Two Modes of Judicial Deference

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Kyritsis
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Deliberative Process ◽  
Political Morality ◽  
Rational Application ◽  
Robust Model ◽  
Suitable Concept ◽  
The Right ◽  
Epistemic Model

In order to preserve the courts’ subsidiarity, even when they monitor the legislature, we must develop a suitable concept of judicial deference. This is the aim of this chapter. It distinguishes two modes of deference, the epistemic and the robust. On the epistemic model, deference affects the deliberative process of judges but does not change the standard by which we evaluate legislative decisions. On the robust model, deference does not affect judicial deliberation but changes what is the right thing to do; it may require giving effect to the authority’s decision, although it is sub-optimal as far as its content is concerned on the strength of countervailing considerations of institutional design. These two modes of deference can also be combined (composite deference). Deference, thus understood, is not erratic and ad hoc but sensitive to reasons of political morality and amenable to rational application.

scholarly journals Technical note: Inherent benchmark or not? Comparing Nash–Sutcliffe and Kling–Gupta efficiency scores

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (10) ◽  
pp. 4323-4331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wouter J. M. Knoben ◽  
Jim E. Freer ◽  
Ross A. Woods
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Coefficient Of Variation ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Model Performance ◽  
Technical Note ◽  
Mean Flow ◽  
Model Adequacy ◽  
Robust Model ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Adequacy Assessment

Abstract. A traditional metric used in hydrology to summarize model performance is the Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE). Increasingly an alternative metric, the Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE), is used instead. When NSE is used, NSE = 0 corresponds to using the mean flow as a benchmark predictor. The same reasoning is applied in various studies that use KGE as a metric: negative KGE values are viewed as bad model performance, and only positive values are seen as good model performance. Here we show that using the mean flow as a predictor does not result in KGE = 0, but instead KGE =1-√2≈-0.41. Thus, KGE values greater than −0.41 indicate that a model improves upon the mean flow benchmark – even if the model's KGE value is negative. NSE and KGE values cannot be directly compared, because their relationship is non-unique and depends in part on the coefficient of variation of the observed time series. Therefore, modellers who use the KGE metric should not let their understanding of NSE values guide them in interpreting KGE values and instead develop new understanding based on the constitutive parts of the KGE metric and the explicit use of benchmark values to compare KGE scores against. More generally, a strong case can be made for moving away from ad hoc use of aggregated efficiency metrics and towards a framework based on purpose-dependent evaluation metrics and benchmarks that allows for more robust model adequacy assessment.

The International Criminal Court's Provisional Authority to Coerce

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Franceschet
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Civil Wars ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
World Order ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
The World ◽  
The Will ◽  
The Right

The United Nations ad hoc tribunals in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda had primacy over national judicial agents for crimes committed in these countries during the most notorious civil wars and genocide of the 1990s. The UN Charter granted the Security Council the right to establish a tribunal for Yugoslavia in the context of ongoing civil war and against the will of recalcitrant national agents. The Council used that same right to punish individuals responsible for a genocide that it failed earlier to prevent in Rwanda. In both cases the Council delegated a portion of its coercive title to independent tribunal agents, thereby overriding the default locus of punishment in the world order: sovereign states.

scholarly journals Wheelchair users, access and exclusion in South African higher education

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Desire Chiwandire ◽  
Louise Vincent
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
South African ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Wheelchair Users ◽  
Staff Members ◽  
Leading Role ◽  
South African Universities ◽  
The Right

