Domestic legislatures and international human rights law: Legislating on religious symbols in Europe

This article examines the dynamics of domestic legislatures' application of international human rights law. Specifically, this article asks the following: What factors shape how domestic legislatures apply international human rights law while they enact national law and policy? Lawmakers have a variety of motives for invoking and deliberating international law. Given these motives, the article identifies two factors — civil society actors and legal experts and the flexibility of international law — that are likely to contribute to if and how national legislatures interpret and apply international human rights law while legislating. These factors are examined through case studies on religion in schools in the United Kingdom, Germany, and France. This article argues civil society actors and legal experts and the flexibility of international law inform lawmakers' estimation of political costs related to compliance and thus how they apply international human rights law to domestic legislation.     

Civil society participation in regional integration in Africa: A comparative analysis of ECOWAS,SADC, and the EAC

There is an undeniable trend towards civil society participation in virtually all issue-areas of global governance, yet civil society participation varies widely among international organisation (IOs). While this trend has inspired a voluminous academic literature, empirically-based, comparative studies of IO-civil society interaction in Africa remain largely absent. This article therefore examines civil society participation in three African subregional organisations – the East African Community (EAC), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), and the Southern African Development Community (SADC). What are the factors that have made regional integration in ECOWAS relatively more people-driven, and that have thus far hindered effective civil society participation in the affairs of SADC and the EAC? Support from member states, allies in the respective organisation’s bureaucracy, and characteristics of civil society itself, the research shows, affect participation in regional integration, with the latter aspect apparently more salient in SADC and the EAC than in ECOWAS.     

A Survey: Children’s Rights Post Termination of Parental Rights and Pre-Adoption

This survey of the statutory provisions and case law of all 50 states and the District of Columbia includes the rights of children to parental support, inheritance, and familial association remaining upon termination of parental rights. A majority of states terminate all the child’s rights at the time parental rights are severed. However, a number of states by explicit statutes or statutory construction have determined that a child’s rights to parental support survives termination of parental rights. This survey examines the prevailing law in each state and suggests statutory reforms to protect the legal status and rights of children.     

Representing teachers as criminals in the news: a multimodal critical discourse analysis of the Atlanta schools’ “Cheating Scandal”

On 1 April 2015, 11 Atlanta teachers accused of changing answers on their students’ standardized tests were convicted of racketeering and sentenced to 5–20 years in prison. Despite ample news coverage, few sources investigated teachers’ motivations for altering students’ responses or explored what the consequences would have been if student scores had not been changed to passing. Moreover, the fact that the teachers’ actions resulted from systemic problems associated with working within a high-stakes testing environment is glossed over and all but lost in the reporting of the “Cheating Scandal” events. The authors conduct a critical multimodal analysis of how semiotic resources were used to represent teachers in the Atlanta “Cheating Scandal” and show how the media's framing of teachers both reflects and conceals specific interests of the powerful educational reform movement and the corporations that benefit from it, such as Pearson, Inc. Data sources included four online news sources from April 2015 that covered the teachers’ sentencing, and the authors analyzed the visual and verbal transformations that occurred during the process of recontextualization. Analysis revealed the construction of a moral narrative that depicted the teachers as selfish and incompetent, reinforcing the dominant paradigm driving school reform in the USA. The authors conclude by calling for more counter-narratives that expose how dominant representations reify negative public perceptions of teachers.     

Stability and change in international policy-making: A punctuated equilibrium approach

International organizations (IOs) have developed into important policy venues beyond the state. Yet our understanding of the broader dynamics of IO policy-making is limited. This article offers the first comparative analysis of macro patterns in IO policy-making. Theoretically, we draw on punctuated equilibrium theory to develop hypotheses about stability and change in the orientation of IO policy agendas. Empirically, we examine novel data on the policy output of five general-purpose IOs between 1980 and 2015, combining statistical analysis and comparative case illustrations. The analysis yields two central results. First, the policy agendas of all five IOs display patterns of punctuated equilibria, with longer periods of stability interrupted by shorter periods of dramatic change. Second, the level of institutional friction in decision-making contributes to variation in punctuations across IOs and within IOs over time. The results suggest four broader implications: (1) punctuated equilibrium theory applies to a broader empirical domain than previously thought; (2) patterns of change in IOs are more complex than conventionally expected; (3) institutional friction matters for IOs’ responsiveness to societal demands and problem pressures; and (4) deeper integration of punctuated equilibrium theory into the study of IOs can pave the way for a promising IR research agenda.     

