bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Fighting for Credibility: US Reputation Building in Asymmetric Conflicts from the Gulf War to Syria (1991–2013)
Authors: Harvey Frank P. , Mitton John 
Published: February 2016

AbstractDo international reputations matter and are they transferable from one context to another? These critically important questions continue to frame policy debates surrounding US responses to crises in Syria and Ukraine. For skeptics, past actions and reputations for resolve have no bearing on an adversary's assessment of US credibility; relative “power” and “interests” explain behaviour (Hopf, 1994; Mercer, 1996; Press, 2005; Walt, 2013; Zakaria 2013). We argue that scholars who dismiss the relevance of reputations typically sidestep important questions about how adversaries actually acquire relevant information about US interests and power. Building on an extensive collection of qualitative and quantitative studies of US deterrence encounters in asymmetric conflicts over the last two decades, we argue that lessons from past actions inform an adversary's interpretation of US interests in any given case and provide crucial information about Washington's willingness to deploy military force (capabilities). By implication, lessons learned from Bosnia 1992–1995 informed actions in Kosovo 1999, which, in turn, informed subsequent assessments of US interests and commitments in Iraq 1991, 1998 and 2003. Similarly, lessons about US reputations and credibility in Iraq from 1991 to 2003 were critically important to successful WMD diplomacy in Syria. Policy implications are addressed in the conclusion.
Toleration Without Hate Speech: The Keegstra Decision, American Free Speech Exceptionalism and Locke's Letter
Authors: LaSelva Samuel V. 
Published: February 2016

AbstractThis paper re-examines the issue of hate propaganda under the Canadian Charter of Rights and the US Bill of Rights. It also reconsiders the significance of Locke's Letter Concerning Toleration. What the paper attempts to show is that one strand of Locke's famous argument supports First Amendment exceptionalism and Justice Holmes's dissenting opinions in Abrams and Schwimmer, but another strand buttresses the Keegstra and Butler decisions and the Report of the Special Committee on Hate Propaganda in Canada. In the contemporary context of the debate over free speech and its limits, Lockean toleration has communitarian as well as libertarian dimensions, and the control of hate propaganda in Canada's multicultural and multinational polity becomes more clearly an important part of the liberal tradition.
The Teaching of Religion in Government Funded Schools in Israel
Authors: Goldstein Stephen 
Published: February 2016

Religious education in Israel is inextricably linked with the more general aspects of the complex role of religion in Israel, which in turn cannot be understood without a basic understanding of Israel as a Jewish state, as well as that of the traditional status of religious-ethnic-national groups in the Middle East.A comprehensive discussion of these complex issues would take us well beyond the confines of this paper. Thus, we will discuss them only briefly herein, thereby necessarily dealing in generalizations which may, at times, be overly simplistic.
A Digest of Selected Judgments of the Supreme Court of Israel
Authors: Rothman Ivan 
Published: February 2016

The following is a survey of major judgments of the Supreme Court of Israel published in (1990) 44 Piskei Din, volumes (i) and (ii), directly following upon our last digest which appeared in (1991) 25 Is. L. R. 219.I. Constitutional and Administrative LawMedianwest Herzliya Medical Centre Ltd. v. Director General of the Ministry of Health & the Minister of Health (1990) 44(i) P.D. 19Commodities and Services (Control) Law, 1957 —parallel legislation — effects of policy — exercise of discretionThe petitioner, a company registered in Israel, was established by a group of private, foreign investors for the purpose of developing and operating a number of private medical centres, and providing medical services. The petition centred on the respondents' refusal to allow the petitioner to open a hospital in Haifa. According to the respondents, their refusal reflected a general policy to oppose the establishment of additional public or private hospitals.
Privacy Rights and Satellite Broadcasts
Authors: Gillis Jonathan 
Published: February 2016

The subject matter of this article is, at bottom, a practical problem. It accepts that people have a right to privacy and that this right should find proper protection in the law. It asks, simply, whether such protection is at all feasible given the particular technology of broadcast by satellite.For the purposes of investigating this problem several issues must be addressed. First is the nature of the violation of privacy involved. Our concern here is principally with TV news broadcasts. We begin from the point where the debate over “what is in the public interest versus what the public is interested in” has ended; there will be general consensus that the content of a certain broadcast represents a violation of an individual's privacy and one about which the law should do something. An example might be the filming in the public domain of a private individual caught in the shock of personal grief or tragedy. In such a case we would need to investigate the nature of the injury involved in any subsequent broadcast of these sounds and images, and to ask what dimension, if any, is added to this injury by their simultaneous broadcast across the globe.
Toward Justice in the Organ Trade
Authors: Zohar Noam J. 
Published: February 2016