Background: South Africa’s Constitution guarantees everyone, including persons with disabilities, the right to education. A variety of laws are in place obliging higher education institutions to provide appropriate physical access to education sites for all. In practice, however, many buildings remain inaccessible to people with physical disabilities.Objectives: To describe what measures South African universities are taking to make their built environments more accessible to students with diverse types of disabilities, and to assess the adequacy of such measures.Method: We conducted semi-structured in-depth face-to-face interviews with disability unit staff members (DUSMs) based at 10 different public universities in South Africa.Results: Challenges with promoting higher education accessibility for wheelchair users include the preservation and heritage justification for failing to modify older buildings, ad hoc approaches to creating accessible environments and failure to address access to toilets, libraries and transport facilities for wheelchair users.Conclusion: South African universities are still not places where all students are equally able to integrate socially. DUSMs know what ought to be done to make campuses more accessible and welcoming to students with disabilities and should be empowered to play a leading role in sensitising non-disabled members of universities, to create greater awareness of, and appreciation for, the multiple ways in which wheelchair user students continue to be excluded from full participation in university life. South African universities need to adopt a systemic approach to inclusion, which fosters an understanding of inclusion as a fundamental right rather than as a luxury.

scholarly journals Complexity to downplay complexity: Implications of ERM logics for the Italian NHS

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (4, Special Issue) ◽  
pp. 369-376
Author(s):  
Raffaela Casciello ◽  
Fiorenza Meucci
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Healthcare Organizations ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Welfare Services ◽  
Holistic Analysis ◽  
The Right

The aim of the paper is to investigate COVID-19-related issues currently affecting the Italian Healthcare System and offer causes for reflection on how to deal efficiently with risk management criticalities. Through the lenses of the Quality in Extreme Adversity (QEA) action framework, such reflections benefit from a greater depth of holistic analysis on risk management opportunities and threats towards both renewing and protecting the welfare services of the Italian Healthcare System. The complexity and urgency to overcome the multitude of risks require healthcare organizations to intervene immediately with integrated top-down enterprise-wide approaches of risk management. In such conditions, the adoption of ad hoc shaped ERM models could be the right solution for facing adequately the inefficiencies in pandemic management.

scholarly journals Alianza estado-sociedad C=civil: Debates y desafíos en la co-gestión de políticas de inclusión educativa en Uruguay y Argentina

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Andres Peregalli
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
Qualitative Methodology ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
Right To Education ◽  
Educational Management ◽  
Bridge Programs ◽  
Medium Level ◽  
Management Paradigms ◽  
The Right ◽  
Educational Inclusion

In Latin America different policies sustained in State-Civil Society alliances are implemented in order to warrant the right to education in marginalized sectors. Uruguay and Argentina carry out “bridge” programs and “completion” plans for adolescents, youngsters and adults to enter, re-enter or finish Medium Level Studies. I compare the characteristics of the alliance State-Civil Society in the co-management of the “Aulas Comunitarias” (Communitarian Classrooms) Program (PAC, Uruguay, 2007) and the “Plan de Finalización de Estudios Secundarios para Jóvenes y Adultos” (Finalization of Secondary Studies for youngsters and adults Plan) (FinEs 2, Argentina, 2008), aiming to understand their contributions to the processes of educational inclusion, as well as their limits. I analyze their genesis, political-institutional design/ways of organization and form of co-management contemplating: a) political-institutional approach to analyze public policy, b) Neo-institutionalism: sociopolitical as well as organizational and historic, c) co-management, d) educational management (paradigms: administrative and strategic). I implement a qualitative methodology, selecting co-management (as performed until December, 2015) as the unit of analysis. The findings show that PAC y FinEs 2 warrant the right to education supported by the attachment of several actors and sectors to their objectives. The quality of the contribution of alliances differs according the political-institutional design, kind of organization and forms of co-management: PAC shows a strategic co-management and FinEs 2 and administrative co-management.

scholarly journals Efektivitas Pilkada Serentak Tahun 2020 di Tengah Pandemi Covid-19 Indonesia

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 1176-1183
Author(s):  
Ika Prawitasari ◽  
Dewi Erowati
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Voting Rights ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Printed Media ◽  
The Right ◽  
Regional Elections ◽  
Indicators Of Success ◽  
Supporting Materials ◽  
Technical Guidance

