Oakes Test and Proportionality Test: Balance between the Practical Costs of Limiting Rights and the Benefits Arising from the Law

The analysis of proportionality as a test is raised as a basic foundation for the achievement of Fundamental Rights. We used legal dogmatics and empirical analysis to seek the expected results, from the reading of the RV Oakes trial by the Supreme Court of Canada. In cases involving freedom of expression, two tests are used to resolve disputes. The first examines whether, in fact, the case can be characterized as a violation of freedom of expression; the second assesses whether this violation can be justified by the reasonable limit clause. This test was defined in the RV Oakes trial by the Supreme Court of Canada, concluding with the Oakes Test, used worldwide as a proportionality test. Resulting is a proportionality between the effects of the limiting measure and the objective - the more serious the harmful effects of a measure, the more important the objective must be.

Evolving Paradigm of Right to Development in International Human Rights Law and Its Transformation into the National Legal System: Challenges and Responses in Pakistan

No state can be progressive and prosperous in which a large number of people is deprived of their basic economic rights and freedoms. In the contemporary world of globalization, the right to development has gained a momentum force in the domain of International Development Law (IDL) and has integrated into the National Legal System (NLS) of the major developed states. The international experts on human rights argued that the right to development (RTD) is called a third-generation human right which tends to enhance the welfare and prosperity of individuals, and thus, it is a right to a process whose outcomes are human rights despite the controversy on the implications of RTD. In the Pakistan legal system, the RTD has not been expressly stated in the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. However, there are some implied constitutional provisions which reflect the concept of RTD. The jurisprudence on RTD is still an evolving paradigm in the contextual perspective of Pakistan, and the superior court of diverse jurisdiction acts as a catalyst regarding the protection and enforcement of RTD in the interest of the public at large. However, the case law explores the positive inclination of the courts in Pakistan on RTD be incorporated as an express provision in the chapters of fundamental rights; in this scenario, the high court’s of Pakistan under Article 199 and the supreme court of Pakistan under Article 184(3) have exercised jurisdiction on the enforcement of RTD. This paper inter-alia examines the national dimensions of RTD from the standpoint of state practice in Pakistan and it analyzes the experience of judiciary in the protection and enforcement of RTD. Moreover, the paper highlights the social and cultural challenges to Pakistan in the implementation of RTD and possible solution to improve the conditions of human rights in Pakistan. This paper will also highlight the steps taken by Pakistan regarding the awareness, incorporation, and propagation of RTD at the national level.

Between Legal Authority and Epistemic Competence: A Case Study of the Brazilian Supreme Court

The objective of this paper is to analyze the role played by the institute of the public hearings in the Brazilian Supreme Court. The public hearings are regulated since 1999 by the Brazilian Laws nº 9.868, nº 9.882 and by the Intern Regiment of the Brazilian Supreme Court. According to this legislation, the public hearings are supposed to be called when a matter of circumstance of fact must be clarified, what can be done through the hearing of the testimonies of persons with expertise and authority in the theme related to the cause. This work aims to investigate what is the role played by the public hearings and by the experts in the Brazilian Supreme Court. The hypothesis of this research is that: (I) The public hearings in the Brazilian Supreme Court are used to uphold a rhetoric of a democratic legitimacy of the Court`s decisions; (II) The Legislative intentions have been distorted. To test this hypothesis, the adopted methodology involves an empirical study of the Brazilian jurisprudence. As a conclusion, it follows that the public hearings convened by the Brazilian Supreme Court do not correspond, in practice, to the role assigned to them by the Congress since they do not serve properly to epistemic interests. The public hearings not only do not legitimate democratically the decisions, but also, do not properly clarify technical issues.

U.S. Supreme Court Decision Making in the Area of Religion, 1987-2011

There are many views on how human decision makers behave. In this work, the Justices of the United States Supreme Court will be viewed in terms of constrained maximization and cognitivecybernetic theory. This paper will integrate research in such fields as law, political science, psychology, economics and decision making theory. It will be argued that due to its heavy workload, the Supreme Court is forced to make decisions in a boundedly rational manner. The ideas and theory put forward here will be tested in the area of the Court’s decisions involving religion. Therefore, the cases involving the U.S. Constitution’s Free Exercise Clause and Establishment Clause will be analyzed. Also, variables such as the U.S. government’s involvement in these cases will be considered. The years to be studied will be 1987-2011.

U.S. Supreme Court Justices and Partisanship: Support for the President and Solicitor General

This paper analyzes the extent to which the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court cast votes that support the positions of the president, or more generally the Executive Branch. Can presidents count on such deference from those justices they nominate or those whom are nominated by other presidents of the same party? Or, do the justices demonstrate judicial independence and impartiality such that they are not so predisposed to vote in favor of arguments of their nominating president-s party? The results suggest that while in general the justices do not exhibit any marked tendency to partisan support of presidents, more recent and conservative Supreme Court justices are significantly more likely to support Republican presidents.

"A Call for School Diversity": A Practical Response to the Supreme Court Decision on Race and American Schools

American public schools should be the place that reflects America-s diverse society. The recent Supreme Court decision to discontinue the use of race as a factor in school admission policies has caused major setbacks in America-s effort to repair its racial divide, to improve public schools, and to provide opportunities for all people, regardless of race or creed. However, educators should not allow such legal decision to hinder their ability to teach children tolerance of others in schools and classrooms in America.