三民網路書店 / 搜尋結果

「人民參與刑事審判」作為近年來司法改革的重要議題，到底是玩真的？還是玩假的？真正實施後，究竟會帶來什麼樣的改變和影響？本書透過文獻爬梳、跨領域田野調查、模擬法庭觀察與參與者深度訪談，以及跨國界實地考察，對此議題作出了結合學理與實務、兼具深度與廣度的討論與分析。作者並從政治學上的審議式民主發想，建構審議式法庭概念，作為統合人民參與刑事審判的目標與未來評估標準，期待避免數人頭的司法民主與刑罰民粹的弊病

Law, Democracy and the European Court of Human Rights examines the political rights jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. It discusses how the Court supports a liberal representative and substantive model of democracy, and outlines the potential for the Court to interpret the Convention so as to support more deliberative, participatory and inclusive democratic practices. The book commences with an overview of different theories of democracy and then discusses the origins of the Council of Europe and the Convention and presents the basic principles on the interpretation and application of the Convention. Subsequent chapters explore issues around free expression, free assembly and association, the scope of the electoral rights, the right to vote, the right to run for election and issues about electoral systems. Issues discussed include rights relating to referendums, voting rights for prisoners and non-nationals, trade union rights and freedom of information.

The Marshall Court and Cultural Change, 1815–1835 comprises the third and fourth volumes of the Oliver Wendell Holmes Devise History of the Supreme Court of the United States. G. Edward White completes the series' coverage of the Marshall Court, tracing the last two decades of John Marshall's term as Chief Justice. White describes the intellectual climate of the Marshall Court's work and analyzes the Court's decisions. Throughout, White stresses that the Marshall Court, despite its much-celebrated influence, must be seen as part of a unique cultural period when the heritage of the Revolution confronted the radical political, demographic, and intellectual changes of the nineteenth century. The Marshall Court itself was also unique and unlike the modern Court in that it used an informal set of deliberative procedures that gave the justices' personal predilections more influence in the Court's rulings than at any other time in Supreme Court history.

The US Supreme Court's legitimacy-its diminishing integrity and contribution to the good of society-is being questioned today like no other time in recent memory. Criticisms reflect the perspectives of both 'insiders' (straight white males) and 'outsiders' (mainly people of color, women, and the LGBTQ community). Neither perspective digs deep enough to get at the root of the Court's legitimacy problem, which is one of process. The Court's process of decision-making is antiquated and out of sync with a society that looks and thinks nothing like the America of the eighteenth century, when the process was first implemented. The current process marginalizes many Americans who have a right to feel disenfranchised. Leading scholar of jurisprudence Roy L. Brooks demonstrates how the Court can modernize and democratize its deliberative process, to be more inclusive of the values and life experiences of Americans who are not straight white males.

The US Supreme Court's legitimacy-its diminishing integrity and contribution to the good of society-is being questioned today like no other time in recent memory. Criticisms reflect the perspectives of both 'insiders' (straight white males) and 'outsiders' (mainly people of color, women, and the LGBTQ community). Neither perspective digs deep enough to get at the root of the Court's legitimacy problem, which is one of process. The Court's process of decision-making is antiquated and out of sync with a society that looks and thinks nothing like the America of the eighteenth century, when the process was first implemented. The current process marginalizes many Americans who have a right to feel disenfranchised. Leading scholar of jurisprudence Roy L. Brooks demonstrates how the Court can modernize and democratize its deliberative process, to be more inclusive of the values and life experiences of Americans who are not straight white males.