Search

Online petitions have become a widespread vehicle for contemporary political participation. While research tends to focus on individual factors for potential petitioners that influence signing, less attention has been paid to the influence of the actual text of petitions. This paper uses data from an original web-based survey experiment in Australia and Germany to test the influence of content factors: narratives (i.e., stories based on individual experiences and emotions) and popularity cues (i.e., high numbers of signatures) across two issues: climate change and welfare policy. We find that narratives within petition texts involve readers through the mechanism of transportation and motivate them to sign petitions, as do popularity cues. The effects of narratives were found across both countries but tended to be stronger in Germany than in Australia. We argue that our novel framework can be used for future research on how the presentation of issues shape contemporary political participation.

Contested elections are usually seen as precondition for constituent responsiveness. By contrast, I show that even uncontested elections can create incentives for autocratic regimes to address citizen demands. I propose that closed autocracies engage in cycles of responsiveness before uncontested elections to assure citizens of their competence and raise popular support. They do so to mitigate the short-term destabilizing effects of elections. Analyzing a unique dataset of petitions to the government of the former German Democratic Republic (GDR), I calculate that response times to petitions were up to 31% shorter before the GDR’s uncontested elections. Moreover, I introduce the concept of “substantive responsiveness,” which focuses on the material consequences of responsiveness for petitioners, and show that petitions were 64% more likely to be successful. The paper advances our understanding of electoral mobilization in closed regimes and contributes to an emerging research agenda on responsiveness and accountability in autocracies.

Drawing on published verdicts and interviews, this article studies how political pressures influence criminal adjudication outcomes. While the regime mandates rigid sentencing, judges, acting under...

The article deals with matla‘ (first she‘r – two-line couplet – in a ghazal) of the first ghazal in the Divan by Mirza Asadulla-khan Ghalib (1792–1869) written in Urdu. One of the items usually commented there is the garment made of paper (kāġhażī peirahan). It used to be worn in ancient times by the complainers who appealed to the ruler. The range of complaints in the poetry of Ghalib as well as by other Urdu and Persian poets was wide, however, stable. “Wearing paper clothes”, the petitioner complained about the Almighty, the ill fate, a cruel girl, a lack of understanding of the petitioner’s poetry and the poor remuneration, and finally, about the poet himself, who “dressed” his poems in the paper. Тhese diverse situations form the elements of the literary motif as well as its context and are common in the Persian verses by the predecessors of Ghalib and also himself. Its analysis helps to understand all levels of meaning inherent in one of the most difficult-to-interpret texts by Ghalib.

The dispute resolution mechanism referred to is in the form of a justice system. The court in question is the implementation of the law in terms of concrete demands for rights, which functions are carried out by an independent body and held by the state and are free from any influence whatsoever and by giving binding decisions. The factors that cause civil lawsuits to be rejected at the District Court are the arguments of the claim or fundamentals of the petitioner, do not have a clear legal basis. A lawsuit is considered vague if the argument of the lawsuit does not explain the legal basis and the event behind the suit. The object of the dispute is unclear, the location of the land is not mentioned. There are no equal borders, the lawsuit is unclear, the lawsuit is premature and the lawsuit has expired. In Decision No. 372 / Pdt.G / 2014 / PN.Mdn The Plaintiff feels disadvantaged by the Defendant, but in this case the arguments of the plaintiff's claim are groundless and groundless. Judges' basic considerations in deciding civil case No. 372 / Pdt.G / 2014 / PN.Mdn the object of the lawsuit that is still being examined in another case (Litispendentie exceptie), which is an object in a civil dispute in this case which is the reason for the plaintiff to file alawsuit.

Land use controversies often dog the construction of hydroelectric projects. Many important projects are battling in the tribunals because of Geo-environmental concerns. The paucity of scientific studies objectively investigating the litigations further aggravates the unsolvability of the disputes. The Sawra-Kuddu Hydroelectric project, India, became a subject of litigation when project affected persons filed a suit in the National Green Tribunal questioning the sustainability of the built environment. The litigants petitioned that the additional adit's blasting vibrations can trigger the landslide of slip zone, and Thana village situated above it. The petitioners further claimed that vibrations had cracked the houses. They also asserted degradation in the apple cultivation due to tunnel construction. The tribunal took a stern note of the petition and banned the construction activities. The tribunal further ruled that a scientific investigation must be conducted to ascertain the cause of petitioners' claims. The study results revealed that the vibrations originating from adit excavation are insignificant and cannot destabilize the slip zone. The high fluctuation of annual rainfall and tectonic strain were deemed responsible for the differential settlement of foundations and cracks in the houses. The horticulture study indicated that the physiological processes of apple crops were normal. The study's findings convinced the tribunal, and construction activities were resumed, resulting in the disputed 111 MW project's commissioning. Many run-of-the-river hydroelectric projects in the world are battling similar litigations addressed in the present study. A similar objective methodology is a need for the hour to resolve other hydroelectric projects' sustainability issues. The study findings will pave the path for the swift resolution of land disputes related to similar projects.

