Suchergebnisse

"This book considers how the social construction of crime and the criminalising of political expression impact upon different stages in a violent political conflict. The freedom to express our political opinions is regarded as an essential human right throughout most of the world, and yet, in defence of our security, governments often place various restrictions on it. This book directly considers what these restrictions are in the context of deeply divided societies to understand how they impact upon intergroup relations in four different contexts: nonviolent movements, counter-insurgency, peace negotiations, and post-settlement peacebuilding. Drawing on an extensive body of original interviews and archival material, the volume analyses this relationship through an in-depth consideration of Northern Ireland and South Africa, followed by a wider analysis of Turkey, Sri Lanka, Belgium, and Canada. The overarching argument is that the implications of criminalising political expression depend on both its 'target' and the wider social reality it contributes towards. This book will be of much interest to students of conflict resolution, transitional justice, law and International Relations"--

The "equal terms" rule of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) prohibits federal, state, and local governments from enacting land use regulations that place religious assemblies or institutions on less than equal terms with nonreligious assemblies or institutions. The plain language of RLUIPA makes it clear that the equal terms rule prohibits unequal treatment of religious assemblies and institutions as compared to non-religious assemblies and institutions. RLUIPA's legislative history further reveals that Congress enacted the equal terms rule to counter zoning laws that favor secular assemblies and institutions over religious assemblies and institutions. Accordingly, federal courts have interpreted the equal terms rule to require that zoning laws treat religious assemblies and institutions no less favorably than non-religious assemblies and institutions, except where such laws are narrowly tailored to advance state interests of the highest order. In Midrash Sephardi, Inc. v. Town of Surfside, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that a zoning law allowing private clubs and lodges in a business district while prohibiting synagogues and churches violated the equal terms rule. The Midrash court further held that the zoning law was not narrowly tailored because private clubs and lodges did not further the purpose of the business district any more than synagogues and churches. The city of Seattle prohibits the establishment of new religious facilities in industrial zones, while allowing the establishment of new lecture and meeting halls and new community centers. This Comment argues that Seattle's disparate treatment of religious facilities as compared to lecture and meeting halls and community centers violates the equal terms rule under a plain reading of RLUIPA, as supported by the Act's legislative history. In fact, Seattle's laws are analogous to a number of zoning laws that were amended in response to equal terms lawsuits. Seattle's laws also bear close ...