The 1689 Bill of Rights

Following the disastrous reign of James II, the Bill of Rights was introduced to curb future arbitrary behaviour by the Crown. Five of the thirteen Articles are still active and cases illustrating their use in the courts are described. The courts have enforced the requirement for parliamentary consent to taxation and the ban on the executive's power to suspend statutes but have been less strict over the dispensing power. Article 9, on parliamentary freedom of speech, is in active use, and developments in Australia and Canada are reviewed. Scotland's own legislation - the Claim of Right - is discussed briefly. Most of the Bill probably does not apply to Northern Ireland. Opinions vary on the Bill's importance but in the author's view it is still a potent force.     

Australian Federalism and the Debate Over a Bill of Rights

Successive Australian Labor governments have tried to nationalizestandards for the protection of rights either by means of astatutory bill binding on the states under the Commonwealth'smuch expanded external affairs power, or by further entrenchingspecific rights in the Constitution. All these attempts havefailed for a variety of political and constitutional reasonsincluding, importantly, the strength of Australia's establishedsystem of federalism and parliamentary responsible government.The article examines the constitutional issues underlying thedebate over a bill of rights for Australia, arguing that Labor'sattempts to implement a bill of rights have been inspired bya preference for more centralized government whereas the defeatof such initiatives indicates, the established strength of Australianfederalism.     

Multiculturalism and Free Speech

Anthony Lester tackles the complex and sensitive issues of multiculturalism and free speech. He explores the various meanings given to multiculturalism, integration and assimilation, as well as the relationship between the right to equality and dignity for ethnic and religious minorities and the right to freedom of expression. Placing our multicultural society in its historical context, he considers the treatment of Commonwealth immigrants in the 1960s and 1970s and discusses more recent confrontations involving racial or religious groups which have raised the right to free speech. He argues that our approach to integration and cultural diversity should promote equality and individuality but resist unreasonable demands to respect customs and practices which, for example, harm the rights of women and children, in the name of misguided multiculturalism. We must guard against political correctness that panders to the thin-skinned but remember that the right to offend does not mean a duty to do so.     

Human Rights or Citizen's Privileges: The Great Bill of Rights Swindle

New Labour arguably left Britain more comfortable in its diversity and better protected by anti‐discrimination law. Equal treatment for gay people advanced significantly and the Human Rights Act provides a modern Bill of Rights for everyone in the Kingdom. Curiously however, parallel laws dishonoured these values in thought, word and deed. Home affairs hyperactivity left ours a less friendly country in which to seek asylum, dissent or even be young. The Coalition bound itself together with ‘civil liberties’ and quickly reversed some excesses of the previous decade. Last year's ‘Arab Spring saw it promote human rights abroad. However the Government appears bitterly divided by them at home. Is the debate about a more ‘British’ Bill of Rights, political genius, pragmatic fudge or a dangerous swindle capable of depriving us all of vital protection against abuse of power?”     

Free Speech and Learning from Difference

In debates about campus speech, there are arguments from the left and from the right that the community function of a college and the intellectual functions of a college can’t both be maximized. Improving the community role necessarily entails placing limits on the intellectual roles, and improving the intellectual role necessarily entails placing limits on the community roles. Where these arguments disagree is in the valuation of the tradeoffs between these roles. I argue that the apparent tension between the community role and intellectual role of colleges can be resolved, or at least mitigated, if we make a clearer distinction between speech and community endorsement of speech. What’s more, if we understand speech to be exploratory in nature rather than declaratory, we may remove some of the status competition between different groups that characterizes the dispute. This can allow for potential complementarities to emerge from the community support role of a college and the intellectual role. The core idea that I wish to explore is the notion of discovery that is embedded in Mill’s defense of free speech and in his conception of experiments in living. This approach depends on the idea that we can abandon the goal of defeating our opponents, and instead embrace the goal of accommodating one another.     

Anders Breivik and the Death of Free Speech in Norway

On July 22, 2011, Anders Breivik detonated a bomb in Oslo and massacred dozens of teenagers at a Labour Party Youth camp on the island of Utøya. Nearly all the media coverage of Breivik focused on the conservative political views outlined in his Manifesto. The week of the massacre, The New York Times ran a series of editorials which identified Breivik as a part of the counterjihad movement represented by Pete King, Bruce Bawer, Geert Wilders, Newt Gingrich, and Robert Spencer. In Norway, the Norwegian media was quick to blame Siv Jensen of the conservative Progress Party for creating the “climate of hate” which produced Breivik. In the wake of the murders, prominent Norwegian intellectuals began calling for a rejection of American “free speech absolutism” in favor of vigorously enforcing an “anti-racism” clause in Norway’s penal code which criminalizes threatening or insulting speech, or speech that incites contempt for anyone because of his or her skin color, religion, or sexual orientation. However, this would contribute little to public safety in Norway; instead it would stifle the kind of vigorous debate about social issues that one would expect to find in an open society. It would also demoralize moderate Muslims who are working to promote free speech and democratic pluralism in Muslim-majority countries.     