This article is the result of research on the heart article in the 3 Constitutional Court Decisions which canceled the entire contents of the law, namely the Constitutional Court Decision Number 001-021-022/PUU-I/2003 which canceled Law Number 20 of 2002 concerning Electricity, Constitutional Court Decision 006/PUU-IV/2006 which canceled Law 27 of 2004 concerning the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Constitutional Court Decisions 11-14-21-126 and 136/PUU-VII/2009 which canceled the Law Number 9 of 2009 concerning Legal Education Entities, and the Constitutional Court Decision 85/PUU-XI/2013 which canceled Law Number 7 of 2004 concerning Water Resources. The term 'heart article' is the term coined by the Constitutional Court and used as the main reason for canceling the entire contents of the law. Unfortunately, in these decisions, the Constitutional Court did not elaborate further on the concept and characteristics of an article categorized as the heart article. Departing from this issue, this research aims to find out what are the concepts and characteristics of the "heart article" of a law that was completely canceled by the Constitutional Court? To help answer this question, this research employed a normative method intended to trace all legal materials, both of the Constitutional Court decisions, statutory regulations, to the literature supporting the research. The importance of this research is to give meaning to the concept of the heart article, which, in the development of legal science, is still rarely discussed. Moreover, it can serve as a reference for petitioners to conduct the judicial review and to identify whether the article being tested is the heart article.

The question concerning the concept of the subject matter of the claim, which is one of the features that individualize the claim, is one of the most disputable and unsettled in the doctrine devoted to the claim. A number of legal scholars define the subject matter of the lawsuit as the substantive law claim of the plaintiff against the defendant. However, this definition cannot be accepted as correct, since, first, petitioners bring claims that cannot meet the above requirement (for example, claims for recognizing transactions as invalid), and, second, the statements of claim filed with the court contain demand (request) for the court, rather than a claim against the defendant.According to another point of view, the subject matter of the claim should be understood as the subjective right indicated by the plaintiff and the corresponding obligation or civil legal relationship in general, about which the court must make a decision. It is also impossible to agree with the above definition of the subject matter of the lawsuit in view of the fact that, as A. A. Dobrovolsky correctly noted, the law provides that the statement of claim must indicate the plaintiff’s claim rather than the disputed legal relationship. We should also agree with the argument given by G. L. Osokina, according to which the logic and practice of the statement of claim for the defense dictate the need to include a subjective right or legitimate interest in the basis of the claim, and not in its subject matter. According to the point of view of K. S. Yudelson, the subject matter of the claim is the requirement to the court to protect the right in the form that corresponds to the stated requirement. However, since this definition is too general, it cannot be used to resolve the issue of the equivalence of claims. The definition of the subject matter of the claim as protection (V.N.Scheglov) or a method of protecting the right (G.L. Osokina) also have the similar drawback. The most correct is the definition of the subject matter of the claim as the protection of a subjective right, freedom or legitimate interest through the specific application of one of the methods provided for by law or the direct exercise of the right that the plaintiff asks the court about.

On June 11, 2021, a pregnant woman approached the Delhi High Court seeking vaccination for pregnant women on a priority basis. The petitioner also sought directions to the Union government for setting up of separate vaccination centres for pregnant women who are at high risk, and the creation of a registry for monitoring their medical condition post vaccination (1). The case was a pivotal point in the history of Covid-19 vaccine rollouts in India, because it demanded a clear communication from the Union Government for vaccination of pregnant women. The Union Government's counsel informed the Court that while the Government would consider the May 28 recommendations of the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (NTAGI) in favour of vaccinations for all pregnant women based on a risk vs benefit assessment, no timeline was in place for this yet (2). Based on this statement, the Court disposed of the petition, passing no further orders.

A verdict can be executed if, the court decision contains an order for one of the parties to pay a sum of money or vacate a fixed object. Usually, a divorce case that occurs will give the husband a penalty to pay a sum of money to support the wife's divorce after the Religious Court Judge decides. The penalty is in the form of giving 1/3 (one third) of the salary given to the ex-wife and 1/3 (one third) of the other given to their children. Based on Government Regulation no. 10 of 1983 jo Government Regulation no. 45 of 1990, the sentence applies to husbands who work as Civil Servants (PNS). In some cases, the application of decisions is often not going well or not even implemented. So that many Respondents demanded the Petitioners to provide an amount of money for a divorce, such as the payment for mut' ah living, iddah livelihoods, and Nadiya livelihoods, which were made before the talk pledge was pronounced and had to provide Hashanah support after the execution of the divorce vow was dropped. Such an application will be granted by the Panel of Judges, but this application is not for a civil servant. So that the authors conducted research using the juridical-normative method, to study the source of the law in the regulation which is contained in the decision of the Religious Court. The results showed that the panel of judges in their decision had the view that the regulation was only an administrative requirement in every government agency.

