scholarly journals The concept of rule of law and the notion of justice in the survival of the Nigerian State

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-32
Author(s):  
John Alade Ayodele

Upholding the rule of law and adherence to the principles of justice play an important role in the economic and social development of a Nation, this is because rule of law and justice to all guarantee peace, security and stability. For a Nation to be ranked among the committee of civilized and developed Nations, rule of law and principles of justice must be upheld. Using the doctrinal methodology, this work assessed Nigerian State from the perspective of her adherence to the rule of law and upliftment of justice. This work reaffirms that for Nigeria as a State to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal 16, will depend on her commitment to the notion of the ideal character of the rule of law as a guiding principle for organizing life in society and access to justice as the essential instrument for the protection of human right. The work concluded that upholding law and order, providing predictable and efficient judgments through the institutional framework and attributes believed necessary to actuate the rule of law such as well trained law enforcement officers, functional courts, independent judiciary, comprehensive law and equipped correctional facilities and homes are the things upon which the Nigerian state can continue, prosper and survive.

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 ◽  
pp. 143-147
Author(s):  
Laurence Boisson de Chazournes

The rule of law and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are mutually supportive. Respect for the rule of law is indeed crucial for development issues. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development itself acknowledges, through SDG 16, that access to justice and the rule of law foster sustainable development. The latter ensures that all individuals are treated alike, that they are entitled to the respect of human rights and that the rule of law informs the satisfaction of social, economic, and cultural needs as well as the development of public policies and the governance of competent institutions.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 134-147

An independent judiciary is the guarantor of a democratic state governed by the rule of law, which we strive to build in Ukraine. This independence is ensured, among other things, by a stable and sufficient funding of the national courts, which has become a significant challenge. The resolution of such issues has been sought in recent decades, but the problem of court financing has become especially acute in the context of the economic crisis and the coronavirus pandemic, which occurred in 2020. This has led to somewhat hopeless feelings about the chosen way of forming the policy of Ukrainian courts financing and its implementation. Our study attempts to analyze certain aspects of the existing mechanism of financing the judiciary in Ukraine, in particular, through the prism of financial support for judges and assistant judges during the coronavirus pandemic. The functions which they perform can be attributed to the main ones during the administration of justice. The authors propose the analysis of the case on the protection of the right of assistant judges to a decent salary, which lasted for years in all courts of the state. In connection with the coronavirus pandemic in Ukraine, a law was passed reducing the salaries of judges, which is also analyzed in the article. The search for a new, more modern approach to resolving the issue of a stable financial independence of the judiciary will help to solve urgent problems and ensure a real rule of law in Ukraine. In particular, our proposed approach to the formation of financial autonomy of the judiciary in Ukraine is suggested in this study. Key words: judiciary, access to justice during pandemic, COVID Justice, financing of the judiciary, independence of the judiciary, financial autonomy of the courts.


1999 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Gavison

A discussion of the role of courts in Israel today demands some introductory remarks. The Supreme Court and the President of the Supreme Court enjoy great acclaim and respect within Israel and abroad, but have recently come under attack from a variety of sources. These attacks are often confused, and many of them are clearly motivated by narrow partisan interests and an inherent objection to the rule of law and judicial review. But these motives do not necessarily weaken the dangers which the attacks pose to the legitimacy of the courts in general, and the Supreme Court in particular, in Israel's public life. The fact that in some sectors extremely harsh criticism of the court is seen to be an electoral boost, testifies to the serious and dangerous nature of the threat. This situation creates a dilemma for those who want a strong and independent judiciary, believing it is essential for freedom and democracy, but who also believe that, during the last two decades, the courts have transgressed limits they should respect. The dilemma becomes especially acute when the political echo sounds out in one's criticism, and when one is part of the group that believes that the legal and the judicial systems have made some contribution to the prevalence of these hyperbolic and dangerous attacks, as I am.


