List of Contributors

The emergence of regional parliamentary assemblies (RPAs) in Africa has been on the ascendancy since the mid-twentieth century. The essence of these parliaments is to contribute to regional economic and political integration through oversight, legislation and representation. However, the ability of Africa's RPAs to perform these functions has been challenged by institutional and legal factors. Using five regional parliaments (the East African Legislative Assembly, the Economic Community of West African States Parliament, the Inter-Parliamentary Union of Intergovernmental Authority on Development, the Pan-African Parliament and the South African Development Community Parliamentary Forum) as case studies, this paper examines the impact of these challenges on the functionality and viability of Africa's RPAs. It finds that given that these parliaments lack legitimacy of authority and enabling status of operation, they exist merely as deliberative, consultative and advisory bodies rather than independent organs of regional economic communities with full legislative and oversight powers. Consequently, the paper recommends, among other things, the amendment of their constitutive acts to grant them full legislative and oversight functions, and the election of their members by universal adult suffrage in order to give them legitimacy of authority.     

ASEAN sceptics versus ASEAN proponents: evaluating regional institutions

Since it was founded in 1967, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has attracted both sceptics and proponents. With Southeast Asia’s economy growing rapidly and tied into all parts of the global economy and the region geopolitically important to the world’s major powers, how ASEAN manages its internal affairs and East Asian relations is crucial. The differences in how sceptics and proponents perceive ASEAN, and why they take up such contrasting positions, need to be fully appreciated as scholars and commentators review and assess ASEAN’s performance. This analysis uses three analytical criteria – effectiveness, legitimacy and efficiency – to juxtapose and evaluate the competing arguments of the two approaches so as to better understand how and why sceptics and proponents can examine the same institutions and events and reach very different conclusions.     

Mediatization of Civil Society Organizations: (De)legitimation of the Swedish Red Cross

Abstract

The article explores how media representations influence ideas about legitimate behaviour within a civil society organization (CSO). We develop understanding of the mediatization of CSOs, and in particular of how media coverage influences internal practices and decision-making. The analysis is based on a case study of the Swedish Red Cross and illustrates how (negative) media exposure influences the conditions for, and behaviour of, a CSO. The findings demonstrate that media constructed a legitimacy crisis and that the organization over time adjusted to the media story to maintain its legitimacy. The findings also suggest that professional communicators play significant roles in carrying and reinforcing ideas within CSOs about the importance of controlling media attention.     

An Empirical Approach to Post-conflict Legitimacy: Victims' Needs and the Everyday

Abstract

An empirical study has been made of victims of conflict in Timor-Leste and Nepal seeking a qualitative understanding of local post-conflict priorities. It allows an appreciation to emerge of how the conflict-affected conceive of legitimacy and quality of governance, with victims emphasizing basic needs, an addressing of issues of marginalization and the incorporation of indigenous understandings of the meaning of peace. The data in this study motivate a victim-centred discussion of both the limitations of liberal approaches to peace and the implications for the legitimacy of post-conflict governance of prioritizing the everyday needs of the conflict-affected, in contrast to universal and institutionally rooted liberal values.     

The Practice and Theory of US Statebuilding

Abstract

The United States has employed three models of statebuilding over the last century, each animated by a different political theory. Statebuilding 1.0, developed and used from the late 1890s through the end of the Cold War, emphasized building loyal and politically stable subordinate states. Privileging American geopolitical and economic interests over those of local populations, the model was premised on the theory of realpolitik. Statebuilding 2.0 arose under and, in many ways, came to characterize attempts by the United States to construct a New World Order after 1990. The key shift was from seeking loyalty to building legitimate states. Under this model, the United States attempted to build broad-based popular support for nascent states by creating democratic institutions and spearheading economic reforms. In this ‘end of history’ moment, liberalism reigned triumphant in statebuilding practice and theory. Statebuilding 3.0 is now being ‘field-tested’ in Iraq and Afghanistan. This new model seeks to build legitimacy for new states by providing security and essential public services to their populations. It rests on social contract theory, and its core tenet that legitimacy follows from providing effectively for the basic needs of citizens. Successive sections summarize the practice of statebuilding under each model and discuss its implicit political theory. A critique of each model then flows naturally into the practice and logic of the next. The conclusion outlines why a statebuilding 3.1 is necessary, and what such a strategy might entail.     