The author concluded that the Sampang Religious Court judge granted the request for marriage in decision No. 472 / Pdt.G / 2012 / PA.Spg. due to the procedures and reasons put forward by the petitioners as well as the legal basis taken by the judge, namely articles 4 and 5 of Law No.1 of 1974. However, the reasons put forward by the petitioners are still not fulfilled in article 7 paragraph (3) (KHI) and the legal basis adopted by the judge has not been fulfilled in Article 4 section (1) of Law No.1 of 1974.Kata Kunci : Isbat Marriage, Polygamy, Religious Court.

A dogma accepted in many ethical and legal frameworks is that the reasons that lie behind conscientious objection (CO) in healthcare cannot be evaluated or judged by anyone other than the objector herself, because conscience is individual, autonomous, and inaccessible to any outside evaluation. In this paper I argue that this view is mistaken: physicians have an obligation to reveal and explain their reasons for CO and that these reasons may be evaluated either ex ante or ex post. In arguing for my claims I refer mostly to the Polish context and I defend some novel claims that have not been analyzed extensively in the debates on CO. First, I introduce a moral threshold requirement: CO is justified only if the reasons behind a refusal are of moral nature and meet a certain threshold of importance. Second, I highlight the similarities between CO in healthcare and the regulations concerning military refusals, including an emerging practice of granting the right to selective CO status to professional soldiers, that places the burden of proof on a petitioner for CO status. My argument highlights the special status of refusing to kill human organism (military conflicts, abortion, assisted-suicide), and shows that certain other common forms of CO do not warrant accommodation (e.g. emergency contraception).

In navigating the household ark, disharmony cannot be avoided, one of which is the result of neglecting rights and obligations that lead to the breakdown of the marriage. One of the consequences was the burden on the husband to pay for the madhiyah, iddah, and mut'ah livelihoods. The wife has the right to request payment of maintenance to the Religious Court if the husband does not fulfill his obligation to provide for his services. This study aims to discuss the legal basis and considerations of the panel of judges in determining the levels of the amount of madhiyah, iddah, and mut'ah. This study uses normative juridical research to examine statutory regulations related to determining the amount of madhiyah, iddah, and mut'ah. The results showed that First. The basis for determining the amount of income for the former husband is adjusted according to the ability of the husband as stated in Presidential Instruction No. 1 of 1991 concerning KHI, Law no. 1 of 1974, and SEMA No. 3 of 2018 Results of the Plenary of Religion point 2 as the refinement of SEMA No. 7 of 2012 number 16 and Article 149 letter b of the KHI. In the case of divorce talak (Article 8 number (3) letter (c) PERMA No. 3 of 2017) the maintenance of mut'ah and iddah is paid together with the pledge of divorce when pronounced by the Petitioner. Second, the judges' judgment regarding the determination of the level of the amount of living is based on, a) the wife does not commit nusyuz, b) the economic condition of the husband, c) based on the consideration of the reasonable needs of each party.

This research aims to obtain clarity on the appropriate basis of the jury's consideration to set the different classifications of adopted children in the acquisition of the property of the heirs from their adoptive parents as well as the right of an heir dzawil arham in receiving a rest distribution of inheritance as contained in the Decree of the Religious Court Number 0002 / Pdt.P / 2013 / PA.KP based on the perspective of Islamic Law. This research uses a type of Normative Law research by using legislative and an analytical approach. The results show that the determination of classification is different for Applicant I and Petitioner II adopted children in the acquisition of property inherited by their parents as contained in the Determination of Religious Court Number: 0002 / Pdt.P / 2013 / Pa.Kp is not appropriate because both applicants are not included in 10 (ten) group of heirs dzawil arham which agreed upon by the four imams of the sect and not included in group of heirs that arranged in Article 174 paragraph (1) which used as a basis by the judges

Negligence is the breach of a duty caused by omission to do something which a reasonable man guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. The definition of negligence as given in Law of Torts, Ratanlal & Dhirajlal (edited by Justice G.P. Singh), referred to hereinabove, holds good. The essential components of negligence are three: ‘duty’, ‘breach’ and ‘resulting damage’. A case has been filed before Chhattisgarh High Court with two-fold prayer; one is that the hospital is responsible for the negligent treatment and another one that the hospital did not follow the covid protocol norms in handling the dead body therefore liable to be prosecuted [Para 1]. High Court observed that the primary allegation of the petitioner that there has been a negligence in the treatment and wrong injection i.e. Remdesivir Injection was administered to the mother of the petitioner by which her health condition was deteriorated. With respect to the medical negligence and criminal case whether under the circumstances Remdesivir Injection was necessary or not, it cannot be tested by the Court [Para 5]. High Court further observed that with respect to the second aspect of the complaint that the dead body was not handled according to the covid protocol guidelines issued by the Central and State Government, this Court in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot go into the roving enquiry; in as much as, the nature of complaint as has been stated that the dead body was handed over without any zipped body bag is a matter of enquiry. Chhattisgarh High Court, therefore, refrained itself to go into the exercise of investigation. High Court added that serving certain problem requires multi-pronged approach and they would persist if viewed through narrow lens and the petitioner therefore cannot accept ill-conceived exercise by this court to substantiate the fact and allegation.

