‐and‐branch’ review of counter‐terrorism legislation is a strong rebuke of recent high profile misapplications of such powers.     

作为概念的“经济法”——聚焦于“经济法”语词的多视角研究

“经济法”是经济法学中最重要的基本概念。“经济法”的概念研究是经济法学总论研究的重要课题之一。对作为概念的“经济法” ,从学术史、语言学和逻辑学等视角进行了语词缘起、范畴定位和文字训诂等三个方面探讨 ,并为经济法本体论和经济法学科论的基本范畴研究提供了相应的思路、方法和理论基础。     

论作为概念群落的环境权

环境权是环境法学研究的重课题。对环境权的界定涉及对环境法律关系的主体、人与自然之间关系的法学意蕴、传统权利概念等重理论问题的重新理解。环境权不是一个单一的法律概念,而是由三种权利类型构成的统一整体,这三种权利分别为：环境的权利、环境物权、环境人权。三种权利的统一基础则在于通过法律权利衡平人与自然之间和谐的共生关系。     

The Commons as a Legal Concept

Scientific debates about the political, economic and even legal aspects of commons have circulated wherever commons are perceived to pose a challenge to the increasing commodification of people’s lives. Indeed, a wide range of commons has emerged worldwide. Emerging commons pose a challenge to the law which is now requested to provide legal tools to resist the dispossession of the common wealth. Nevertheless, commons do not embody a reality which is external or unfamiliar to the law. This paper is an attempt to reframe the commons as a legal concept. In this article I argue that commons are not just a marginal element of contemporary legal systems. Rather, they embody the premises for important transformative practices and discourses and represent a subversive site in the legal order. I maintain, first, that the law of the commons is consistent with the law in force and the current legal regimes of private property and, second, that the current stage of globalization is most favourable to the establishment of a law of the commons both in the peripheries and at the core of the capitalist system. However, given the persistent dominance of the individual-based property paradigm, the legitimacy of the commons on legal grounds remains problematic. Certainly the recognition and protection of the commons challenge the legal regime of property in force and query about the possible limits that the law may impose upon property rights. It is evident that the true core of the commons discourse as a legal discourse rests upon its relation with property and depends on the notion of property that we assume as normative. The Hohfeldian idea of property as a bundle of rights offers a good starting point for articulating a legal theory of the commons under positive law.     

Psychiatric injury and assault the immediate effect ofR. v.Ireland, R. v.Burstow

Conclusion R. v.Ireland marked the emergence of the psychic assault—an assault which does not involve fear of immediate force, where the harm becomes a feature of the assault. This explains why foresight ofsuch harm was required of the defendant by the Court of Appeal inIreland. However, the more recent discussions on assault, by the House of Lords inR. v.Burstow, R. v.Ireland and by the Court of Appeal inR. v.Constanza, have made no reference to the defendant's foresight or to the victim's psychiatric injury. Instead the decisions have focused on the victim's fear of immediate violence. To this extent they have halted the development of the psychiatric assault and preserved the traditional view of assault as the apprehension of immediate unlawful force.     

R. (Martin) v Mahony: the History of a Classical Certiorari Authority

R. (Martin) v Mahony, a decision of the Irish High Court of 1910, continues to be acknowledged by modern textbook writers as a leading authority for the classical rule that certiorari could not correct error of law. This rule, which considerably reduced judicial superintendence of magistrates' courts, had been established by the English court of Queen's Bench in the 1840s. However, the rule was repudiated by the Exchequer Division in Ireland in the late 1880s, which developed a novel, liberal theory of certiorari. This doctrinal innovation, which was used in overturning convictions under the anti-boycotting statute, the Criminal Law and Procedure Act 1887, appalled sections of Lord Salisbury's government, was disapproved of by the English courts, and split the Irish judiciary. The division caused by the doctrine persisted until 1910 when the Irish High Court, having assembled in banc in Martin's Case in order to resolve the impasse, re-established orthodox English doctrine.     

The Concept of Legislation: Jackson v Her Majesty'sAttorney General

In Jackson and Others v Her Majesty's Attorney General , the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords faced an unusual case – one in which it had to decide not only what Parliament intended, but whether it created a statute in the first place. Though the Committee was unanimous in finding that Parliament did indeed create a statute, the decision reveals deep divisions within the panel concerning the status of the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy and a profound difference in commitment to an exclusively source-based approach to law.     

Imprisonment v. the death penalty as a deterrent to murder

In this investigation we examine the simultaneous deterrent effect of imprisonment and executions on homicide. Examination of the census years 1920 to 1960 shows the certainty of execution and homicide rates to be generally unrelated. Also contrary to the deterrence hypothesis, the significant negative bivariate relationship between the severity of prison sentence and homicide rates found here and in earlier investigations is shown to be a statistical artifact resulting from a failure to control for the effects of alternative legal sanctions and sociodemographic factors. While neither imprisonment nor executions are found to have a significant deterrent effect on homicide, attention is called to some limitations of this investigation and the need for additional research.