Institutional journalism in a revolutionary crisis: the press as an aide to the Muslim Brotherhood 2011–2012

This article is based on the hypothesis that the Egyptian institutional media played an active role in the Egyptian ‘Arab Spring’ revolution in 2011 and analyzes how Egypt's official newspapers constructed and presented a moderate and positive image of the Muslim Brotherhood (hereinafter the Brotherhood) despite the fact that they had labeled the Brotherhood ‘the outlawed movement’ a year earlier. In order to examine whether their attitudes changed after the downfall of the Mubarak regime, a critical discourse analysis of newspaper texts has been made of the news columns written throughout 2011 of two of the most popular Egyptian newspapers – al-Ahram (n = 115) and al-Gumhuriyya (n = 94) both of which identify with the Egyptian government's official policy. In addition, an analysis made of three of the Brotherhood's publications (n = 72) (N = 281) revealed that the Brotherhood exploited the printed media not only to replace the regime but also to gain control of its narrative. Ultimately, by controlling the shaping of public opinion, the media contributed to the drawing of a parallel between the motivation that formed the basis of the mass protest and the Brotherhood's agenda.     

Equality of resources and the demands of authenticity

One of the most distinctive features of Ronald Dworkin’s egalitarian theory is its commitment to holding individuals responsible for the costs to others of their ambitions. This commitment has received much criticism. Drawing on Dworkin’s latest statement of his position in Justice for Hedgehogs (2011), we suggest that it seems to be in tension with another crucial element of Dworkin’s own theory, namely, its endorsement of the importance of people leading authentic lives – lives that reflect their own values. We examine this tension between responsibility and authenticity, and some strategies Dworkin does and could deploy to defuse it, which we think are unsuccessful. We then propose a solution for reconciling the demands of responsibility and authenticity, which is, so we claim, friendly to Dworkin’s fundamental commitments but which leads to a revisionist interpretation of the demands of equality of resources.     

Gender Equality as a General Interest of a Pluralistic Society: An Analysis of Constitutional Precedent in Colombia

The article explores the relationship between the legal principles of general interest and gender equality, both consecrated in Colombia's 1991 Constitution. Through an analysis of the precedents set by the Constitutional Court, the article provides a hermeneutical approximation of the behaviour of jurisprudence concerning the general interest. It demonstrates how this principle could be used to foster a more encompassing definition of gender equality. The precedents set by the Constitutional Court have opened up the spectrum of women's rights so as to grasp their relation to the principle of general interest as well as their basis as fundamental rights.     

European Law Beyond ‘Ever Closer Union’ Repositioning the Concept,its Thrust and the ECJ's Comparative Methodology

The article investigates competing understandings of European law. It supports, against the prevailing EU‐centred understanding, an ecumenical concept that embraces EU law, supplementing international instruments, the European Convention on Human Rights and, importantly, various domestic laws enacting or responding to such transnational law, as well as European comparative law. To keep the concept in sync with European politics, it posits a new idea that binds the parts together: to provide for a European legal space rather than further European integration (the ever closer union). This idea can also serve as European law's functional equivalent to forming one legal order. European law thus conceived grasps the puzzling complex of interdependent legal orders, sets a common frame for corresponding reconstructions (European composite constructions, legal pluralism, network theories, federalism or intergovernmentalism) and allows forces with diverging outlooks to meet in one legal field, on one more neutral disciplinary platform. Within this framework, European comparative law finds a new mission as well as a sound legal basis.     

我国刑事见证制度的价值及完善

刑事见证制度是保证国家公诉的透明度和公信力之关键,具有独立的程序价值。我国刑事诉讼法律规范在见证制度方面存在诸多不足之处,这对司法机关依法规范侦查行为、统一证据标准造成混乱,也对我国的人权保障形成制度障碍。对此,我国刑事诉讼法应当从见证人的选取、见证人的权利和义务、见证制度的违反后果等方面统一见证制度的程序和实体标准,为证据的可信度提供制度保障。     

浅谈“轻轻重重”与“宽严相济”

随着西方国家“轻轻重重”两极化刑事政策的确立及我国宽严相济刑事政策的提出,学界对两者相通性的探讨逐渐增多,但对两者区别的研究甚少。在对两者历史沿革、具体内容、价值取向进行比较分析的基础上,可以得出我国刑事政策的理性选择。     

完善我国宪法监督制度的构想

从宪法观念和监督体制两方面深入剖析了我国现行宪法监督制度及其存在的问题,提出了建立专门宪法监督机关模式的构想,论述了确立该体制需要解决的两个重要问题专门宪法监督机关与全国人大及其常委会的关系和专门宪法监督机关组成人员的产生方式。     

Modern Families,Modern Family Justice: Supporting Family Relationships in Fast‐Changing Socio‐Political‐Economic Climates (Summary of the Report of the Consultation at St George's House,Windsor, February 12–13, 2018)

This summary relates to the consultation held at St George's House, in Windsor, England, on February 2018. The attendees came from across Europe and from the United States, and they discussed a range of initiatives designed to address the challenges in modern family justice and the changes in the social, political, and economic environments that are impacting family life across the globe. Although the challenges are very similar, the approach to resolving them varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The attendees concluded that there is much we can learn from each other, and that greater cooperation between family justice professionals across geographic boundaries would be highly beneficial.     

Guiding Principles for Family Justice Programs

The Association of Family and Conciliation Courts and Relate, UK, co‐convened a 24‐hour consultation at St George's House, Windsor, UK, on modern family justice issues across Europe. This article identifies a preliminary set of guiding principles for family justice programs developed by consultation participants.     

原旨主义、活的宪法与复杂状态下的宪法解释?

宪法解释应该遵循原初意义还是回应时代需要,是原旨主义和“活的宪法”之争的焦点所在。在对宪法裁判进行批判与维护的过程中,原意解释方法和非原意解释方法都开始走向基础主义。两种解释方法执着于单一的理念,既无法证明自己比对方更为优秀,也未能对解释实践进行全面的描述。宪法解释是一个相当复杂、语境多元的过程,在不同复杂状况下,法官拥有不同程度的解释裁量权。有鉴于此,任何将宪法解释化约为单一解释哲学的做法,都是不恰当的。