For a half-century, the historiography on Spanish Habsburg rule suggested that the crown envisioned Indies society as best divided into two segregated sociolegal groups: the republic of the Spaniards and the republic of the Indians. This model was popularized by the eminent mid twentieth century Swedish historian Magnus Mörner and has since become a foundational concept in the field. However, using extensive archival evidence, this article suggests that the Mörner Thesis of the Two Republics is flawed. Historicizing sixteenth-century uses of the concept of the republic, it finds that contemporaries conceived of a complex social order in which many political communities such as municipalities and groups of petitioners could overlap within larger meta-republics, such as the Indies republic and the Christian faith-republic. It then turns to subjects’ uses of the two republics, noting that this conceptual duality appeared rarely in the petitions of Spanish officials, commoners, Indians, Afro-descendants, and mestizos, and was also rare in royal and viceregal legislation. Moreover, this binary most often served to suggest Spaniards’ and Indians’ common ground. The article then reflects on other approaches to understanding the Indies’ Spanish-Indian binary, the place of non-Spanish, non-Indian vassals within republic-thinking, and the staggering complexity of Indies laws, categories, and social interactions.

Robert Card’s “Reasonability View” is a significant contribution to the debate over the place of conscientious objection in health care. In his view, conscientious objections can only be accommodated if the grounds for the objection meet a reasonability standard. I identify inconsistencies in Card’s description of the reasonability standard and argue that each version he specifies is unsatisfactory. The criteria for reasonability that Card sets out most frequently have no clear underpinning principle and are too permissive of immoral objections. Card has also claimed that petitioners must justify their positions with Rawlsian public reason. I argue that, although the resulting reasonability standard is principled, it is overly restrictive. I also show that a reasonability standard built on Rawls’ more lenient conception of reasonableness would be overly permissive of objections at odds with professional healthcare standards. Finally, I argue for my favored solution, which bases the reasonability standard on minimal professional standards.

The holding of concurrent elections on April 17 2019 is a new history in the general election process in Indonesia. This is the implication of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 14 /PUU/2013 on the review of Law Number 42 of 2008 concerning the Election of President and Vice President. Although simultaneous elections have been considered better than previous elections, it does not mean that there are no shortcomings in the implementation. The most appalling problem is the large number of fatalities by the election organizers who are seen as the impact of the 2019 concurrent elections as well as other technical problems. Looking at various aspects raised from the 2019 elections, the Association for Elections and Democracy (Perludem) conducted a review of the material of the Law on the 1945 Constitution to the Constitutional Court as outlined in the Constitutional Court Decision Number 55/PUU-XVII/2019. In their argument, the petitioner conveys a number of things related to the analysis that has been carried out in the holding of simultaneous elections held in 2019 yesterday. In the results of the decision, the Constitutional Court rejected the petition of the petitioner in its entirety because it was considered to be groundless. However, the Constitutional Court provides choices regarding election models that can be chosen and considered constitutional based on the 1945 Constitution. Abstrak:Terselenggaranya pemilu serentak pada tanggal 17 April 2019 merupakan sejarah baru dalam proses pemilihan umum yang ada di Indonesia. Hal ini merupakan implikasi dari Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 14/PUU/2013 perkara pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 2008 Tentang Pemilihan Umum Presiden dan Wakil Presiden. Meskipun pemilu serentak sudah dinilai lebih baik dari pemilu-pemilu sebelummnya bukan berarti dalam pelaksaanannya tidak memiliki kekurangan. Masalah yang paling menggemparkan adalah banyaknya korban jiwa oleh penyelenggara pemilu yang dinilai sebagai dampak pelaksanaan pemilu serentak 2019 serta masalh masalah teknis lainnya. Melihat dari berbagai sisi yang ditumbulkan dari pemilu 2019, maka Perkumpulan Untuk Pemilu dan Demokrasi (Perludem) melakukan uji materiil Undang-undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 ke Mahkamah Konstitusi yang dituangkan kedalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 55/PUU-XVII/2019. Didalam argumentasinya, pemohon menyampaikan beberapa hal terkait dengan analisa yang telah dilakukan dalam penyelenggaraan pemilu serentak yang dilaksanakan pada tahun 2019 kemarin. Dalam hasil keputusan tersebut, Mahkamah Konstitusi menolak permohonan pemohon untuk seluruhnya karena dianggap permohonan tersebut tidak beralasan hukum. Akan tetapi Mahkamah Konstitusi memberikan pilihan terkait model-model keserentakan pemilu yang dapat dipilih dan dinilai konstitusional berdasarkan UUD 1945.

Transcript of RecordDocket No. 18-102State of LINCOLN,Petitioner,v.CHASE PHARMA, INC., et al.,Respondents.COMPETITION PROBLEMSPONSORED BY:Southern Illinois University School of LawANDDepartment of ...

