Public Workers: Government Employee Unions, the Law, and the State, 1900-1962

В современной методологии юриспруденции происходит переход от изучения состояний ее объекта, которыми выступают право и государство, к постижению этого объекта в его изменениях и превращениях. Две подсистемы методологии юриспруденции, подсистема обращенная к состоянию права и государства; и подсистема обращенная к изменениям права и государства, — получают свое отображение в концептуальной форме, методологических подходах, методах, специфических понятиях. Показательны перемены в содержании методологии юриспруденции, где определяющее значение имеют методологические подходы, определяющие стратегию исследовательских поисков во взаимосвязи юриспруденции с правом и государством. Среди наиболее характерных подходов антропологический, аксиологический, цивилизационный, синергетический и герменевтический — определяют плюралистичность современной методологии и свидетельствуют о становлении новой парадигмы методологии юриспруденции. In modern methodology of jurisprudence there is a transition from the study the states of its object to its comprehension in changes and transformations. Hence the two subsystems of methodology of jurisprudence: subsystem facing the states of the law and the state as well as their components and aspects; and subsystem facing the changes of the law and the state in general and their constituents. These subsystems of methodology of jurisprudence receive its reflection in conceptual form, methodological approaches, methods, specific concepts. Methodology of jurisprudence should not be restricted to the methodology of legal theory. In this regard, it is an important methodological question about subject of jurisprudence. It is proposed to consider the subject of jurisprudence as complex, covering both the law and the state in their specificity, interaction and integrity. Indicative changes in the content methodology of jurisprudence are the usage of decisive importance methodological approaches that govern research strategy searches in conjunction with the law and the state. Among the most characteristic of modern development approaches: anthropological, axiological, civilization, synergistic and hermeneutic. Modern methodology of jurisprudence is pluralistic in nature alleging various approaches to the law and the state. Marked approaches allow the formation of a new paradigm methodology of jurisprudence.

Download Full-text

Urgensi Assesment Report Dalam Omnibus Law RUU Cipta Kerja

ADALAH ◽

10.15408/adalah.v4i3.16419 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 4 (3) ◽

Author(s):

Indra Rahmatullah

Keyword(s):

Academic Research ◽

Legal Protection ◽

The State ◽

The Law ◽

Scientific Arguments

Abstract:A draft law must be able to answer and solve the main problem of the society so that with the existence of the law the community gets legal protection from the state. However, the draft of Cipta Kerja Law makes an endless controversy. In fact, the draft was allegedly containing some problems since its appearance. Therefore, academic research (Assesment Report) is needed so that the rules in the draft have basic scientific arguments that can be justified. Unfortunately, the draft does not conduct an assesment report to know whether the society need the law and urgent.Keywords: Legal Protection, Controversy and Assesment Report Abstrak:Sebuah rancangan undang-undang harus dapat menjawab dan menyentuh pokok permasalahan masyarakat sehingga dengan adanya undang-undang tersebut masyarakat mendapatkan sebuah perlindungan hukum dari negara. Namun, dalam RUU Cipta Kerja ini justru berakibat pada kontroversi yang tiada hentinya. Bahkan, disinyalir RUU ini mengandung kecacatan sejak awal pembentukannya. Oleh karena itu, dibutuhkan penelitian akademis sehingga aturan-aturan yang ada dalam RUU ini mempunyai basis argumentasi ilmiah yang dapat dipertanggungjawabkan yang salah satunya adalah dengan membuat Laporan Kelayakan. Sayangnya RUU ini belum melakukan laporan kelayakan apakah RUU ini dibutuhkan dan penting di masyarakat.Katakunci: Perlindungan Hukum, Kontroversi dan Laporan Kelayakan

Download Full-text

The Constitutional Principle of Accountability: A Study of Contemporary South African Case Law

Southern African Public Law ◽

10.25159/2522-6800/2955 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 33 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Chuks Okpaluba

Keyword(s):

Judicial Review ◽

Police Officers ◽

Public Procurement ◽

Case Law ◽

The State ◽

Constitutional Principle ◽

Starting Point ◽

The Law ◽

Constitutional Right ◽

The Many

‘Accountability’ is one of the democratic values entrenched in the Constitution of South Africa, 1996. It is a value recognised throughout the Constitution and imposed upon the law-making organs of state, the Executive, the Judiciary and all public functionaries. This constitutional imperative is given pride of place among the other founding values: equality before the law, the rule of law and the supremacy of the Constitution. This study therefore sets out to investigate how the courts have grappled with the interpretation and application of the principle of accountability, the starting point being the relationship between accountability and judicial review. Therefore, in the exercise of its judicial review power, a court may enquire whether the failure of a public functionary to comply with a constitutional duty of accountability renders the decision made illegal, irrational or unreasonable. One of the many facets of the principle of accountability upon which this article dwells is to ascertain how the courts have deployed that expression in making the state and its agencies liable for the delictual wrongs committed against an individual in vindication of a breach of the individual’s constitutional right in the course of performing a public duty. Here, accountability and breach of public duty; the liability of the state for detaining illegal immigrants contrary to the prescripts of the law; the vicarious liability of the state for the criminal acts of the police and other law-enforcement officers (as in police rape cases and misuse of official firearms by police officers), and the liability of the state for delictual conduct in the context of public procurement are discussed. Having carefully analysed the available case law, this article concludes that no public functionary can brush aside the duty of accountability wherever it is imposed without being in breach of a vital constitutional mandate. Further, it is the constitutional duty of the courts, when called upon, to declare such act or conduct an infringement of the Constitution.

Download Full-text