The Public Right and Wrongs: Tort Theory and the Problem of Public Nuisance

Tort theory over the past two decades has been characterized by a fruitful dialectic between two models. Instrumentalism, especially, in its deterrence mode, has been promoted by a wide coalition of scholars and jurists. In response, various critics of instrumentalism have argued for the autonomy of tort law, first under the umbrella of corrective justice and later under civil recourse. The success of civil recourse depends in part on its ability to explain emerging areas of focus in tort law. One such area is public nuisance, which, despite some setbacks, is viewed by the plaintiffs bar, state actors, and some members of the academy as an effective tool to address significant social problems, such as the opioid crisis. This article asks whether, and how, civil recourse theory can accommodate modern public nuisance law.

Might and Right

The chapter sets out to critically discuss the methodological approach that Ripstein chooses when reconstructing Kant’s position and in particular how he defines and relates “constitutive” and “regulative” principles with respect to peace and public right. Forst focuses on what he calls a paradox of peace: peace is supposed to avoid, end, or overcome war as the practice of might making right; but the principle of peace itself at crucial points seems to require us to accept that might makes right, at least as far as the past is concerned. Specifically, Forst offers a different interpretation of the relevant constitutive principle in the realm of the practical, namely that of freedom, and he invites Ripstein to move beyond Kant in questioning rather than affirming the paradox of peace.

Introduction

This chapter sets up the thesis of the book: Crime coverage practices serve as a lens to consider underlying cultural attitudes to concepts like privacy, public, public right to know, and justice. Differing decisions, for example, about whether to name suspects, suggest varying beliefs about the value of privacy and the public right to know. The chapter outlines the methodology and situates the work in relation to Daniel Hallin and Paulo Mancini, whose book Comparing Media Practices influenced the selection of countries, as well as the initial premises. We name the ten countries that comprise the basis of our comparison, and briefly introduce our three media models: the Protectors (Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden), the Watchdogs (the United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, and the United States), and the Ambivalents (Spain, Italy, and Portugal). The chapter concludes with a brief overview of individual book chapters.

SHARIA GOVERNANCE SEBAGAI SOLUSI MENGATASI PENGARUH NEGATIF KARAKTERISTIK SOSIAL-POLITIK TERHADAP PENGUNGKAPAN I-CSR BANK SYARIAH

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji pengaruh karakteristik sosial politik terhadap tingkat pengungkapan Islamic Corporate Social Responsibility (I-CSR), dan menguji apakah mekanisme sharia governance dapat memoderasi pengaruh dari karakteristik sosial politik terhadap pengungkapan I-CSR bank syariah. Data yang digunakan yaitu laporan tahunan 52 Bank syariah dari 13 negara selama periode 2014–2016. Karakter sosial politik diproksikan dengan nilai Public Right and Civil Liberties (PRCL), sedangkan pengungkapan I-CSR diukur dengan analisis konten berdasarkan indeks pengungkapan I-CSR yang dikembangkan berdasarkan standar AAOIFI. Pengujian statistika menggunakan metode FGLS dengan metode analisis Moderated Regression Analysis (MRA). Hasil penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa rata-rata pengungkapan I-CSR bank syariah masih relatif rendah yaitu sekitar 44%, namun cenderung menunjukan tren yang meningkat dari tahun ke tahun. Hasil pengujian hipotesis menunjukan bahwa karakteristik sosial politik yang diproksikan dengan nilai PRCL berpengaruh terhadap tingkat pengungkapan I-CSR. Pengujian lebih lanjut menunjukan sharia governance berperan sebagai pure moderator.

The Range of Applying the Foreign Law in the Jordanian Judiciary Against the Civil Proceedings Caused Due to a Crime

The research aims to clarify the legal solution about an important issue, which is to identify which legal rule needs to be applied to a civil lawsuit that has been raised based on a public right lawsuit in the criminal court, it was noticed that there is a Jurisprudential and Judicial Dispute while dealing with this subject, therefore the research addressed the differences in opinions and the Jordanian legislator's point of view about this matter. At the end of the research, a conclusion for the need for a clear and explicit provision statement to melt this dispute.

Public Right

This chapter engages complexities concerning systemic justice in relation to sex, love, and gender. It shows how philosophical ideas in Kant’s account of public right in combination with his full account of human nature, yields a position that can take on systemic issues of dependency (including the state’s right and duty to fight poverty) and oppression (including through public laws protecting sexual or gendered minorities). In addition, I show how Kant’s account of different kinds of external forces people may find themselves subjected to—“barbaric,” “anarchic,” “despotic,” and “republican”—help us capture the moral complexity facing oppressed and vulnerable populations in different legal-political circumstances. Finally, I argue that the ultimate aim for states is to establish a legal-political whole characterized by the citizens governing themselves wisely through active participation in public debate and public institutions.

Freedom in the External Relation of All Human Beings: On Kant’s Cosmopolitanism

An influential interpretation of Kant’s Doctrine of Right suggests that the relationship between public right and freedom is constitutive rather than instrumental. The focus has been on domestic right and members’ relations to their own state. This has resulted in a statist bias which has not adequately dealt with the fact that Kant regards public right as a system composed of three levels – domestic, international and cosmopolitan right. This article suggests that the constitutive relationship is between all levels of right, on the one hand, and ‘freedom in the external relation’ of all human beings, on the other hand.