Search results

This chapter discusses the extension of legal equality between male and female citizens in four states in North Africa – Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco and Algeria – through one specific lens: A married woman's legal capacity to initiate and obtain divorce without the husband's consent. Building on the works of Stein Rokkan and Reinhard Bendix on the expansion of citizenship to the ‘lower classes’, it is argued that amendments in divorce law by introducing in-court divorce for women, in addition to out-of-court divorce, is a significant institutional change that extends legal equality between men and women. The introduction of in-court divorce expands female citizenship by bolstering woman's juridical autonomy and capacity in state law. Changes in divorce laws are thus part of state centralization by means of standardizing rules that regulate family law through public administrative institutions rather than religious organizations. Two questions are addressed: First, how did amendments in divorce laws occur after independence? Second, in which ways did women's bolstered legal capacity in divorce have a spill over effect on reforms in other patriarchal state laws? Based on observations on sequences of change in four states in North Africa, it is argued that amendments that equalize between men and women in divorce should be seen as a key driver for reforms in other state laws, that reduce legal inequality between male and female citizens. In all four states, women's citizenship was extended in nationality law and criminal law after amendments in divorce law gave women unilateral legal power to exit a marital relationship.

Ethiopia has enacted laws on transparency and disclosure of information in state-owned enterprises (SOEs). However, these laws are not strict enough, with the transparency and disclosure practices disappointing in the country. Thus, this study aims to investigate the legal framework governing transparency and disclosure in SOEs.

This study uses doctrinal, qualitative and comparative approaches. Domestic legal texts are appraised based on the organization for economic co-operation and development Guideline on Corporate Governance of State-owned Enterprises, the World Bank Toolkit on Corporate Governance of State-owned Enterprises and best national practices. This approach has been further corroborated by qualitative analysis of the basic principles of transparency and disclosure.

The finding reveals that the laws on transparency and disclosure do not comply with global practices and are inadequate to ensure transparency and discourse in SOEs. They fail to establish appropriate disclosure frameworks and practices at the SOE and state-ownership entity levels. They also indiscriminately subject enterprises to multiple auditing functions and conflicting responsibilities.

To the author’s knowledge, this study is the first legal literature on transparency and disclosure in Ethiopian SOEs. This study assists the state as owner in reforming the laws and uplifting SOEs from their current unpleasant condition. It can also become a reference for future research.

This study aims to investigate beneficial right as a new legal concept and term accepted by the Indonesian legal system. The new concept was ratified to endorse government decision to use ṣukūk (as an Islamic financial instrument) in the financing of state budget deficit. Some legal issues emerged after the ratification such as the necessity to synchronize the beneficial right with other property rights in Indonesia and the disharmony between laws related to sovereign ṣukūk issuance.

The study uses a qualitative method with library study and interviews with relevant legal experts in Indonesia as the data collection techniques.

The findings show that the passage of Sovereign Ṣukūk Law 2008 that ratified beneficial right deemed as a concession point by the government to solve conflicts between legal restriction and employment of state-owned assets as the underlying asset of sovereign ṣukūk. The study deemed the necessity to improve the use of beneficial right in the Indonesian legal system which by the concept is not exercised for the issuance of sovereign ṣukūk only. There is the need to harmonize the administration of this right with other property rights in Indonesia.

The scope of study will be limited to the Indonesian regulation related to the use of beneficial right concept in the issuance of sovereign ṣukūk in Indonesia. The regulation as mentioned will be in the form of statutes, presidential or ministerial regulations, and also opinions of Indonesian legal and sharīʿah scholars regarding the matter.

This study may explore significantly the use of beneficial right for the issuance of sovereign ṣukūk by the Government of Indonesia. Specifically, the study reveals and addresses the issues that are following the ratification of beneficial rights originated from the common law system into the Indonesian civil law system.

This paper explores the experience of “Shari’a” as non-state law in the English courts through a historical analysis of past Islamic finance dispute resolutions (IFDRs). This paper aims to propose a conceivable scenario relating to the law applicable in international commercial contracts in the English courts with the emergence of the Hague Principles 2015.

This paper addresses several issues that have been raised in English case law: doubts about the legal nature of “Shari’a” as non-state law; the limits placed on freedom of choice of “Shari’a” law by the application of a single legal system; and the distinction between application of law and incorporation by reference of “Shari’a” in IFDRs. The paper then analyses the conformity of “Shari’a” with the provisions now used to resolve Islamic finance disputes (trade and investment) in the English courts, using an empirical analysis of The Accounting and Auditing Organization for Islamic Financial Institutions standards.

The paper provides that, in theory, “Shari’a” standards could play a significant role in IFDRs after Brexit, even though a gap persists in practice because the Hague Principles 2015 have not yet been adopted by the English legal system.

The study focuses on the English courts and shows how the IFDRs could be resolved with the emergence of Hague Principles 2015 in the post-Brexit era.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this paper appears to be the first paper to provide a conceivable scenario relating to the future of the IFDRs in the English courts.

This paper aims to discuss the positioning of international organisations (IOs) in the realm of international law. It proposes a more robust approach, arguing IOs have legal obligations akin to states to the extent which could be fulfilled by them. This paper suggests making IOs parties to international treaties like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and Geneva Convention 1949 to codify their international responsibilities. In addition, it proposes amending multilateral treaties to grant IOs membership and create binding legal obligations for them, thereby enhancing the overall legal framework for IOs.

The paper opted for qualitative analytical approach of research by referring to international treaties and scholarly papers.