Brazil has become the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Global South-a pandemic that disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, especially those detained and imprisoned. Legal institutions are struggling to respond. In this paper, we focus on the National Council of Justice’s Recommendation 62, issued March 17, 2020, which recommends that judges take several measures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection in prisons. We test this recommendation’s impact by looking at habeas corpus decisions in the São Paulo Court of Justice. The exploratory findings presented here indicate that Recommendation 62 has little impact on habeas decisions. In general, citing the recommendation does not lead the Court to grant early release or house arrest to those detained, and most habeas actions are decided against petitioners. This is true even when petitioners claim to be part of a risk group, or their alleged offense did not involve violence or serious threat-factors that should favor habeas relief under Recommendation 62.

STATE OF LINCOLN,Petitioner,v.CHASE PHARMA, INC., ET AL.,Respondents.On Writ of Certiorari to theUnited States Court of Appeals for the Twelfth CircuitBRIEF FOR PETITIONERTeam 2802Attorneys for Pet...

This article reveals an evolving judicial doctrine, in which the Supreme Court of Israel postpones, removes, dismisses, or even dismisses in limine petitions, due to the mere existence of legislative initiative with respect to the petition’s issue. The article analyzes the way the Court uses the doctrine, and offers a normative analysis of this phenomenon. The main argument is that the judicial use of the doctrine leads to deprivation of the petitioners’ rights, gives (too) much power to the state legal counsels, leans on uncertain and unforeseeable situations, and damages the fundamental principle of the rule of law. On the other hand, the judicial use of the doctrine promotes and enhances constitutional dialogue, as well as preserving judicial resources (and judicial legitimacy in particular) and the professionality of the legislation. Henceforth, the article also introduces an effort to balance between the doctrine different consequences, by presenting a set of criteria for a more reasoned, coherent, and analytical use of that doctrine.

Brazil has become the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Global South-a pandemic that disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, especially those detained and imprisoned. Legal institutions are struggling to respond. In this paper, we focus on the National Council of Justice’s Recommendation 62, issued March 17, 2020, which recommends that judges take several measures to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection in prisons. We test this recommendation’s impact by looking at habeas corpus decisions in the São Paulo Court of Justice. The exploratory findings presented here indicate that Recommendation 62 has little impact on habeas decisions. In general, citing the recommendation does not lead the Court to grant early release or house arrest to those detained, and most habeas actions are decided against petitioners. This is true even when petitioners claim to be part of a risk group, or their alleged offense did not involve violence or serious threat-factors that should favor habeas relief under Recommendation 62.

In its development banking institutions play a very important role and Act Number 3 of 2004 concerning About Bank Indonesia. After the birth of Law Number 21 of 2011 concerning the Financial Services Authority. It is very interesting to study. What are the considerations taken by Bank Indonesia as a Bankrupt Petitioner after the existence of the Financial Services Authority and What is the Role of Bank Indonesia in Resolving Bankrupt Requests Against Banks. In this study the author uses the type of normative research from primary legal sources secondary legal materials. Article 2 paragraph (3) No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations gives Bank Indonesia sole authority to submit bankruptcy applications to banks as creditors. the results of this study indicate that the authority to submit bankruptcy bank applications after the establishment of the Financial Services Authority the Financial Services Authority is to take into account whether the banks status has a systemic impact when the bank is filed for bankruptcy statements. The Financial Services Authority in this case can request consideration with Bank Indonesia about systemic impact of a bank. But the fact is Bank Indonesia still has authority of macropudentials

The current study seeks to better understand the experiences of English as Second Language (ELS) and/or Limited English Proficiency (LEP) petitioners as they access the court system for civil prote...

Background In the United States, 74% of homicides and 51% of suicides involve firearms. Using extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws, petitioners can request restricting firearm access for individuals (known as "respondents") who pose a risk to themselves or others. Objective To characterize respondents and circumstances of ERPOs. Design Descriptive study. Setting State of Washington. Participants All ERPO respondents during 8 December 2016 to 10 May 2019. Measurements Reason for filing the ERPO; characteristics of respondents; respondent's reported history of domestic violence perpetration, mental illness, substance misuse, and suicide ideation or attempt; number and type of firearms removed; and ERPO petition outcome (granted or not granted). Results The ERPOs were filed for concerns about harm to self (n = 67), harm to others (n = 86), or harm to both self and others (n = 84). Of all ERPOs, 87% were filed by law enforcement and 81% were granted. At least 1 firearm was removed from 64% of respondents, with a total of 641 firearms removed. The petitioner reported prior domestic violence perpetration by the respondent in 24% of cases, and a prior diagnosis of a mental health condition and substance misuse for the respondent in 40% and 47% of cases, respectively. Of all respondents, 62% had a history of suicidal ideation or attempt according to the petitioner. As part of the ERPO process, the court ordered mental health evaluation in 30% of cases. Limitation Filing of the forms was inconsistent. Conclusion Laws regarding ERPOs are a potential tool to help protect patients or family members from harming themselves or others by restricting firearm possession and purchase. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term effects of these laws and identify approaches to increase their use. Primary funding source State of Washington.

This article examines the decision in Chesapeake Action Network v. Environmental Protection Agency, and its impact on regulated parties. The key issues addressed are whether a party may comment on ...

