The Politics of Governance in Higher Education: the Case of Quality Assurance

The politics of governance in higher education is dominated by a discourse of quality assurance which assumes the external regulation of academic activity to be the natural state of affairs. This article analyses the ideological origins of that discourse and its resonance with more general trends in the public management of welfare, the nature of the opposition from traditional university values, the stages in the translation of ideological advantage into specific forms of regulation, and the consequent shifts in the balance of power between the major players in higher education. Underlying this analysis is a framework which views the governance of higher education as an arena in which there is a continuing struggle for the control of high status knowledge through the functions of standard setting, evaluation and intervention.     

Carl Schmitt on the Secularisation of Religious Texts as a Resacralisation of Jurisprudence?

Carl Schmitt, an increasingly influential German law professor, developed a provocative and historically oriented model of “political theology” with specific relevance to legal scholarship and the authorship of constitutional texts. His “political theology” is best understood neither as an expressly theological discourse within constitutional law, nor as a uniquely legal discourse shaped by a hidden theological agenda. Instead, it addresses the possibility of the continual resurfacing of theological ideas and beliefs within legal discourses of, for instance, sovereignty, the force of law and states of emergency (or “exception”) that present themselves as relentlessly secular, even—in the case of Kelsenian jurisprudence—”scientific”. This article illustrates and then critically evaluates Schmitt’s theory in terms of the authorship of constitutional texts in particular. It includes two case studies—genocidal colonial land appropriation and Kelsenian positivism in order to illustrate aspects of his political theology. Whilst Schmitt is defended against reductionist interpretations, I show that there remains considerable unfinished business before a Schmittian approach to legal theory merits full acceptance.     

Adam Smith and the Grotian Theory of Property

In the theory of property, which he presented in his lectures in Glasgow in 1762–63, Adam Smith moved decisively against the ideas of his Scottish contemporaries and near contemporaries, particularly with respect to the elements of their theories they had inherited from Locke. This article explores the reasons behind this change in direction and discusses the use Smith made of Grotius' theory of property in reformulating his own ideas. I argue that Grotius' influence is evident in three features of Smith's theory: the account of property in the first age of society; the role of agreements in the subsequent development of property; and the nature and scope of natural rights.     

Contrasting Strategies within the War Crimes Trials of Kesselring and Wolff

This article compares the different ways in which, during the post-war decades, the Allied war crimes trials programme responded to the war criminality of two prominent German officials: Field Marshal Albert Kesselring and SS General Karl Wolff. It explores the question of why Wolff, whose complicity was arguably much greater than that of Kesselring, received more favourable treatment, and the role of various political and geo-political factors, including those influencing the interventions of US intelligence officials, as explanations for this apparent legal discrepancy. Dr. Kerstin von Lingen is a researcher at the Centre for Studies on Experiences in War (SFB 437 “Kriegserfahrungen”) at Tubingen University, Germany; Dr. Michael Salter is Professor of Law at The Law School, University of Central Lancashire, United Kingdom.