Transplantation of organs from live persons may take place without any payment to the donors, and this involves relatively few moral problems. Gift donation appears to be widely accepted as a laudable and welcome form of benevolence. Even though an organ gift may entail some risk to the donor, his or her consent — provided that it is freely given and properly informed — renders such risk non-objectionable.Gift donation cannot, however, be expected to fill the large and growing demand for transplant organs. Thus, the issue of a market in organs has for some years now been the subject of ethical and legal scrutiny, and has been addressed by (generally prohibitive) legislation. What follows is intended as a critical survey, focusing initially on organ-buying, and then on organ-selling.
“Ownership” “Assets” and Transferability of “Property Rights”
Authors: Weisman Joshua 
Published: February 2016

1. The connection between the proprietary nature of a right and its transferability was discussed at length in my article, “Some Fundamental Concepts of Property Law: A Critical Survey”. The view expressed there was criticised by Prof. Tedeschi in two articles: the first, “On the Right of Preemption in Land”, and the second — “Property and Transferability — Ownership of Organs Taken from a Living Person”. The latter included criticism of certain things I had written in my article, “Organs as Assets”, in relation to the connection between an object constituting an “asset” and it being “transferable”.According to my approach, transferability is a central feature of a property right, and of the nature of a thing as an “asset”. Prof. Tedeschi, however, believes otherwise.
Gift Of Organs — A Note
Authors: Rabello Alfredo Mordechai 
Published: February 2016

Is it possible to view human organs as assets that can be given as “the subject of a gift”? The view most widely accepted in the legal literature is that a dispositionary act in relation to our body cannot constitute the object of a binding contract, if the execution of the contract could endanger the life of the person (i.e. the person making the disposition) or constitute a risk to his physical well-being. In such a case, the contract would contradict the general principles of law and morality.It is an accepted legal principle that a person may make a commitment to give hair, to nurse a child or to donate blood. In a contract for consideration, the validity of the obligation must be determined, but stipulating specific performance is prohibited, thus the only remedy can be the awarding of damages. The law in Israel is clear that the giver of a gift can retract his promise up until the moment of giving, and if the intended recipient of the promised organ is detrimentally affected, the reluctant giver will be liable, at most, to compensate the frustrated recipient.
On the Relevance of “Relevance” to the Theory of Legal Factfinding
Authors: Scolnicov Anat 
Published: February 2016

In modern evidence theory two main theories of legal factfinding have emerged. One of these is the mathematical probabilistic approach, which claims that the universal rules of mathematics apply to legal factfinding as to any other rational decision-making. The opposite approach, of Tribe, Nesson and others, contests this view. Those opposing the mathematical theory have done so mostly on grounds of legal policy, which I shall not be concerned with. However, some of the sharpest criticism, at least from the point of view of the adherents of the mathematical explanation, has been of the soundness of the mathematical explanation. In certain instances typical to the legal process, the mathematical approach has been claimed to lead to absurd results which contradict common sense and legal doctrine.In this paper I will claim that the rules of mathematical probability must apply to legal factfinding and if fallacies in its application are exposed, their existence must be due to error in the way in which the rules have been applied. I will argue and try to prove that the concept of relevance, an essential concept to any theory of legal factfinding, has been disregarded in mathematical probability theory.
Children v. Parents: A New Tort Duty-Situation for Psychiatric Injury?
Authors: Kershner Susan Maidment 
Published: February 2016

SummaryRecognition of liability in negligence for personal injury, whether physical or psychiatric, is a question of public policy par excellence. In English tort law, public policy is a transparent judicial requirement in fixing liability even when negligence is established otherwise. In considering the tortious liability of a local authority to children in its care, the English House of Lords has, in obiter dicta, raised doubts as a matter of public policy concerning the enforceability of claims for damages by children against a parent for emotional neglect causing psychiatric injury. In Israel, by contrast, the Supreme Court recently extended tortious liability by enforcing the parental duty of care to children through a claim for psychiatric injury. So far Israeli law is unique in this development. Variations in judicial policy concerning the recognition of claims by children for psychiatric injury are considered here, in the contexts of English tort law, and Israeli, US and European human rights law.
Further Hearing – Theoretical and Empirical Aspects
Authors: Goldschmidt Chanan 
Published: February 2016