我国著作权法取消作品合法性要件探析

2010年修改后的著作权法第四条取消了原法对作品合法性要件的规定,只涉及对作者行使权力的违法规制。原法第四条虽存在立法瑕疵,但其对作品合法性要件的规定并无错误,修订中可对原法模糊之处作技术性处理而不应全盘否定。此次修法有违宪法精神和著作权法的立法宗旨,同时也造成与现行行政法规的不协调等诸多弊端。建议著作权法恢复作品合法性要件的规定,在此前提下加以修改完善。     

论检察独立——兼论我国检察机构改革

检察独立与检察一体,是现代检察制度创设的关键。检察独立既包括检察机关独立,也包括检察官独立,欧陆国家大多数采用检察一体下的检察独立,我国因国家组织体制的不同,检察独立制度尚未确立,面对司法独立的紧迫性,改革并确立检察独立的现代检察制度,是我国检察机构改革的关键。     

Mission impossible in Cyprus? Legitimate return to the partnership state revisited

Cyprus has been divided for far longer than it has been united. There have been many attempts to reconcile conflicting parties but without remarkable success. The two communities – Greek Cypriots and Turkish Cypriots – see the solution to the “Cyprus problem” in opposite terms. Although recent public opinion surveys have concluded that the most preferred option for the Turkish Cypriots would be “independence of the TRNC” and “reunification of the country”, for the Greek Cypriots, there is much less information about the legitimacy of these competing regimes and their respective claims. This paper seeks to fill this gap by identifying different legitimacy sources and their effect on the course of conflict settlement. Somewhat paradoxically it appears that those most strongly identifying themselves with the Republic of Cyprus, and approving the regime legitimacy of the Greek Cypriot government, are actually for status quo and not for the reunification of the country which makes the return to the partnership state mission impossible.     

A framework for the systematic study of election quality

This article offers the beginnings of a methodology for assessing the quality of a national election, its freeness, fairness and administrative efficacy. The historical lack of a comprehensive framework of analysis has compelled election observers to make pronouncements on the basis of incomplete evidence, usually gathered on the day of the vote and count. It has allowed international observation missions to ‘call’ the results of elections on the basis of political expediency rather than the facts of the case. The intent in this article is not to offer a foolproof method for categorizing election quality but rather to lay out a framework which we believe is more comprehensive and meaningful than anything that has come before. To illustrate its workings the article scores six multi-party elections: two in established democracies – Australia and Denmark 2001– and four in fledgling democracies – South Africa 1994 and 2004, East Timor 2001 and Zimbabwe 2002. The framework outlined here will make it possible to identify patterns of success and failure in the fairness of elections. It should enable all kinds of observers from academics and election administrators to election observers to spotlight the weak areas of election administration, where a government might then choose to focus its efforts to improve the quality of subsequent elections.     

Institutional legitimacy in Sub-Saharan Africa

ABSTRACT

How do personal encounters with legal institutions shape citizens’ confidence in those institutions throughout sub-Saharan Africa? Using Afrobarometer’s cross-national citizen survey, we show that negative first-hand experiences with government courts and police erode citizens’ trust in those state institutions but do not tend to disrupt citizens’ perceptions of their authority to arbitrate or enforce the law. Individuals from diverse demographic backgrounds imbue state institutions with the right to perform their governance and law-enforcement duties, even after experiencing institutional incompetence or injustice. This article advances existing comparative research on legal institutions, which tends to conflate trust and legitimacy and overlooks the distinction between de facto performance and de jure authority. We suggest that rule-of-law institutions have deeper roots than some scholars have previously supposed.