Religion, religious fervour, and universalist education

This paper is conceived from a secular perspective, and designed to address three elements identified in the call for papers: “Pluralistic tendencies”, their counterpart of “exclusivist attitudes”, and “creating an ethos of inter-religious harmony”. I choose to tackle these aspects by (a) exploring the meaning of religion, (b) addressing a specific attitude often corresponding to religion, namely religious fervour, and (c) assessing the validity and instrumentality of facilitating a universalist education as a tool to defuse “mistrust and hatred among various faith-communities”. The following paper is intended to serve only as a preliminary discussion guidance paper

A Proposal for a Borderland Dispute Settlement Continuum Mechanism

The malaise felt by both Canadians and Americans regarding several areas of trade does not exist in a vacuum. It is not difficult to surmise that besides the genuine tension owing to actual implementation of liberal trade principles in the trade practise between the two states, and to their diverging interpretations of these principles, lies also some political opportunism. Not only has the US pursued a unilateralist course in its trade relations with Canada; it did so also in matters security, which have created, at least a perception, of an unfavourable impact on Canadian economic interests. The US current beleaguered international reputation in matters foreign policy regarding both security and economic issues may therefore tilt the pendulum in Canada’s favour. From a power contest point of view, perhaps now is the time and opportunity for Canada to reap also international “moral” (juridical), in addition to economic, gains

The International Lease As A Legal Instrument Of Conflict resolution: The Shab\u27a Farms As A Prototype For The Resolution Of Territorial Conflicts

The Shab\u27a Farms have been considered the linchpin in the Hizb\u27 Allah rhetoric to destabilize the Israel-Lebanon-Syria relationshi

Defining Terrorism: A Comparison of Several Judicial-Executive Dialogues

The events of 9/11 have forced upon the entire community of Western states a re-assessment of their respective anti-terrorism policies and laws. It released an intense discussion seeking to update and re-characterize the post-9/11 state of international relations producing a wave of renewed attempts to legally (re)define terrorism. The main challenge is to determine whether terrorism in its twenty-first century manifestation warrants recognition as a component within the doctrine of armed conflict and what would be the effects of such transformation. This article compares how the judiciary in Western liberal and pluralist democracies has been tackling this dilemma and affecting respective legislative responses. The article offers preliminary thoughts as guidelines to the design of parameters for an approach to anti-terrorism security that is common to North America (and the rest of the world). To this effect, it contextualizes the relevant North American jurisprudential developments within a sample of other Western-oriented judicial track records. The article finds that the North American dialogue (in Canada and the US) among the three branches of government is departing from two opposite ends of one and the same Western War on Terror adjudicative spectrum. This context appears to be slowly, but eventually, progressing toward conversion, effecting a common re-characterization and definition of terrorism, anti-terrorism, and their place within the doctrine of armed conflict

"Private party direct access: A comparison of the NAFTA and the EU disciplines"

This paper will study the subject of locus standi of non-state actors within the dispute resolution regimes established by the EU and NAFTA. While NAFTA addresses the issue on a sectoral basis, the EU deals with it as an institutional and constitutional matter. The purpose of the paper is to juxtapose the different approaches and their solutions to the issue of the protection of the rights of private parties as devised in the two regional arrangements. The first part will discuss the nature of the two agreements and will focus on NAFTA as a regional agreement without institutions in comparison to the EU which represents an enterprise in regional integration equipped with powerful and authoritative institutions. The setting explained, I will elaborate on the concept of private party and follow with a general review of the choice of remedy (or the selection of dispute resolution mechanisms). Then, the distinction between direct versus non-direct access will be explored, for the main challenge to the private party's right to remedy arising from the inter- and supranational arrangements lies in this particular detail. Next, I will analyze the private party direct access to dispute resolution in NAFTA. Most relevant to this paper is the NAFTA Chapter 11 Section B dealing with dispute resolution regarding investments and the investor's right direct access. Dispute resolution and private party direct access in the EU will involve a discussion of the Community court system and of ART. 173 (4) of the EC treaty in particular. The paper will conclude with observations on the difference between NAFTA and the EU concerning approaches to private party direct access

Labor Mobility under NAFTA: Regulatory Policy Spearheading the Social Supplement to the International Trade Regime [Article]

This material published in Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law is made available by the James E. Rogers College of Law, the Daniel F. Cracchiolo Law Library, and the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact the AJICL Editorial Board at http://arizonajournal.org/contact-us/