AbstractThe hearing framework known as a further hearing has been familiar to the general public in Israel for some time. This procedure is granted upon the petition of the parties or by the justices of a specific panel of the Supreme Court. However comprehensible the concept appears to be, in view of its simple designation, this legal device has not merited meaningful attention in legal research. By law, a further hearing is a situation where “in a matter on which the Supreme Court has ruled, with a panel of three or more justices, it may rule at a further hearing as a panel of five or more justices.” In such a case, an expanded Supreme Court bench hears a matter that has already been ruled, but the Court may also convene an expanded panel in other instances. It may also do so in a case that was originally heard by an expanded panel without being designated a further hearing, in which case, it will simply be designated an “expanded panel.” This article will address the concept of the further hearing, as opposed to the phenomenon of “expanded panels” in general. The first part of this article will be theoretical, and we will seek a conceptual understanding of this legal institution. In the second part, the article will address empirical research on this subject and will present quantitative data on further hearings held in the course of over thirty years of Supreme Court adjudication (1970-2000). The third and last part of this article will present possible conclusions that may be drawn from the empirical results and will question the need for such an institution.
Foundations in Germany and Israel: An Analysis of the Legal Framework
Authors: Lerner Pablo 
Published: February 2016

AbstractThis article compares the law of foundations (charities) in Germany and Israel. What is a foundation and what it is created for, may receive different answers in different legal systems. When an Israeli jurist refers tohekdesh, he is not referring to the same concepts included in the GermanStiftung. These differences find expression both in practical and theoretical matters. For example, German law recognizes the foundation as a legal personality, a characteristic lacking in Israeli law. Moreover, in Germany a foundation managing a business enterprise, or an enterprise adopting the legal form of a foundation, is an accepted phenomenon, but this is not accepted in Israel.To understand what a foundation is, it is necessary to distinguish between the different types of foundations: on one hand public or private ones, and on the other hand religious and secular foundations. This article discusses the methods of creating a foundation (mortis causaorinter vivos) and examines the elements needed to create it: purposes, assets (one of the central points in Foundations Law is to ensure their efficient use) and management. The comparison does not obviate the problem of state supervision, needed to ensure the right of the beneficiaries and of the entire community to correct usage of the endowed resources.In the final analysis, the paper stresses the importance of comparative law as an instrument aimed to broaden legal theory and enrich the dialogue between jurists of different countries.
Three-Dimensional Partition and Registration of Subsurface Land Space
Authors: Sandberg Haim 
Published: February 2016

AbstractTraditional legal doctrine pictures land ownership in the form of a cone down to the center of the earth. This article suggests that it is desirable for the law to enable subsurface subdivision into separate, three-dimensional property units, constituting separate subjects for title and transactions. Thus the law would contribute to the public interest in recognizing the subsurface space as a separate property unit from both the functional and the planning aspects.Before three-dimensional registration can begin, it is necessary to create an infrastructure of professional standards for three-dimensional survey for registration purposes. The creation of such standards constitutes one of the main goals of the world survey profession.It may be assumed that there is a downward limit below which the subsurface has no effect on the surface space and vice versa. In this case, the traditional doctrine may be seriously contested by the argument that those deep levels of the earth should be defined as a collective property. However, it is not practical to establish a fixed downward limit upon ownership of subsurface space. When expropriating the subsurface, it is necessary to compensate the landowner for the consequential damage, as well as for the direct damage incurred. There is some doubt whether compensation should be paid for subsurface area that the landowner could not reasonably and practically exploit. As soon as the axiomatic impediment to three-dimensional subdivision is removed, the importance of long-term planning for subsurface use will increase.
Levirate Marriage in the State of Israel: Ethnic Encounter and the Challenge of a Jewish State
Authors: Westreich Elimelech 
Published: February 2016

