THE DRAFT CONSTITUTION OF THE CHECHEN REPUBLIC IN THE ASSESSMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE VENICE COMMISSION

Author(s):  
V. V. Goshulyak ◽  
◽  
E. V. Portnova ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-179
Author(s):  
John M Williams

The Attorney-General: [Clark, told the Legislative Assembly that] … Sir Samuel Griffith, Mr Kingston and himself knew what they were doing. They went to work with their eyes open and he claimed part of the responsibility, or glory, or whatever they might call it. Mr Dobson: A march towards republicanism. The Attorney-General: said they could call it what they liked. If it was republicanism, then Sir Samuel Griffith was a good republican, and he was as good a one as he [Clark]. A report of the debate on the Draft Constitution in the Tasmanian Legislative Assembly. Hobart Mercury 18 August, 1897.


2013 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald James Larson

By way of framing Manan Ahmed Asif's intriguing personal (and poetic) reflection entitled “Idol in the Archive” in this current issue of the Journal of Asian Studies, it must always be remembered that in August 1947, the old British Raj gave birth to not one but two independent nation-states, namely India and Pakistan. India became a “Sovereign Democratic Republic” when its Constitution came into effect on January 26, 1950, following adoption of its draft Constitution by its Constituent Assembly on November 26, 1949. Pakistan took a bit longer, becoming the “Islamic Republic of Pakistan” when its first Constitution came into effect on March 23, 1956. Furthermore, of course, Pakistan underwent secession of its Eastern Province with the founding of the “People's Republic of Bangladesh” in 1971. It is hardly an exaggeration to suggest that partition is the defining event of modern independent India and Pakistan, and, more than that, continues to be the defining event of India and Pakistan even after more than fifty years of independence.


1954 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 418-421

The Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration held its fifth session at Geneva from April 16 to 24, 1953. Representatives were present from 21 of the 22 member governments, and several non-member governments and agencies sent observers. The subcommittee on finances reported that gross income had amounted to $26,114,357 in 1952, and gross expenditures totaled $19,446,549, leaving a budgetary surplus of $6,667,808. Reimbursements for movements completed in 1952 had been “most satisfying”, but it was anticipated that a slower rate of reimbursement would prevail in 1953, and that additional funds would therefore be required. The subcommittee also re-ported that between February 1, 1952, and December 21, 1952, 77,626 persons, among them 31,226 refugees, had been moved from Europe. The Director, Mr. Hugh Gibson, reported the following developments in the activities of ICEM: 1) provision had been made for training building laborers in Italy destined to migrate to Brazil (in collaboration with the Brazilian and Italian governments and the International Labor Organization), and for a number of preselection projects; 2) in Greece, in collaboration with UNESCO, a language training program for prospective migrants to Australia had been initiated; 3) Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Venezuela were making “definite progress” in the area of land resettlement; and 4) other projects of a “technical nature” were being considered. The fifth session also studied a draft constitution for the Committee which had been prepared by the Director at the request of the fourth session. The delegates concluded that eventual acceptance of the constitution by member governments would give the Committee “more stability and an anticipated life span of from three to five years”, and decided to refer the draft agreement to governments for comment before the next session of ICEM.


2004 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Anthony Arnull

The purpose of this article is to consider the effect of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe on the European Court of Justice (ECJ). At the time of writing, the future of the draft Constitution is somewhat uncertain. Having been finalised by the Convention on the Future of Europe in the summer of 2003 and submitted to the then President of the European Council, it formed the basis for discussion at an intergovernmental conference (IGC) which opened in October 2003. Hopes that the text might be finalised by the end of the year were dashed when a meeting of the IGC in Brussels in December 2003 ended prematurely amid disagreement over the weighting of votes in the Council. However, it seems likely that a treaty equipping the European Union with a Constitution based on the Convention’s draft will in due course be adopted and that the provisions of the draft dealing with the ECJ will not be changed significantly. Even if either assumption proves misplaced, those provisions will remain of interest as reflecting one view of the position the ECJ might occupy in a constitutional order of the Union.


2004 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-46
Author(s):  
Dominique Rousseau

In a text which claims constitutional rank the principle of citizenship, in all meanings of the term, is fundamental. If a treaty has as its first reference the State, a constitution naturally has as a reference also the citizen. Indeed in the European Constitution provisions abound referring to the citizen. In Part I they are to be found in Titles II and VI; in Part II there is the whole Title V and in Part III there is Title II. As citizenship is everywhere in the Draft, this would deserve it the rank of Constitution that it claims.This first impression, however, is not supported by reading the different actual provisions in the Draft Constitution concerning citizenship. They fall short on three grounds.


2019 ◽  
pp. 302-342
Author(s):  
Isser Woloch

This chapter argues that the restoration of democracy in France started in earnest only with the election in October 1945 of a Constituent Assembly. When voters rejected the Constituent Assembly's draft constitution in the requisite referendum, another six months elapsed before a second Constituent Assembly reached sufficient compromises to produce a new draft, which won voter approval by a thin margin. During the long provisional interval, the CNR Common Program helped undergird Charles de Gaulle's unity government and subsequent tripartite coalitions after the general abruptly exited the scene. However, until the fall of 1947, when a great strike wave brought the experiment to an explosive end, tripartism remained the political framework for France's postwar moment. Successive governments addressed the intractable challenges of postwar recovery while they sought to implement the “peaceful revolution” imagined by CNR in such matters as economic controls, social security, housing, and educational opportunity.


2015 ◽  
pp. 36-51
Author(s):  
RUDOLF DUR SCHNUTZ

The recent move towards the individual access to constitutional justice is a progress for protection of human rights in Europe. The explicit purpose of these efforts is to settle human rights issues on the national level and to reduce the number of cases at the Strasbourg Court. Such individual complaints have to be designed in a way that makes them an effective remedy which has to be exhausted before a case can be brought before the European Court of Human Rights. This paper points out the current state of these improvements on the national level in a difficult context on the European level and the recommendations of the Venice Commission in this regard.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document