* Views of Cambridge Core between #date#. This data is updated every 24 hours. Dmitry Maleshin, Alan Uzelac, Danie Van Loggerenberg, Brian Conlon, Karol Weitz, Iryna IZAROVA, Elisabetta Silvestri If you buy books through these links, the Internet Archive may earn a small commission. (c) (2019) LexisNexis Canada Inc.: Supreme Court Law Review Brazil is the country with the largest number of law schools – about 1.3,000 – and a large number of law graduates – about 830,000 licensed lawyers and 1.5 million unlicensed law graduates, according to official statistics. Not only that, but the number of law schools in Brazil is greater than the sum of all other law schools in the world (as an idea, the United States has 205 law schools and Australia has only 36). Our figures are impressive and give us enormous research potential – at least in terms of “human resources”. However, it is admitted that legal education and research in Brazil is still poor and outdated. The majority of law schools use only the lecture system as the standard for teaching. And most research is just a matter of analyzing the legal text without relying on empirical data. Certainly, there are other factors that influence this negative scenario, for example, the increasing massification of Brazilian universities into profitable business models – for example. We have the largest educational resources in the world. All these and other contributions are discussed in more detail in this paper. In this sense, the result of legal education is that only a small part of Brazilian students manage to become lawyers, since about 80-90% of graduates fail the national bar exam.
Even among those that do exist, legal knowledge is not exemplary. From a legal research perspective, the results have also been disappointing. The optimistic side is that, although most “mass schools” still suffer from anachronism and Jews and the Law, edited by Suzanne Last Stone & Ari Mermelstein, the paper intervenes in the burgeoning field of comparative constitutionalism. Using comparative constitutional research on gay rights as a case study, it examines the science that comparative constitutionalists produce, including the methodology and underlying assumptions about constitutions. He criticizes the dominant comparative work on gay rights for its methodological thinness. Such research considers constitutions to be rules-based and favours judgments by constitutional courts over the practice of constitutionalism in other places of governance. Foreign examples are put into use to make changes in a particular place. From the perspective of an activist or lawyer, the comparative constitutional work on gay rights that currently prevails can be misleading. The overemphasis on the courts as a forum for constitutional amendment distracts litigation efforts from other forms of activism.
The literature also exaggerates the transferability of constitutional precedents by ignoring them from their discursive and cultural context. Moreover, the consistent selection of a handful of success stories from historical jurisdictions distracts from the possible lessons that await in failures in which reform efforts have failed. The work is also unsatisfactory from a scientific point of view. By accepting the current framework of debate, comparative constitutionalists cannot imagine changes beyond same-sex marital conflicts and, therefore, miss their distinctive power as scholars. The article argues for thick instrumentalism as a mode of comparative constitutional science. Thick Instrumentalism combines a commitment to a project of justice for gay rights with a richer, more discursive, and culturally sensitive understanding of the different places where constitutional rights are respected and violated. This issue does not yet have a description. Can you add one? The book`s summary views reflect the number of visits to the book`s and chapter`s landing pages. Full-text views reflect the number of PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox, and Kindle, and full-text HTML views for chapters in this book.
In March 2009, Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and several other ousted judges were reappointed to Pakistan`s Supreme Court following a populist movement to re-establish an independent judiciary. Pakistan`s Supreme Court has since addressed legal activism, which has led to a conflict between the judiciary and the elected executive, challenging the distinction between the rule of law and the judiciary of politics. This article deconstructs philosophical debates about the meaning and relevance of the rule of law to show that claims of universal applicability, neutrality, and inherent value involved in the dominant modes of rule of law theory are hollow.
Recent Comments