[Book Review: The Law of the Land: The Evolution of Our Legal System Charles Rembar]

1981 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 579
Author(s):  
Steven A. Meyerowitz
Keyword(s):  
2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masdar Masdar

Cash waqf in Indonesia has been long enough implemented based on some rules enacted by government and other rules defined by The Waqf Board of Indonesia (BWI). However, the implementation of cash waqf has not reached the level of success. Therefore, this article studies the application of cash waqf law in Indonesia according to Friedman’s legal system theory. The legal system theory of Friedman firstly looks at the substance of the law, which is the rules or regulations; and secondly it examines the structure of the law, encompassing the law enforcement agencies, such as judge, prosecutor, police and legal counselors. And lastly the theory examines the element of legal culture, which is a response from Muslim society. The first two examinations indicate that there is nothing to be a problem. But from the last examination there is a problem regarding the trust from Muslim society. From the legal culture point of view, the implementation of cash waqf by the government, which is performed by BWI, needs attracting society’s credentials in order to improve and maximize the performance of cash waqf in Indonesia.


Author(s):  
ARTAN QERKINI

The market economy and changes within Republic of Kosovo’s legal system, which imposed the need of legal changes within the field of contested procedure also, have caused this procedure to become more efficient vis-à-vis legal provisions which were in force until October 6th 2008. Through the Law on Contested Procedure (hereinafter “LCP”), the legislator has aimed, inter alia, to make the contested procedure more concentrated, and thus, more efficient. In this regard, the Kosovar legislator has determined that it is mandatory for the parties to present any and all relevant evidence for resolving the dispute until the preparatory session, and in the event that one was not held, until the first main hearing session. As an exception, the parties may present relevant evidence even after this stage of proceedings, provided that their failure to present said evidence no later than at the preparatory session, respectively first main hearing session, was through no fault of their own. I consider that these legislative amendments are vital to ensuring practical implementation of the principle of efficience in the contested procedure.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document