The State Constitutional Pedigree of the U.S. Bill of Rights

A direct comparison between the U.S. Bill of Rights and prominentEnglish common law documents shows that the first ten amendmentsto the U.S. Constitution have only a limited relationship toEnglish antecedents. Nor were the amendment proposals by thestate ratifying conventions the primary source of the U.S. Billof Rights. Instead, this famous addition to the federal Constitutionwas a summary of the common core found in the seven existingstate bills of rights. James Madison's use of this source restedupon colonial developments in rights theory, contrasting notionsof rights in England and America, competing notions of libertyin America in the 1780s, and the political exigencies surroundingthe ratification of the U.S. Constitution.     

从话语权视角看国家意识形态的现代性转化

20世纪90年代以来,西方文化意识形态产品全球性扩张与侵蚀所形成的“强势文化”态势,挑战了中国主导意识形态的话语权。面对挑战,秉持合法性与世俗化价值原则,适时整合中国传统意识形态资源,推动国家意识形态与社会主流文化相融合,创建适合当代中国实际的国家意识形态结构体系,是实现意识形态现代性转化的关键,同时,这也是构建马克思主义意识形态在当代中国话语权的契机。     

Developments in the Law: Garcetti v. Ceballos and the Workplace Freedom of Speech Rights of Public Employees

On May 30, 2006 the Supreme Court handed down a 5–4 decision in the case of Garcetti v. Ceballos, announcing that "when public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, they are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline." Previously, the Court had held in Pickering v. Board of Education (1968) that the First Amendment's protection of freedom of speech generally prohibited public employers from firing or disciplining employees for speaking out on matters of "public concern." The Pickering decision established a two-part test that first required federal courts to determine whether the employee had spoken out on a matter of public concern and then whether the disruptive impact of the employee's statement justified the disciplinary action. This article argues that the Garcetti decision may deter many public employees from disclosing governmental inefficiency and misconduct and presenting dissenting viewpoints on matters of clear public concern. Consequently, the decision may make it more difficult for the leadership of public agencies to uncover inefficiency and misconduct.     

Rethinking Human Rights in York as a Human Rights City

Human rights is in crisis in the UK. It lacks significant political backing and public support. This ‘insider account’ of York becoming a human rights city suggests that there is a need to rethink approaches to human rights. The article looks at the strategies adopted in the city; the annual city‐based indicator report which provides the key reference point for all local activities; and the declaration of York as a ‘human rights city’ in 2017 alongside its subsequent impact. The discussion is linked to two debates within human rights: how to define and build a culture of human rights, and what it means for human rights to be truly relevant at a local level. The new approach advocated can be summarised as participatory, locally informed, and related to everyday concerns.     

Human Rights and Sovereignty in the ASEAN Path Towards a Human Rights Declaration

Sovereignty and non-interference principles are trademarks of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) regional approach. Starting from 1993, ASEAN has been developing a process aimed at creating a human rights system. This process reached its acme in August 2013 when the ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (AHRD) was formally launched. In the frame of the tension between sovereignty and human rights, the paper firstly analyzes the roots of the ASEAN path towards the creation of the regional human rights system grounded on the Vienna World Conference debate. Next comes an analysis of the political commitments assumed by ASEAN in the last 20 years in the process of creating a human rights body in the region. Furthermore, the paper presents an in-depth analysis of the most problematic issues connected with the nature, functions, mandate, and purposes of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Human Rights Commission (2009). This is followed by an analysis of the AHRD.     

水权与水权的界定--水资源利用的产权经济学分析

在公有水权基础上实行可交易水权制度涉及到三个重要环节,即水权的界定、水价以及水权运作规则和水资源管理,其中水权的界定是水资源市场形成和运行的前提条件,没有排他性水权的确立,水权的让渡和交易是不可能的.本文从产权经济学的理论出发,分析水权的清晰界定与水资源市场的关系,并在此基础上分析水资源利用中的各种水权关系,指出进一步界定和明晰水资源的配水量权是实现水权制度创新的前提条件.     

女性发展与全面小康

全面建成小康社会,一个都不能少。女性发展是全面小康的重要组成部分。在全面建成小康社会过程中,女性发展既取得了巨大成就也面临着严峻挑战。女性要共建共享全面小康,既要依靠自己,也要争取男性支持,更需要各级党委政府的大力推动。     

Human Rights and Modern Liberalism: a Critique

The idea of human rights has become one of the central moral notions of both the theory and practice of international politics. While its foundation and future in the practice of politics looks bright, it is an idea that still causes great trouble at the theoretical level. What are human rights? Why do we have them? To what should we attribute the authority of their moral claims? The theorist Michael Freeman has suggested one theory that by addressing such questions may serve as a foundation for human rights. His theory, however, ends by begging the questions it set out to answer.     

Practicing a Virtuous Politics: Bill Bolling and the Atlanta Community Food Bank

Bill Bolling created the Atlanta Community Food Bank (ACFB) in 1979 and, as its executive director from then until 2015, transformed a fledgling effort in a church basement into the “equivalent of a $100 million company.” This article tells the story of how Bolling built the ACFB from scratch, arguing that his accomplishments can be traced to his effectiveness as a political leader. The article explains how Bolling practiced a virtuous politics in building informal sources of power and in developing and applying political skills on behalf of the ACFB. In the process, the article challenges the traditional critical scholarly view of political leadership, offering Bolling as a case illustration of an emerging theory of a benevolent and effective form of political leadership.