Technological Disasters, Litigation Stress, and the Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms
In: Law & policy, Band 26, Heft 2, S. 289-307
ISSN: 0265-8240
226616 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Law & policy, Band 26, Heft 2, S. 289-307
ISSN: 0265-8240
In: California Western International Law Journal, Band 43, Heft 1
SSRN
Working paper
In: Library of Islamic law 6
Introduction -- The Muslim community in Britain -- Overview of the Hounslow Muslim community -- The Sharia, religious law of Muslims -- The Muslim Law (Shariah) Council (UK) -- The many faces of ADR in Hounslow -- The case for court-invoked adjudication -- Towards an Islamic model of ADR -- Policy considerations.
Blog: Völkerrechtsblog
The post Dispute Resolution Mechanisms and Competence-competence in Multi-Level Systems: Workshop for Early Career Researchers appeared first on Völkerrechtsblog.
In: Verfassung und Recht in Übersee: VRÜ = World comparative law : WCL, Band 44, Heft 1, S. 81-98
ISSN: 0506-7286
In: Verfassung und Recht in Übersee: VRÜ = World comparative law : WCL, Band 44, Heft 1, S. 81-98
ISSN: 0506-7286
World Affairs Online
In: P. Malcontent, Facing the Past: Amending historical injustices through instruments of transitional justice, Antwerp: Intersentia, 2016 Forthcoming
SSRN
In: Research policy: policy, management and economic studies of science, technology and innovation, Band 47, Heft 6, S. 1096-1110
ISSN: 1873-7625
In: Jiaxiang Hu and Jie (Jeanne) Huang, Dispute Resolution Mechanisms and Organizations in the Implementation of "One Belt, One Road" Initiative: Whence and Whither, 52 Journal of World Trade 815, 815-837 (August 2018), SSCI, ISSN 1011-6702.
SSRN
Restorative justice is an alternative way of thinking about crime and justice which views crime as a violation of a relationship among victims, offenders and community instead of putting a state as a sole victim, and has the objective of "putting right" or "healing" the wrong and to restore the broken relationship in the community. Unlike the restorative justice perspective, the Ethiopian criminal justice system views crime primarily as an offense against the state and a violation of its criminal laws, either in the form of commission or omission. Under the Ethiopian criminal justice system, neither the victims are given an opportunity to fully participate in the process nor is there a legal procedure which enables the public prosecutor to adequately protect the victim`s interest. The focus of the public prosecutor is to convict the accused\offender and get him\her punished, instead of encouraging him\her to take responsibility to undo the wrong he\she has committed. The Ethiopian criminal justice system also excludes the community from participation; and if the community is said to be participating in the process, it is only in the form of providing information about the commission of the crime and appearing as a witness in the criminal proceedings. On the other hand, the customary dispute resolution mechanisms of Ethiopia are playing an important role in resolving crimes of any kind and maintaining peace and stability in the community, though they are not recognized by law. The customary dispute resolution mechanisms are run by elders; involve reconciliation of the conflicting parties and their respective families using different customary rituals; emphasizing on the restitution of victims and reintegration of offenders, and aims at restoring the previous peaceful relationship within the community as well as maintaining their future peaceful relationships by avoiding the culturally accepted practices of revenge. However, despite the fact that Ethiopia`s indigenous knowledge base of customary justice practice is an enormous advantage to implement the ideals of restorative justice in the Ethiopian criminal justice system, restorative justice has not yet taken root in the criminal justice system of Ethiopia. This thesis, therefore, examines whether there is a place for restorative justice in the Ethiopian criminal justice system; examines the compatibility of the Ethiopian customary dispute resolution mechanisms with the core values and principles of the modern restorative justice systems; and assesses the potentials to implement restorative justice ideals by accommodating the customary dispute resolution mechanisms with the formal criminal justice system in the future. The study is conducted based on interviews, legislative analysis, and analysis of other relevant literature. The findings of the study show that the notion of restorative justice is almost non-existent in the current Ethiopian criminal justice system though it manifests some elements of restorativeness. It also shows that the Ethiopian customary dispute resolution mechanisms are compatible with the values and principles of restorative justice though they are not legally recognized and well organized programs; and that a consensus has recently been reached regarding the importance of using customary dispute resolution mechanisms as a basis to implement restorative justice in the Ethiopian criminal justice system.
BASE
In: Sociology and Anthropology, Band 7, Heft 7, S. 313-326
ISSN: 2331-6187
In: Alternative Dispute Resolution Journal, Band 10, Heft 1, S. 2022
SSRN
In: Maastricht journal of European and comparative law: MJ, Band 25, Heft 1, S. 108-117
ISSN: 2399-5548
SOLVIT is an informal out-of-court dispute-resolution tool between the EU Member States and Norway, Lichtenstein and Iceland to practically help citizens and businesses when encountering problems in cross-border situations with their rights enshrined in EU legislation. In light of the recently adopted Commission Communication on the reinforcement of SOLVIT, 1 the authors analyse its key characteristics and challenges. The authors concludes that an enhanced role of SOLVIT can efficiently promote a culture of compliance and smart enforcement of EU law in the Single Market together with the Member States.
In: Journal of politics and law: JPL, Band 2, Heft 4
ISSN: 1913-9055
Disputes are one of the major factors negatively affecting the development process of any nation. They divert resources that could otherwise be used productively; hence, there appears to be general agreement on their undesirability (Alexander 2005). Disputeresolution practices and peace-building mechanisms remain problematic for most societies in the world including those in Africa, as most of them are trying to imitate Western modalities instead of using their own indigenous knowledge systems and skills. The dispute-resolution practices of the ancient Ethiopians in have been established for many thousands of years, and have been used to prevent loss of life and the destruction of property. This paper reveals that the dispute-resolution practices of the Afar people of Ethiopia significantly contributed to the development process. The article reveals that it is difficult to attain development without developing dispute resolution practices and it also shows that it is difficult, though not impossible, to resolve disputes without assuring development by eliminating poverty. Thus, it concludes that the ancient Aksumite, which was one of the first four great civilizations on earth, must have developed a unique type of dispute resolution practices that enabled Ethiopia of that time to be one of the leading countries in the globe during that time. No doubt every nation has its own indigenous dispute-resolution practices. It is thus possible to resolve disputes in by using indigenous knowledge systems, instead of using Western modalities. In this paper, the dispute-resolution practices of the Afar people of Ethiopia are discussed. ; https://doi.org/10.4102/td.v10i4.94
BASE