Search results

The CoViD-19 pandemic has brought about a panoply of institutional challenges both domestically and in the international arena. Classical constitutional theory thereby underwent a reinvention by the executive for the sake of speedy policy action and to the detriment of institutional control while favouring authoritarian forms of governance. This paper concerns itself with institutional responses to such developments, placing emphasis on the role of the judiciary and people*s in contesting emergency decrees and other executive orders, especially where fundamental rights are infringed upon. The paper aims to explore the difficulties arising with exerting absolute executive powers during the health crisis, the respective role assumed by constitutional courts and the impact of the new governance paradigm on forms of public contestation, also as a means of quasi institutional control.

Indeed, the right to health may be translated into political discourse and become foundational to security and public interest paradigms. This may result in a shrinking public space given the constraints to the freedom of movement. In the name of public safety, the (collective) right to assembly, expression and protest have been submitted to major limitations in that regard.

Ultimately, this re-opens debates on the meaning of absolute rights and contextualities of derogations, as well as the reconcilability of civil and political rights and economic, social and cultural rights. It also exposes social inequalities, social justice dimensions and vulnerabilities, often exacerbated by the health crisis; migrant rights demonstrably face particularly severe and intersectional forms of violations.

Particular values lie with the interdisciplinary approach embraced in this paper; the authors draw on a variety of social sciences disciplines to shed light on this very current issue. Both theoretical and empirical methods are used and combined here, making sense of the underlying logic of virus governance and its impacts on fundamental rights.

Non-politicized bureaucracy plays a fundamental role in the survival of states during times of transition and drastic change. Moreover, non-politicized bureaucracy protects state institutions from failing. In fact, state survival bureaucracy (SSB), as an alternative to Deep State, obtains all mechanisms for the sustainability of the state, both its entity and identity. In case of resistance to the elected officials and executives’ abrupt decisions, professionals and experts came up with Deep State to reflect the elements of rejection.

The paper uses both system and function approaches in analyzing the role of bureaucracy in states going through transition. It also draws comparisons from the harsh experiences in the Arab region after Arab revolutions where most of the states collapsed while Tunisia and Egypt survived. The authors will use the available literature in reviewing different arguments regarding the role of bureaucracy in addition to the own observations as scholars who were engaged in the political process in Egypt for sometimes and during the drastic changes since January 25, 2011 and the knowledge about political process in Tunisia and other Arab states.

In the study of the collapse of a number of Arab states and the survival of Tunisia and Egypt, it was found out that it is SSB which holds state together in cases of drastic changes or tangible threats. SSB includes bureaucrats and policy implementing agencies that are committed to both entity and identity of the state. The role of SSB emerges clearly in a state of utmost survival crisis of the state. SSB does inherently obtain self-correcting mechanisms that help states face, experience drastic change and cope with it.

Non-politicized bureaucracy plays a fundamental role in the survival of states during times of transition and drastic change. Moreover, non-politicized bureaucracy protects state institutions from failing. In fact, SSB as an alternative to Deep State, as defined in this paper, obtains all mechanisms for the sustainability of the state, both its entity and identity. The analysis will show how SSB is a constructive mechanism for the survival of the state when its entity and identity as well as well-established national interests are under tangible threats.

The purpose of this paper is to bring out the possibility of selecting good leaders in Asian countries, i.e., China and Singapore.

Since comparative historical analysis enhances the objectivity for academic discussion, Deng Xiaoping’s and Lee Kuan Yew’s leadership successions have been chosen as the cases for studies by virtue of “method of agreement”. Incorporating “argument based on the contrary” into the context for macro-historical analysis, this paper characterises the duo’s successful (at least quite successful) leadership successions, thus offering an alternative paradigm beyond Western-style democracy.

Both cases of post-Mao China and the independent Singapore indicate that in quite a number of Asian countries, good leaders could still be selected beyond universal suffrage as practised among Western Electoral Democracies, mainly because of the elites-driven context. As to the duo’s succession results, Deng Xiaoping’s selection of leaders was somewhat successful, while Lee Kuan Yew’s was phenomenal.

This paper offers readers a glance over the possibility of selecting good leaders in Asian countries not fully based on Western-style democracy. Learning from the duo’s leadership successions, the West may treat elite politics as the supplement under Western Electoral Democracies in order to avoid their countries falling into the trap of populism. The West could meanwhile consider the exceptional criteria prized by the duo for leadership successions. Considering such interactions among elites in the real-life context, it could serve as an alternative model to Western-style democracy.

This paper aims to examine the hypotheses of main international theories (realism, liberalism and constructivism) and the development of these theories toward the behavior of foreign policy of small states in the developing world. The theories of international relations, especially the realistic theory, face a theoretical debate and a fundamental criticism. The hypotheses of these theories are not able to explain the external behavior of some small states, especially those in the developing world such as Qatar. In particular, these small states do not have the elements of physical power through which they can play this role. However, they are based on the internal determinants (such as political leadership and the variable of perception) and non-physical dimensions of power to play an effective and influential external role.

This topic sheds light on the hypotheses of theories of main international relations, which explain the behavior of foreign policy of small states. This is due to the increased number of such states after the disintegration of Soviet Union, the practice of some countries an effective foreign role and the transformation of the concept of power from the hard power to soft power, and then to smart power

The theories of international relations, especially the realistic theory, face a theoretical debate and a fundamental criticism. The hypotheses of these theories are not able to explain the external behavior of some small states, especially those in the developing world such as Qatar. In particular, these small states do not have the elements of physical power through which they can play this role. However, they are based on the internal determinants (such as political leadership and the variable of perception) and non-physical dimensions of power to play an effective and influential external role.

The importance of the study comes from its interest in small countries in general and the Qatar situation in particular. The small country emerged as a player independent of the Gulf Cooperation Council, unlike what prevailed before, which led to the discussion of a regional role for Qatar despite its small power compared to the strength and size of other factions in the region such as Turkey, Israel and Iran.

About 10 years ago the Singapore Government realized that entrepreneurial spirit was lacking in its general population. These conclusions were confirmed by an empirical survey, the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), an annual assessment of the national level of entrepreneurial activity. The paternalistic and authoritative approach of the government contributed to the general population’s averseness to participating in riskoriented ventures.

Removing impediments to entrepreneurship is a key challenge for the government and the business sector if the island republic is to maintain its national competitiveness. This article explores the various initiatives taken by the government to stimulate risk-taking and attempts to ascertain if the various measures can be used as key factors to strengthen the inherent cultural values that stimulate the entrepreneurial spirit.The observations can serve as a useful tool for academics and managers in recognizing the cultural traits that influence and help foster entrepreneurial tendencies.