In 1851 more than 1.6 million signatures endorsed a petition for an amendment to the 1848 constitution that would have allowed Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte to stand for reelection. Following contemporary critics who claimed that the movement had been orchestrated by the government, scholars have been little impressed by this mobilization, which produced the largest petition of nineteenth-century France. By analyzing the petitions and the signatures themselves, official reports, correspondence of key actors, and the public debate, this article reappraises the campaign, making three claims: that a government-sponsored petition merits analysis in the context of the explosion of popular mobilization that followed 1848, that the depiction provided by the republicans of the participation of the administration in the campaign is partial and incomplete, and that the petitioners were not dependent and manipulated individuals but purposeful citizens who understood and supported the petition they signed. The article concludes that the campaign would not have succeeded without the genuine popularity of the president and the surfacing of a strong popular Bonapartist undercurrent.En 1851, des pétitions, rassemblant plus de 1,6 million de signatures, ont demandé une révision de la Constitution permettant à Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte de se porter candidat à un deuxième mandat présidentiel. Selon les républicains, le mouvement avait été orchestré et manipulé par le gouvernement, et les historiens ont aussi dédaigné cette mobilisation, alors qu'elle était la pétition la plus signée en France au dix-neuvième siècle. En analysant les pétitions et les signatures elles-mêmes, les rapports officiels, la correspondance des acteurs clés et le débat public, l'article réévalue cette campagne et propose trois arguments : (1) que les pétitions parrainées par le gouvernement font partie de l'histoire des mobilisations populaires ; (2) que l'image d'une administration toute-puissante mise au service de la campagne ne correspond pas à la réalité ; et enfin (3) que la plupart des pétitionnaires n'étaient pas des individus manipulés, mais des citoyens conscients du sens de leurs actions. La campagne n'aurait pas réussi sans l'expérience de la démocratie depuis 1848, la popularité du président et l'émergence d'un bonapartisme populaire.

PT Sinar Sosro Bandar Lampung is a company engaged in the sale of beverages. Data processing at PT Sinar Sosro issuance of claim evidence is still manual, which has not been computerized, one of which is the process of issuing the calculation of claim evidence to the company. Based on the above problems, there are several solutions to deal with so that the management of petty cash funds can simplify spending. The design of the information system for managing petty cash funds uses the imprest method at PT Sinar Sosro Bandar Lampung, namely the design of the system is done using Use Case Diagrams and Applications are built using Borland Delphi 7 and MySQL databases. Testing this system uses a black box. The results of this study are to produce a petty cash fund management information system containing information about the expenditure of petty cash funds, proof of claims that can help and be evidence of the existence of expenditure activities carried out when the petitioner wants to use petty cash funds.

The purpose of this writing is to find out the authority of the prosecutor's office in submitting a request to dissolve a PT in a district court based on the provisions of a Indonesia company law, and its relationship in strengthening national resilience. Furthermore, to examine and analyze this research is by normative legal research by emphasizing discussion on legal-formal (normative) rules and regulations. The data used in this study consisted of primary legal materials including legislation, secondary legal materials such as books and literature and tertiary legal materials obtained through library research. The result of the research is that authority to act as a petitioner for dissolution with the reason if there is a single share ownership (corporate sole) and/or violation of public interest or the law, in the framework of the executive function to uphold the law in society, and that authority is a form of upholding the authority of the government and reflects legal certainty so that it gives effect to the strengthening of national resilience.

When the new Scottish Parliament was established through the Scotland Act of 1998, various innovative steps were taken to guarantee greater public participation in political processes. One of these measures, the Scottish e-petitioning system, provides a vehicle for interested citizens to petition the parliament directly on matters of public interest. This article examines all the e-petitions submitted since September 2011 in the area of Justice and Law, establishing how petitioners convey their own motivation for taking this step, and how Scottish justice is represented. Analysis of these petitions shows citizens engaging proactively with legal issues, and probes into citizens’ conceptualizations of law and justice both in their current reality and as projections of how they could or should be. It also explores the association between legal and national consciousness, and the way in which citizens adopt an increasingly transnational approach to framing legal issues. The petitions thus reveal both active concern to achieve justice in highly specific individual matters, and a more theoretical concern with the specific status of Scottish justice, portrayed as lagging behind the rest of the United Kingdom in various respects.

The dialogue of major reform in immigration laws along with increase in rejection of H-1B petitioners since the start of the Trump administration may make employers find H-1B renewal becoming more ...

This article analyses nearly one million petitions received by the House of Commons to reveal a culture of petitioning that recast the political culture of modern Britain and Ireland. It argues, first, that petitions provided a much more regular and continuous form of interaction between people and Parliament than elections. Second, petitioning–meaning the practices associated with the drafting, signing and presentation of petitions–enabled a vibrant, performative public politics. Third, petitions and petitioning were relatively open, inclusive forms of political participation since all British subjects enjoyed the formal right to petition. We examine the role of formidable campaigns of mass mobilisation, but also humble appeals of marginalised individuals. Our data has significant implications for our understanding of the nationalisation, organisation, and popularisation of politics in this period. We argue that attention to petitions helps us to decentre parliamentary elections as the principal connection between local and national politics. Indeed, petitioners responded to the shifting boundaries between the central and devolved state in deciding to which authorities they would direct petitions. Petitioning campaigns pioneered the mass, organised, national movements that would gradually emerge as the hallmark of stronger political parties. This did not undermine petitioning. However, the consequent growth of disciplined parties strengthened executive power, at the expense of parliamentary government, redirected petitions from the Commons. Furthermore, the continuing expansion of petitioning alongside extensions of the franchise suggests that petitions did not function as an ersatz ballot. Rather, petitions and debates between parliamentarians and petitioners over the meaning of growing lists of signatories suggest that petitioning catalysed a range of other forms of participation and hence forged an ever more popular politics.