AbstractThe article examines the approach of leading rabbis toward levirate marriages following the establishment of the State of Israel. Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi Herzog supported the abolishment of levirate marriages and attempted to impose on all ethnic communities the Ashkenazi approach, which since the 13th century favoredchalitza. Chief Sephardic Rabbi Uziel supported rabbi Herzog although the levirate commandment takes precedence overchalitzain the Sephardic and oriental traditions and is practiced in these communities. In 1950, the two Chief Rabbis led a council of rabbis that enacted a regulation rejecting levirate marriages and favoringchalitza. Rabbi Uziel believed that two opposing traditions governing an issue as central as family law are not appropriate in a modern state. He perceived the levirate marriage, which binds women in matrimonial relations against their will, to be inconsistent with their status in the modern era. The strong roots of the Ashkenazi Halachic tradition, which has for many generations rejected levirate marriages, allowed him to demand that all ethnic groups adopt it. Rabbi Yossef and other oriental critics regard his actions as submissive to Ashkenazi tradition, a criticism I reject. Rabbi Yossef vigorously opposed the abolition of levirate marriages, and in a decision in 1951 he claimed that it was invalid. It was the beginning of his struggle against what he perceived as Ashkenazi dominance and Sephardic submission, demanding the restoration of the oriental and Sephardic traditions. In time, this became an explicit ideological-political stance under the mottoleachzir atara le'yoshna. I suggest that Rabbi Yossef endeavors to restore the golden age of the Bashi sages in Jerusalem, chief among them Rabbi Elyashar, at the twilight of the Ottoman period.
Embryonic Stem Cell Research and Therapeutic Cloning: Scientific, Ethical and Legal Perspectives
Authors: Dahan Leora 
Published: February 2016

AbstractAt the turn of the millennium, some of the most controversial topics being internationally debated were the issues of embryonic stem cell research and cloning. Stem cell research involves the exploration of the medical possibilities latent in primary, relatively undifferentiated cells. Such research, however, is not fully supported by the entire scientific community or by all of the general public due to the ethically controversial practices involved in such research. Generally, stem cell research requires the destruction of an embryo, which is perceived by some as the destruction of human life, or at least the destruction of an entity bearing the potential to evolve into human life. Thus, despite its vast potential, stem cell research has been condemned by some as disrespectful of the value of human life, and even as murder. Similarly, therapeutic cloning techniques have been attacked as unnatural and unethical, especially due to their close affiliation with reproductive cloning. The wide variety of opinions held throughout the globe has lead to a diverse spectrum of legal arrangements. Various governments have chosen to regulate this matter in various ways. Some have explicitly addressed the matter in primary legislation, while others have chosen more indirect ways of “resolving” the situation. Still others have chosen to “ignore” the problem by neglecting to establish a clear legal policy. This article reviews the various ethical and legal perspectives held with regard to these controversial fields and suggests the preferability of one particular ethical tendency and one particular method of regulation.
Human Rights, Democracy, and the Inescapability of Politics; or, Human Dignity Thick and Thin
Authors: Mirsky Yehudah 
Published: February 2016

The essay places the ICJ opinion in a broader legal and political context and argues that the failure to distinguish between democratic and non-democratic regimes characterizing the ICJ advisory opinion reflects broader trends with potentially ruinous consequences for the enterprise of human rights promotion itself. The ICJ opinion's willful ignoring of Israel's democratic character yielded a tendentious and inconsistent ruling. By contrast the Israel High Court of Justice's decision invalidating portions of Israel's security wall reflects a healthy understanding of a democracy's needs and limitations, as reflected in that court's proportionality standard of review. The ICJ willingly blurred crucial distinctions between democratic regimes that genuinely adhere, however imperfectly, to principles of human rights in their own governance, and those states and actors that do not, a distinction made all the more imperative by the events of September 11.The judicialization of human rights in the post-Cold War era takes place against the background of a tensile relationship between human rights advocacy and democracy promotion during the Cold War. While human rights represent an essentially legal idea, democracy a political idea. In closing, the essay lays out one basic, hopefully workable, conceptual division of labor between human rights and democracy as complementary elements of a broader project of human dignity, in which human rights represents a “thin” universal conception of human dignity, while democracy offers a process whereby that conception can be “thickened” in various political, social and cultural contexts around the globe.
Administering the Territories: An Inquiry into the Application of International Humanitarian Law by the IDF in the Occupied Territories
Authors: Cohen Amichai 
Published: February 2016

This article seeks to evaluate Israel's implementation of the international law of occupation in the territories which it came to control after the Six-Day War, from a new perspective. Many scholars have criticized or justified specific Israeli policies by comparing them to specific norms of international law. Contrary to this scholarship, this article addresses the questions at the core of current debates over the implementation of international law: Why has Israel chosen to implement some specific rules of international law and to ignore others? And what caused the changes in Israel's implementation of international law?Some of the answers to these questions can be found by examining the interests of various institutions involved in the implementation of International law, and the interplay between them. I suggest that in order to understand Israel's initial behavior one must look at the interests, goals and culture of the Israeli army, the IDF, the institution initially responsible for administering the territories. I shall further argue that subsequent changes in policies are a result of the struggle between the IDF and other Israeli institutions attempting to gain influence over the way the territories were controlled.