1969 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 231-261
Author(s):  
William Lucy

After elucidating and defending an account of access to justice that is consistent with most uses of that notion in academic and policy discourse, this essay examines some arguments that attempt to show the value of access to justice. It shows that one such argument (from non-domination) does a better job of illustrating access to justice’s normative significance than two frequently invoked competitors (the arguments from the rule of law and equality). In an era in which access to justice seems genuinely in peril, it is vital to appreciate the normative cost of its restriction or denial.          


Author(s):  
Gabdrakhman H. Valiev ◽  
Sergey V. Kondratyuk ◽  
Natalia A. Prodanova ◽  
Irina A. Babalikova ◽  
Kermen I. Makaeva ◽  
...  

The problem of the relationship of law and order is relevant to any modern society. The article tries to analyze this relationship, taking into account judicial, police and other activities. The named concepts are closely interconnected, but are not identical. They are correlated as cause and effect: there is a rule of law, there is no rule of law. One suggests the other. The rule of law as concrete reality logically precedes the rule of law as a doctrine, the connection here is hard, causal. The process is one. Law and order: a real indicator of the state of legality, reflects the degree of compliance with the laws, the requirements of all legal regulations. It is concluded that the rule of law is the end result of the implementation of legal requirements and, at the same time, the objective of legal regulation, since it is for the formation and maintenance of the rule of law that laws are issued, thus like other regulatory legal acts, various institutions and bodies and, above all, the justice system, the control system, various human rights organizations and social movements.


Author(s):  
Florent Guy ATANGANA MVOGO

Through the constitutional law of January 18, 1996, Cameroon endowed itself with a constitutional justice. The question is to what extent do the mechanisms of access to constitutional justice contribute to the democratic governance of the country? To analyse this fact, it appears that the mechanisms of access to constitutional justice in Cameroon are highly prohibitive and deny the rule of law and participatory democracy; all things that are resolutely situated at the antipodes of a democratic governance.


Author(s):  
Howard G. Brown

The Thermidorian National Convention, despite some efforts at ‘transitional justice’, failed to master the legacies of the Terror. Therefore, the fledgling regime needed to impose the new republican political order while also restoring basic law and order—two tightly entwined tasks. The Constitution of 1795 articulated a liberal democracy based on the rule of law, but political instability and endemic lawlessness led first to multiple violations of the constitution, especially in the wake of elections, and a steady shift from democratic republicanism toward ‘liberal authoritarianism’. This shift received added impetus during waves of repression intended to restore order on strictly republican terms. The result was the creation a new ‘security state’, one that combined coercive policing, administrative surveillance, exceptional justice, and militarized repression. The emergence of the new system helped to restore order, and thereby to legitimize the Consulate, but it also paved the road to personal dictatorship in 1802.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Opačić ◽  
◽  
Vladimir Vrhovšek ◽  
◽  

We, as the authors of this text, have found it important to point out the close connection between law and justice, theory and practice, because citizens go to court for justice. The judge says what justice is. However, when the legal norm is available and well known to the persons, to whom it refers, and when it is predictable and the case law is uniform, the persons to whom the legal norm refers, can know their rights and obligations concretely, and thus know how to treat them. In order to that they must behave and anticipate the consequences of their behavior. When all the above has been fulfilled, it can be said that the requirements of the rule of law and legal security have been met, so it can be freely said that law and justice are at the "service of the people", through theory and practice. It should be reminded that the precision of the legal norm is one of the basic elements of the rule of law and is a key factor for the emergence and maintenance of the legitimacy of the legal order, which applies to all branches of law, and that court decisions are binding on all.


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 171-186
Author(s):  
Frauke Lachenmann

The negotiation process of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGS) process was extremely ambitious. It sought to remedy all the shortcomings of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGS) by ensuring transparency, ownership of the countries of the Global South, strong involvement of civil society groups and stakeholders, and creating a truly transformative set of sustainable development goals. Yet, it did not manage to avoid all the mistakes that were characteristic of the formulation of the MDGS. In addition, it struggled with its very own problems. The article traces the developments and debates that led to the formulation of Goal 16 on the rule of law. It shows that the success of this ambitious goal largely depends on the refinement of the indicator framework and the review mechanism.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document