In the early summer of 1588, twenty-seven inhabitants of the large parish of Rickmansworth (Hertfordshire) presented a petition to two local Justices of the Peace complaining about disorder in Mill End, on the outskirts of the main town, caused by those frequenting Richard Heyward’s alehouse. Most recent work on alehouse sociability has considered attitudes towards drinking and its regulation after the early Jacobean legislation; in contrast, this article considers attitudes towards drunkenness in late sixteenth-century England, including the views expressed in the official ‘homily against drunkenness’ and in the Sabbatarian pamphlet published in 1572 by Humfrey Roberts. Similarly, most work on early modern protest considers complaints against the activities of the protestors’ social superiors; in this instance petitioners complained about the conduct of their inferiors. Although, due to archival attrition, it is impossible to determine what action the authorities took against Heyward and his clientele, thanks to the chance survival of a personal letter it is possible to reconstruct the reactions of the JPs to whom the petition was addressed, thus shedding light on how JPs might act outside the Quarter Sessions.

From a random sample of five-hundred petitions submitted (1819–1840) by felons convicted at the Old Bailey, only thirty-nine were female petitioners. This approximates the female-male felony ratio of convictions for felonious property crimes in London during this period.1 The thirty-nine female petitioners are the focus of this article. In particular, the article examines evidence and arguments suggesting that ideas of morality and social constructions of femininity and masculinity rather than legality most influenced the outcome of their appeals. Second, the article will examine the extent to which elite decision-makers used their ideals of motherhood, marriage status, and chastity to determine both the credibility of appeals and the moral integrity of the petitioners. Third, the article will examine how constructions of respectability were also applied to those who petitioned on behalf of female convicts and whether these ideas influenced the perception of the petitioner as credible. Ultimately, the article will conclude by assessing the degree to which subjective perceptions of petitioners and prisoners as moral or respectable determined who was deemed "fit subject of mercy." 1. Peter King, Crime and Law in England 1750–1840 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), 172–175.

This article explores governing through rights in a penal context by analyzing a recent case before the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (the “Court” or “Supreme Court”), Brown v The Parole Board for Scotland et al. (UKSC 2017). The case involved a prisoner whose stay in prison was extended by several years beyond what the trial court ordered because he was unable to access offender behavior courses due to staffing shortages and waiting lists. In rejecting this as an arbitrary detention (in violation of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights), the Supreme Court focused on the prisoner’s behavior as a justification for non-release. This article traces how the Court applied concepts of rehabilitation and sentence progression to shift focus from the state’s compliance with its rights duties to the prisoner’s deservingness of rights protection. Using frameworks of governmentality and structural violence, I explore how administrative processes, such as sentence management and rights litigation, facilitate and constitute prison violence. Specifically, rehabilitation provided the means of constructing the petitioner as a disobedient and undeserving subject, while simultaneously valorizing the penal authorities’ enlightened oversight of his sentence. Through such moves, the Court and, by extension, legal institutions, can inflict violence in three ways: first, by legitimating the extension of confinement using tools aimed at limiting detention; second, by imposing material and psychic burdens in the pursuit of legal claims, creating both hope and the basis of destroying it; and third, by obscuring and denying the disordered and inherently violent nature of the experience of imprisonment. The article seeks to expose how bureaucratic logics (like balancing tests), spaces (like appeal courts), and material practices (as in the temporal organization of “background facts” in legal judgments) are part of prison and the violence which characterizes the prison experience.

It is long established that a ‘reasonable offer’ for a petitioner's shares can defeat an unfair‐prejudice petition. Lord Hoffmann gave guidance about such offers in O'Neill v Phillips. Now, in Prescott v Potamianos, the Court of Appeal has set out three factors that help to determine in general whether an offer is ‘reasonable’. Those factors are: the value offered; the likelihood of implementation; and the proximity to the unfairly prejudicial conduct. The Court's guidance is useful for lawyers and their clients, as well as being broadly favourable for petitioners. But the Court emphasised that the unfair‐prejudice jurisdiction is based on fairness and so requires a considerable degree of flexibility. Such flexibility impairs the certainty that Lord Hoffmann was seeking to promote, and may create difficulties for parties making or receiving offers.