Fact-sensitive political theory

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to argue for the importance of attention to facts in normative theorising. I discuss the problems that arise from both not displaying such attention (as some idealists do) and from doing so in the wrong way (as, for example, realists do). I propose a different brand of theorising – fact-sensitive political theory, which aims to avoid these two problems by paying attention to key facts while retaining a solid normative anchoring in abstract normative principles. The merit of abstract vs. non-abstract reasoning is that the normative debate is not torn between two distinct ends of a spectrum in the way the idealist–realist debate is. By contrast, the locus of the investigations is vertical in the sense that abstract and concrete normative discussions are given equal status and can co-exist compatibly. One of the main differences between abstract and concrete normative principles is whether abstract or concrete facts are considered necessary for the determination of the normative principles. The fact-sensitive account of normativity is neither realist nor non-ideal: it is an ambitious and demanding normative theory that contains both abstract and concrete normative reasoning. The fact-sensitive account of political theory meets the two criteria set out in this article: to integrate concrete and empirical facts about the subject matter and to subject the selection of facts to theoretical and methodological discussion and justification.     

The promises and perils of subsidiarity in global governance: evidence from Africa

In the messy world of global governance, the principle of subsidiarity has the potential to order relations between different layers of governance as well as compensate for the legitimacy deficit of global governance institutions. However, subsidiarity has received surprisingly little scholarly attention in the discipline of International Relations. This article therefore seeks to examine the promises and perils of subsidiarity in global governance by adducing empirical evidence from Africa, a region which has authored norms and policies that often contest global norms and institutions. Based on two case studies of pro-democratic intervention in The Gambia and court proliferation at the (sub-)regional levels, the article concludes that while subsidiarity may strengthen democracy and the rule of law at the national level, it may also undermine the rule of law at the global level, as well as dilute fundamental global norms that serve to protect basic human rights. At the same time, subsidiarity provides opportunities for normative innovation, which suggests that more attention needs to be paid to the law-generating effects of subsidiarity and to the Global South as an agent of change in international law and global governance.     

A new conceptual framework for revenge firesetting

Revenge has frequently been acknowledged to account for a relatively large proportion of motives in deliberate firesetting. However, very little is actually known about the aetiology of revenge firesetting. Theoretical approaches to revenge-seeking behaviour are discussed. A brief review of how revenge is accounted for in existing theoretical explanations of deliberate firesetting and the known characteristics of revenge firesetters are provided. On this basis, the authors suggest, as a motive, revenge firesetting has to date been mis-conceptualised. A new conceptual framework is thus proposed, paying particular attention to the contextual, affective, cognitive, volitional and behavioural factors which may influence and generate a single episode of revenge firesetting. Treatment implications and suggestions for future research are also provided.     

The cognitive distortions of child molesters are in need of treatment

Abstract

This paper forms the second part of a debate led by Marshall, Marshall, and Kingston (2011) regarding the need to address so-called cognitive distortions in sexual offender treatment. In their paper, Marshall et al. argue that so-called cognitive distortions may not necessarily require intense and focused attention or challenge throughout treatment. In evaluating Marshall et al.'s arguments, we highlight some inherent differences in how both Marshall et al. and ourselves choose to define the term “cognitive distortion”. We surmise that these key definitional differences appear to account for many of the issues that we “debate”. In particular, for example, Marshall et al. focus their arguments regarding cognitive distortions more explicitly upon excuses, denial and minimisations, whereas we choose to focus upon schemas and higher-order belief structures. Thus, we argue that the broadness and vagueness of the term “cognitive distortion” can lend itself to quite different interpretations and research foci. We offer some alternative views to Marshall et al.'s position and advocate the consideration of cognitions with an aetiological role in offending. We conclude with some suggestions for future research and treatment.