The authors have evaluated the bindingness of international law on IOs. The authors argue that jus cogens and customary international law are equally binding on IOs. However, treaties could only be binding on IOs to the extent of their consent. The authors have assessed prior violations of IOs. The authors argue that, to prevent such violations by IOs, creating obligations is the first step. Second, amendments are required in the existing international treaties that reflect the foundations of international humanitarian and international human rights law like the Geneva Convention 1949, ICCPR, and ICESCR, to permit IOs to join these treaties, resulting in binding international legal obligations.

The most prominent assertion of this paper is that IOs as subjects of international law are bound by the principles of international law, including treaty law with consent, customary international laws, general principles of law and peremptory norms. To fulfil these obligations, a regime needs to be introduced wherein amendment is made in treaties to make IOs parties to them and structuring the law on responsibility for IOs. Considering the multifaceted nature of IO, the role it performs in contemporary times requires them to be bound by rules of international law just like states. There is a need to settle their position in global governance and give them more teeth to understand and fulfil their duties to ensure smooth functioning in the long run.

The paper fulfils an identified gap in the positioning of IOs under the international law.

This chapter explores the nature of military law and IHL during the cold war period. It explores what treaties were completed, Additional Protocols I and II of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the ad hoc international tribunals of the 1990s and 2000s, and examines the ICJ’s ruling of the legality of nuclear weapons.

In 2017, the opioid epidemic was declared a public health emergency in the United States. The federal and state governments are still struggling to contain the crisis through various legislations and to stem the tide of overdoses and deaths. This paper looks specifically at the issue of high prescriptions of opioids disbursed to patients by physicians.

This paper evaluates this evolving policy issue through a critical review and synthesis of academic literature, government policy documents (at states and national levels) and articles in the popular press.

Over-prescription is a legal problem because it inevitably leads to diversion of these substances for non-medical usage. The Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) laws have been passed by all 50 states and the main policy responses are covered. However, there are hindrances to their effectiveness, which have to be addressed. Two state level policy alternatives are discussed as potential solutions — PDMP mandates and Pain Management Clinic Laws (PMCLs). After a comparative evaluation, it is recommended that all states should pass the mandatory PDMP review and usage laws urgently.

This is the first detailed policy evaluation on the specific and time-sensitive aspect of physician over-prescribing, within the larger opioid abuse problem. Moreover, critique on the public health leadership issue is raised.

The extant literature underlines the inadequacies of legal and policy frameworks addressing the safety and health concerns of sandstone mineworkers in India. Notably, Rajasthan, a state renowned for its extractive industries, mirrors these concerns. Against this backdrop, this paper aims to critically evaluate the relevant legal and policy landscape, with an emphasis on the recent central statute: the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code of 2020 (OSHWCC). Given that the Code subsumes the key legislation pertaining to the safety and health of mineworkers, an in-depth critical analysis is essential to forge suitable policy interventions to address continued gross violations of human rights.

The critical analysis of legal and policy frameworks on silicosis in sandstone mineworkers is based on a comprehensive reading of existing literature. The literature includes relevant laws, case law, reports of the Rajasthan State Human Rights Commission and National Human Rights Commission, publicly available data and key scholarly contributions in the field.

Although the OSHWCC has made some changes to the existing regulatory architecture of mines in India, it has failed to safeguard the safety and health of mineworkers. Notably, the vast majority of mines in India – constituting approximately 90%, which are informal, seasonal and small-scale – remain beyond the jurisdiction of this Code. In Rajasthan, there are specific policies on silicosis, but these policies are poorly implemented. There is a serious shortage of doctors to diagnose silicosis cases, leading to under-diagnosis. The compensation for silicosis victims is insufficient; the distribution mechanism is complex and often delayed.

The central and many state governments have not established the regulatory institutions envisaged under the OSHWCC 2020; therefore, the working of the regulatory institutions could not be critically examined.

The paper critically evaluates laws and policies pertaining to silicosis in sandstone mineworkers, with a special emphasis on the state of Rajasthan. It offers a comprehensive critique of the OSHWCC of 2020, which has not received much attention from previous studies.

This theme will be addressed through main points: Special Nature of Investment Disputes and its methods of peaceful settlement. International legal framework governing Arbitration in investment disputes: A. Multilateral legal framework. B. Bilateral legal framework/Investment promotion and protection agreementsTypes of arbitration in investment disputes. The Egyptian experience in investment disputes arbitration. The National legal framework. Egypt on the map of investment disputes in the world. A case study. Conclusion: Results related to the legal framework regulating investment disputes in Egypt. Results related to The arbitration cases against Egypt.

The researcher investigates the subject of international arbitration in investment disputes in the framework of voluntary theory, which is based on the premise that the satisfaction of people who are addressing the international legal norm is the basis of the same rule. In other words, the basis of international law is based on the satisfaction of the State and other international legal persons Both, and then express or implied consent.

Despite the availability of domestic and regional arbitration mechanisms in Egypt represented by a large number of cases.

The theme for the study primarily on Egypt and the international arbitration of investment disputes, through theoretical and practical study of disputes arbitration which Egypt is a party defendant in which to focus on what was issued in which the provisions of the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes, in an attempt to find out the reasons for the verdicts image released it, where it came mostly against Egypt, and whether these judgments against them in investment disputes due to reasons related to the legal framework of the arbitration process, or for reasons of bodies of arbitration issued by those provisions, or to the defense, which represents the Egyptian party, or to the circumstances Economic and political (which represents the investment climate).

The proposed solutions to improve the conditions and factors surrounding the arbitration disputes that Egypt is waging against foreign investors, whether they are initially alleged or accused of drafting agreements and contracts, through amending the relevant legislation and laws, selecting arbitration bodies and defense bodies.