Sędziowie sądów specjalnych III Rzeszy i ich „zdrowe poczucie narodowe”

German lawyers jointly supported the National Socialist authorities, assuming that the law was Hitler’s will, resulting from the new criminal law being introduced, which violated the principles of nullum crimen sine lege and nulla poena sine lege. Judges of special courts (Sondergerichte) in the Third Reich applied criminal law according to a “healthy national sense” (das gesunde Volksempfinden), which usually meant heavy penalties, contrary to the elementary sense of justice. It was adopted as a rule that a crime is not only what is forbidden by regulations, but also everything that the authorities have not consented to. For any behaviour, even if not prohibited by law, the judges could sentence defendants to draconian punishments, at their “national discretion.” Law professors justified the lawlessness created in the Third Reich by claiming that it was a rule of law (Rechtsstaat). The criminal law for Poles and Jews of 1941 provided for the death penalty for all manifestations of “hostile attitude” towards the German occupier. Polish forced labourers in the Reich were punished with death for violations of discipline and disobedience to the German oppressors. Poles displaced from occupied Poland were assigned to work in enterprises and farms in the Reich. The special court in Breslau sentenced to death a Pole who defended his pregnant beloved woman, forced to work beyond her strength and abused by the German housewife, as well as the unfortunate woman herself. The same court sentenced a Pole to death for trying to protect his 13-year-old son from a German farmer, who was forcing the child to perform work he was physically unable to carry out. Special-court judges continued their professional careers in West Germany after the war and did not bear any responsibility for their crimes.

The history of Community Interpreting studies in Japan

The study of CI in Japan began in the late 1980s, and its first researchers were law professors and attorneys who advocated human rights. They discussed the plight of non-Japanese-speaking defendants in legal settings. Subsequently, interpreters and theorists of interpretation discussed ethics, cultural issues, training and so on. Recently, however , a new wave of studies has emerged, with a greaterfocus on linguistic approaches such as discourse analysis, corpus studies etc. This paper willfirst briefly review the earlier CI research in general and thenfocus on legal interpreting, which is the most advanced and noteworthy area of CIstudies in Japan.

The Voices of European Law: Legislators, Judges and Law Professors

European Union legislators, CJEU judges and EU law scholars have produced streams of texts which determine both what EU law is and how it is perceived. We explore what these distinct “voices” tell us about the EU’s legal and policy priorities using a mega corpus compiling more than 200,000 legislative acts, 55,000 court rulings and opinions, and 4,000 articles from a leading EU law journal. Applying an unsupervised machine learning technique known as probabilistic topic modelling, we find that economic integration remains the focus of EU law, but that scholars tend to emphasize rights issues more and ignore certain topics, such as farming regulations, almost entirely. The relationship among these partly interdependent, partly autonomous voices, we suggest, can be conceptualized in terms of co-evolution. Legislation influences issue attention on the CJEU, which, in turn, influences what law professors choose to write about.

Will Machines Replace Us? Machine-Authored Texts and the Future of Scholarship

We present here the first machine-generated law review article. Our self-interest motivates us to believe that knowledge workers who write complex articles drawing upon years of research and effort are safe from AI developments. However, how reasonable is it to persist in this belief given recent advances in AI research? With that topic in mind, we caused GPT-3, a state-of-the-art AI, to generate a paper that explains “why humans will always be better lawyers, drivers, CEOs, presidents, and law professors than artificial intelligence and robots can ever hope to be.” The resulting paper, with no edits apart from giving it a title and bolding the headings generated by GPT-3, is reproduced below. It is imperfect in a humorous way. Ironically, it is publishable “as-is” only because it is machine-generated. Nevertheless, the resulting paper is good enough to give us some pause for thought. Although GPT-3 is not up to the task of replacing law review authors currently, we are far less confident that GPT-5 or GPT-100 might not be up to the task in future.

Cannabis policy reform in Germany: Political and constitutional discourses on decriminalisation and regulation strategies

There is relentless discussion in Germany about the right manner to deal with cannabis and its users. In 1994 and 2004, the Federal Constitutional Court reaffirmed the legal appropriateness of prohibition. However, since then, studies and data about the dangers and effects of cannabis use have quieted alarm, and Europe, alongside the once-prohibitive United States, has had its initial experiences with liberalised use of cannabis. Since the founding of the Schildower Kreis, a network of experts from science and practice, 122 German criminal law professors have petitioned the Bundestag for an Enquête Commission. The aim of this paper is, on the one hand, to provide insight into German narcotics law. On the other hand, the political arguments for sticking to prohibition are contrasted with the numerous empirical findings that are now available. The results of the empirical studies now challenge the Federal Constitutional Court and the legislature to review their previous course and possibly break new ground in drug policy. The basis of the Federal Constitutional Court’s decisions no longer exists. The Narcotics Act and constitutional discourse on cannabis prohibition need to be reviewed, as do political arguments about resources and high costs. Indications of a paradigm shift in drug policy, as required by the Global Commission on Drug Policy, are hesitantly appearing in Germany.

Encuesta sobre nación y supranacionalidad

En esta encuesta un grupo de profesores de Derecho Constitucional contestan un conjunto de preguntas sobre el concepto de nación, el papel que ha desempeñado tal concepto en el desarrollo histórico del constitucionalismo y en el desarrollo de los movimientos nacionalistas, y la relación actual que mantiene con la idea de constitución; sobre el significado del término «nación» en la constitución española, y el del término «nacionalidades»; y, finalmente, sobre la idea de supranacionalidad que define el proceso de integración europea y su relación con el concepto de nación.In this academic survey a group of Constitutional Law Professors answer some questions about the concept of nation, its role in the historical evolution of constitutionalism and of nationalist movements, and its relation nowadays with the idea of constitution; about the meaning of the term «nation» in the Spanish constitution and of the term «nationalities»; and finally about the idea of supranationality that defines the European integration process and its relationship with the concept of nation.