scholarly journals Returning Home: The Ambivalent Assyrian Experience in Turkey

Poligrafi ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 153-176
Author(s):  
Abdulmesih BarAbraham

Discrimination and precarious living conditions in Tur Abdin, in southeastern Turkey, prompted Assyrians, indigenous Christian ethnic people to the country, to leave their homeland for Europe in the early 1960s. The process of migration continued for several decades and intensified with the militarization of the eastern provinces during the fight against the Kurdish PKK. Many Assyrian villages had to be abandoned. With an appeal formulated in a circular letter by Turkey’s then Prime Minister Bülent Ecevit in 2001, the Turkish government encouraged Assyrians abroad to return to their former homeland, assuring them that their security and rights as citizens would be guaranteed by the state. At the beginning of the new millennium, the situation in Tur Abdin seemed noticeably improved. The end of the state of emergency in the eastern provinces and the application of rule of law in the wake of the reforms in the context of EU accession process contributed to this. Many of the Assyrians who emigrated re-visited their former villages, but also tried to rebuild churches and their mostly dilapidated houses. Clarification of ownership of land and properties after occupation and changes of legal basis became a key issue.

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 49-77
Author(s):  
Mirella Korzeniewska-Wiszniewska

The current Serbian authorities (aligned with the Serbian ProgressiveParty) have pushed Serbia towards effective reforms over the past severalyears and improved its image on the international arena through an intensifieddiplomatic offensive after 2015. This has led to a situation in which theSerbian state became a political and economic partner in both regional andintegration projects. The latter is demonstrated by the arduous but progressiveaccession process to the European Union.After 2000, international and Serbian public opinion greeting the end of theregime of Slobodan Milošević expected rapid democratisation of the statebased on statements by Serbian politicians who had declared a West Europeancourse of the state. The short-lived rule of Prime Minister Zoran Đinđić,confirmed this; however, the policy of his successors was no longer so unambiguous.For almost a decade, Serbia oscillated between populism anddeclared democratisation, without making major changes, expected by bothsociety and the European Union.When after the year 2012 the Serbian Progressive Party came to power (theparty was founded as a conservative grouping and had radical roots), itseemed that the Serbian state would be pushed towards a more conservative,anti-European and nationalist direction. However, that did not happen.Opinion about the last six years of the group’s rule is varied. This paper aimsto try to answer the question whether during the party’s rule, Serbia has beendemocratising and whether in this era of nationalist movements and populism,the country has a chance at real democratisation and finishing the processof accession to the EU?


Yuridika ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 663
Author(s):  
Iwan Satriawan ◽  
Devi Seviyana

The research aims to analyze the power and limit of the state and whether Indonesia has properly adopted the concept of powers and limits during state emergency of COVID-19 pandemic. The method of the research was normative legal research which used statute and case approach were employed for data analysis. The result shows that a state may apply some types of power in an emergency condition. However, in using its powers, the government must consider principle of limits in a state of emergency. In fact, Indonesia does not properly adopt the balance of power and limit in the state of emergency during COVID-19 pandemic. It is true that the government may take actions to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the State cannot exceed the limitations of using powers in accordance with state emergency principle. There was a tendency to exceed the limits by the State during the pandemic. The State has violated some state of emergency principles during COVID-19 pandemic such as temporary, the rule of law, necessity, proportionally, intangibility, constitutionalism, harmony, and supervision. The research recommends that the Government and the House of Representatives (the DPR) in the future should obey the state of emergency principles, particularly in terms of state power limits to respect constitutional principles and rule of law. In addition, individuals, groups of people, or organizations may submit judicial review of laws or regulations that violate the state of emergency principles in handling pandemic in the light of protecting the fundamental rights of citizens.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 12-62
Author(s):  
Raina Nikolova

The article analyzes the Bulgarian administrative legal framework on emergencies (state of emergency, crisis management and overcoming, emergency situation and emergency epidemic situation). It indicates the temporary restrictions of the right of free movement of the citizens provided in the legislation. The article discusses the competence of the central executive authorities, interdepartmental bodies and territorial authorities (regional governors and mayors) to deal with a pandemic. The article discusses also the legal basis and justifications for the introduction of the curfew by some of the regional governors and mayors during the state of emergency, caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19).


Author(s):  
Marc de Wilde

AbstractThe article analyzes the debate on 'constitutional dictatorship' that took place at the first annual conference of the Association of German Constitutional Lawyers in Jena in 1924. In their keynote lectures, Carl Schmitt and Erwin Jacobi argued that Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution authorized the President of the Reich to derogate from the rule-of-law provisions of the constitution if this was necessary to save its 'political substance'. Advocating a 'doctrine of derogation', they implicitly criticized one of the main methodological assumptions of legal positivism, i.e., that legal norms and politics, law and power, had to remain strictly separated. They thereby set the stage for the emerging 'conflict of methods and directions' that was to haunt German jurisprudence in subsequent years.


2020 ◽  
pp. 002190962096253
Author(s):  
Francesco Tamburini

This paper shows how the constitutional provisions related to the state of emergency and exception, although they are contained within democratic traditions, were set to operate in Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia as a mechanism of basic control and maintenance of liberal autocracies. The state of emergency model was used for the survival of regimes in times of instability and social unrest, leading in some cases to the suspension of human rights for many years. Nevertheless, these provisions were modified or lifted when the regime had to show a more convincing stake to the democratic process in 2011.


2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrej Zwitter

Legal mechanisms governing the state of emergency can play an important role in authoritarian rule and post-revolutionary transition periods. Egypt has experienced the terror of a regime empowered by emergency law. In Tunisia, emergency law was not so much an issue before but rather after the Jasmine revolution. Given the importance of emergency regulations in both cases, this article provides brief process-oriented accounts of the constitutional reforms triggered by the Arab Spring. It furthermore takes a critical look at how Egypt and Tunisia have redesigned these norms in the latest constitutions of early 2014. On the basis of criteria regarding the rule of law and mechanisms of crisis governance in modern democracies, this article then analyses and evaluates the key elements regarding checks and balances pertaining to emergency regulations in the 2014 constitutions.


Author(s):  
Aleksandrs Kuzņecovs ◽  

Due to rapid spread of Covid-19 worldwide, Latvian government declared the state of emergency. This decision was adopted by the parliament in order to contain the virus and undertake all the necessary measures to prevent its further spread. At the same time, it is clear that government’s actions undertaken within the state of emergency mostly remain unchecked. The absence of any legal basis for the parliament to extend their oversight during the state of emergency makes role of the parliament in these circumstances unclear. The current position of the parliament precludes political and legal liability over the executive and their officers. Lack of the delegated legislative and human rights restriction clause applicable specifically during the state of emergency raises questions regarding powers of the government and parliamentary control during the state of emergency. The article explores the possible solutions to rectify such flaws in the legal system of the Republic Latvia


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-146
Author(s):  
Vicenzo Baldini

The state of emergency that is being experienced has generated a sort of dynamic disorder of complex systematic re-elaboration within the framework of the legal system of the state. We appreciate a permanent tension between the rule of law and the discipline of emergency which manages to find a problematic landing point in the prefiguration of the existence of an emergency legal system, based on a different Grundnorm and parallel to the one that sustains the whole establishment of the legal system of the sources of the state legal order


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document