The use of compliance studies to evaluate the effectiveness of international human rights courts can produce misleading results because a focus on compliance considers the behaviour of only one stakeholder in the dynamic that is human rights adjudication: the state. A survey of petitioners in cases before the IACtHR, together with a review of literature surrounding strategic litigation before the Inter-American system, demonstrate how civil society organisations value the declarative justice provided by the Court, how they mobilise around human rights litigation and how adept they are at deploying rulings in such a way as to produce impact beyond compliance and even in the absence of any compliance at all.

The Constitutional Court (hereinafter: CC) made 319 decisions in the first semester of 2020. From these, 63 decisions were on the merits, meanwhile the others were mainly rejections on formal grounds. In the competences of norm control the CC has annulled three legal regulations, it declared three constitutional requirements and two legislative omissions. The mostly practiced competence of the CC is still the constitutional complaint procedure, mainly the one against judicial decisions. In its competence, the Court annulled nine judicial decisions in the first semester of 2020. The article summarises six significant decisions of the CC from the first semester of the year. The CC, during the examination of the constitutionality of the statutory limitations on the retail of electronic cigarettes, ruled that a compensation shall be assured by the legislative organ for the entrepreneurs [CC decision 3/2020. (I. 3.) AB]. In a case related to libel the Court has formed the case-law on the freedom of speech and established that those publishing opinions on social media in public issues (so called influencers) shall show higher tolerance [CC decision 3048/2020. (III. 2.) AB]. The Court examined a court case based on noise complaint where the petitioner made a religious performance too loudly and the judicial decision claimed it as disturbing the neighbours’ peace [CC decision n. 3049/2020. (III. 2.) AB]. The Court established certain guarantees in the framework of the right to fair trial in a case launched for wrongful retention of a child 3068/2020. (III. 9.) AB]. The CC has declared a legislative omission in a case for the publicity of public data, calling upon the lawmaker to ensure the effective legal remedy [7/2020. (V. 13.) AB]. In the end, the Court, when examining the regulation on the disability allowances, declared a constitutional requirement in order to provide the allowance for the petitioner, who, previously, had launched a procedure at the European Court of Human Rights. The decision of the CC enables the ordinary courts to interpret the regulations in favour of the complainant [10/2020.V.28.) AB].

Background Since 2010, petitioner claims of shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (SIRVA) to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) have been increasing. Objective To conduct a scientific review of clinical characteristics of SIRVA petitions to the VICP. Methods We queried the VICP’s Injury Compensation System database for medical reports of alleged SIRVA and SIRVA-like injuries. Medical reports are summaries of petitioner claims and supporting documentation along with a VICP clinician reviewer diagnosis and assessment of criteria for concession. We conducted a descriptive analysis of SIRVA petitioner claims recommended by the VICP for concession as SIRVA injuries. Results We identified 476 petitioner claims recommended for concession. Claims per year increased from two in 2011, the first full year in the analytic period, to 227 in 2016. Median age was 51 years, 82.8% were women, and median body mass index was 25.1 (range 17.0–48.9). Four hundred cases (84.0%) involved influenza vaccine. Pharmacy or store (n = 168; 35.3%) was the most common place of vaccination followed by doctor’s office (n = 147; 30.9%). Fewer than half of cases reported a suspected administration error; 172 (36.1%) reported ‘injection too high’ on the arm. Shoulder pain, rotator cuff problems, and bursitis were common initial diagnoses. Most (80.0%) cases received physical or occupational therapy, 60.1% had at least one steroid injection, and 32.6% had surgery. Most (71.9%) healthcare providers who gave opinions on causality considered the injury was caused by vaccination. A minority (24.3%) of cases indicated that symptoms had resolved by the last visit available in medical records. Conclusions Most conceded claims for SIRVA were in women and involved influenza vaccines. Injection too high on the arm could be a factor due to the risk of injecting into underlying non-muscular tissues. Healthcare providers should be aware of proper injection technique and anatomical landmarks when administering vaccines.

What role do emotions play in state repression? Building upon ethnographic observation in one Beijing petition bureau, this paper explores the emotional labour performed by grassroots officials to demobilize social dissent. The petition system serves as an official channel through which the Chinese government receives complaints and grievances from citizens. Notwithstanding its institutional inefficiency in addressing petitioners’ requirements, this system plays a critical role in maintaining social stability. I investigate the process by which frontline petition officials manage petitions. I argue that channelling petitioners’ emotions has become one of these officials’ core functions. Petition officials have developed three types of emotional strategies – emotional defusing, emotional constraint and emotional reshaping – to absorb petitioners’ complaints. This study of emotional repression offers a fresh perspective on the affective dimension of contentious politics and also contributes to the theoretical discussion on how authoritarian regimes deal with dissent.

This study examines how lay legal advocates meet petitioners’ extralegal and legal needs during the protection order process using survivor-defined advocacy. We conducted interviews with 20 lay legal advocates and identified four ways in which advocates provided services consistent with survivor-defined advocacy, including court accompaniment, safety planning, meeting petitioners’ extralegal needs, and centering the survivor as the decision-maker. We discuss our results in light of previous research on survivor-defined advocacy and describe the implications in the context of current domestic violence law and policy, including the need to enhance lay legal advocates’ ability to provide survivor-defined approaches in their services.