Search results

This paper is based on an empirical study undertaken between April 2014 to December 2014 that aims to investigate the Open Government Initiative in the Kenyan Judiciary and its contribution to Judiciary transformation for enhanced justice delivery.

The paper draws from both literature and data collected from representative professionals in the Kenyan Judiciary through interviews and questionnaires.

The findings indicated that the Kenyan Judiciary was at its initial stages of implementing its Open Government Initiative, and several strategies for the implementation were identified. Further, the findings revealed the benefits of opening up the Judiciary for public participation which pointed toward an improved justice delivery.

This paper presents findings of the investigation of Open Government Initiative in the Kenyan Judiciary as a contributory factor to the then on-going Judiciary transformation aimed at enhanced justice delivery. The paper provides a nexus between open government and records management and demonstrates the importance of sound records management for successful Open Government Initiative.

The purpose of this study is to develop an in-depth understanding of the overall process of facilitating co-creation of e-government services, focusing on the government's role in fostering citizen engagement.

This study conducted a meta-synthesis of qualitative case studies encompassing analyses on a case-specific level followed by syntheses on a cross-study level.

Through meta-synthesis, the study developed an integrated framework, the process theory view of enabling co-creation of e-government services, illustrating how co-creation could be initiated and facilitated by the government.

By providing critical insights into co-creation steps, the process theory view offers a holistic theoretical understanding of enabling co-creation by identifying factors driving and motivating governments to initiate co-creation activities, interpreting the prerequisites for co-creation and the importance of impact assessment.

This study offers important implications for public authorities, administrators and policymakers by helping them enhance their knowledge base on the co-creation process to facilitate a higher level of collaboration between citizens and government for effective and efficient public service delivery through e-government.

While it is widely acknowledged that citizen engagement is crucial for improving and transforming the development and delivery of e-government services, it is equally recognized as a challenging and complex task. Through a meta-synthesis of qualitative case studies, this study is one of the first to develop a process theory view for offering a holistic understanding and crucial insights for addressing the concerns over the co-creation of e-government services.

Over the past few decades, the law and literature movement has fragmented, expanded, and evolved to include fields as diverse as hermeneutics and narrative theory. This chapter discusses the developments in and contributions of these two strains of the law and literature movement and argues that each respectively provides us with important ways of seeing acts of interpretation and the use of stories in the legal culture. Hermeneutics provides an understanding of the phenomenon of interpretation that avoids the trap of choosing originalism or postmodernism as the accepted method of interpreting legal texts. Narrative theory provides tools for understanding and critiquing the burgeoning use of stories in the law.

The object of this research is the reconstruction of the existing legal response by European Union states to the phenomenon of immigration. It seeks to analyse the process of conferral of protection.

One main dimension is selected and discussed: the case law of the national courts. The study focuses on the legal status of immigrants resulting from the intervention of these national courts.

The research shows that although the courts have conferred an increasing protection on immigrants, this has not challenged the fundamental principle of the sovereignty of the states to decide, according to their discretionary prerogatives, which immigrants are allowed to enter and stay in their territories. Notwithstanding the differences in the general constitutional and legal structures, the research also shows that the courts of the three countries considered – France, Germany and Spain – have progressively moved towards converging solutions in protecting immigrants.

The research contributes to a better understanding of the different legal orders analysed.

This paper aims to examine the growing incidence of judicialisation of politics in Nigeria's democratisation experience against the backdrop of questionable judicial accountability.

The article draws on legal and political theory as well as comparative law perspectives.

The judiciary faces a daunting task in deepening democracy and (re) instituting the rule of law. The formidable challenges derive in part from structural problems within the judiciary, deficient accountability credentials and the complexities of a troubled transition.

Effective judicial mediation of political transition requires a transformed and accountable judiciary.

The article calls attention to the need for judicial accountability as a cardinal and integral part of political transitions.

This chapter addresses commentary about constitutional law and politics in this current era of a conservative domination of the judiciary.¹ Its primary concern is the different ways in which a working majority on the Court and its judiciary of appointees by Presidents Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush might be conservative,² and the different ways in which domination might take place.³ The frame for the chapter is what I call an “indifference thesis” for analyzing constitutional law and politics. Stated boldly, the thesis is that there should be a commentary distinguished by an interpretive attitude that distrusts, and intentionally resists, analysis based on preconceived notions about the strengths and weaknesses of any constitutional law and politics, be it conservative or left-liberal.⁴ Perhaps, to many readers, an indifference thesis for commentary appears methodologically odd, if not politically perverse. Therefore, the first order of business is to try to make the thesis less odd and perverse by explaining its provenance and attributes.⁵

The purpose of this paper is to develop a medico-judicial framework for rehabilitation of forensic psychiatric patients in Zimbabwe.

Grounded theory of the Charmaz (2006, 2014) persuasion was used. An exploratory qualitative design was utilised. The theoretical framework that was used as a point of departure was Pierre Bourdieu’s conceptual canon. Participants were purposefully and theoretically sampled. These included the judiciary, patients, patients’ family, psychiatrists, nurses, social workers, experts in forensic psychiatric practice. They were 32 in total.

The findings reflected a need to realign the dislocation and dissonance between and within the fields of the prison system, medical system, and the judiciary. The realignment was done by co-constructing a therapeutic jurisprudent medico-judicial framework for rehabilitation of forensic psychiatric patients in Zimbabwe with participants who were stakeholders in forensic psychiatric rehabilitation.

The study was focused on male forensic psychiatric patients rehabilitation and not on female forensic psychiatric patients because there were important variables in the two groups that were not homogenous. However, it is possible that including females in the study could have added perspective to the study. This also limits the generalisation of findings beyond the male forensic psychiatric participants. Services beyond the experience of participants translate to the notion that findings cannot be generalised beyond the parameters of the study. Future research and service evaluation and audit need to be considered. The study findings focused on the “psychiatric” aspect and did not emphasise the “forensic” aspect of the service delivery service. Future research may need to feature physical provisions and progression pathways with reference to “forensic” risk reduction as a parallel goal.

The study calls for the following: Transformation of the medico-judicial system, adjusting legislation and restructuring of the public service; changing of public attitudes to enable implementation of the medico-judicial framework; there is need for a step by step process in the implementation of the framework in which training needs of service staff, social workers, community leaders and key stakeholders will need to be addressed; the proposed changes presented by the model will require cultural, financial and infrastructural shifts.

There is need for policy makers to re-enfranchise or rebrand forensic psychiatric rehabilitation services in Zimbabwe. This could positively involve the marketing of forensic psychiatric rehabilitation to the stakeholders and to the public. This is projected to counter the stigma, disinterest and disillusionment that run through both professionals and public alike. This will foster a therapeutic jurisprudence that upholds the dignity and rights of forensic psychiatric patients.

This work is an original contribution to forensic psychiatry in Zimbabwe. Research in that area is prohibitive because of the complexity of processes that are followed. This research is therefore ground breaking.