This study examines effectiveness 2020 simultaneous regional elections in the midst of Covid-19 pandemic. In addition, indicators of success Pilkada are integrity organizers and public participation in exercising their voting rights. Therefore, looking at 2020 Pilkada which was held in midst Covid-19 pandemic is still an important discourse. This study used descriptive qualitative method. Data collection techniques use primary data obtained from webinars on local political democracy during pandemic and secondary data by citing books, journals, documents and printed media, as well as other supporting materials. The results showed that the 9 December 2020 Pilkada had several threats and opportunities, including; First, threat of high number of positive cases of Covid-19, limited time, process updating voter data, technical guidance for ad hoc administrators, logistical budgets, education and political outreach. Second, opportunities for technology and information as means of political education and political socialization. Third, organizing regional elections by using e-voting, being the right recommendation, seeing use of e-voting can preserve people's voting rights and inhibit spread of Covid-19.

scholarly journals Zločin genocida: međunarodno pravo i pravo Bosne i Hercegovine / Crime of Genocide - International Legislation and Legislation of Bosnia and Herzegovina

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dragan Jovašević ◽  
Marina Simović
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Crime ◽  
Strict Sense ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Human Group ◽  
World War ◽  
The Right ◽  
Criminal Legislation

Both international and national criminal legislation, considers genocide as particularly severe and socially dangerous criminal offence (crime). It is the worst form of violation of the right to life and existence of entire human groups - national, racial, religious or ethnic. This is the crime of crimes and is considered to be the most severe crime of today. In the strict sense, this is an international crime which by giving orders or taking immediate actions fully or partially destroys an entire human group. Therefore, after the World War II, on the basis of international documents adopted within the framework of the organization of UN, all modern countries included genocide in their national legislations (basic or special) as the most severe crime threatened by the most severe types and measures of sanctions. A similar situation exists in Bosnia and Herzegovina as well. However, this crime is known to numerous international documents establishing primary jurisdiction of international (permanent or temporary - ad hoc) military or civilian courts.

Proportionality and Justification

2019 ◽  
pp. 159-196
Author(s):  
Matthias Klatt
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cultural Relativity ◽  
Rational Application ◽  
Global Constitutionalism ◽  
Normative Basis ◽  
Space Of Reasons ◽  
Proportionality Test ◽  
The Right

This chapter presents a normative defense of proportionality’s absolute validity, arguing that proportionality is one of the central rules that establish the space of reasons. Proportionality enables the construction of a justified and well-founded basis for the rational application of human rights. The normative basis of proportionality lies in a moral right to justification. To explore this idea, the chapter begins by explaining the meaning of a right to justification. Next, it explores how it relates to the proportionality test. Building upon the distinction between internal and external justification of rights reasoning, it also addresses the universality problem that consists in doubts about the global validity of the right to justification. It defends the international and transnational validity of the right to justification against claims to cultural relativity by discussing the application of human rights. This, in turn, allows a defense of Forst’s right to justification as a robust fundament of discursive global constitutionalism.

Formal Principles: Some Replies to Critics

2021 ◽  
pp. 175-189
Author(s):  
Robert Alexy
Keyword(s):  
Pivotal Role ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Combination Model ◽  
Rational Application ◽  
Epistemic Model ◽  
Separation Model

One of the main theses of principles theory is that the rational application of constitutional rights presupposes proportionality analysis and that proportionality analysis necessarily includes balancing. The objection of over-constitutionalization has been raised to this thesis. Principles theory has attempted to reply to this objection with a theory of discretion in which formal principles, in particular, the principle of democracy, play a pivotal role. The theory of formal principles, however, has led in recent decades to more questions than answers. With respect to constitutional rights, two models have been and remain in competition: the combination model and the separation model. The first model balances formal principles in combination with substantive principles, whereas the second model separates the balancing of formal principles from the balancing of substantive principles. It is argued in this chapter that both models are mistaken, and an epistemic model is proposed that finds expression in the epistemic variables of the Weight Formula.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document