Courts: A Comparative and Political Analysis
In this provocative work, Martin Shapiro proposes an original model for the study of courts, one that emphasizes the different modes of decision making and the multiple political roles that characterize the functioning of courts in different political systems.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
actually administrative law appellate courts arbitration assize basic body of law caliph central century chancellor Chancery chapter China Chinese civil law common law common law courts conflict resolution Confucian consent constitutional council criminal crown decision disputes district doctrine empire enforcement England English courts essentially evidence existence fact fact-finding French hierarchical imperial important imposed instance institutions involved Islamic law judges judicial independence judicial lawmaking judiciary jurisdiction jury justice kadis kaziaskers king King's Bench land law systems lawyers legal systems legislation litigation lord magistrate mazalim mediation mediatory medieval Muslim officers Ottoman Ottoman Empire Parliament particular parties persons political authority preexisting legal rules procedures prototype of courts punishment regime religious Roman law seyhulislam Sharia social control societies specific Star Chamber statutes statutory subordinates sultan Tameside theory tion tradition triadic conflict trial court trial de novo typically ultra vires University Press village writs yamen
Page 1 - ... prototype of courts" is not reflected in the actual operations of judicial bodies. And yet, it is important to retain his general conclusion that it is precisely the departure from the triadic structure that is a source of possible weakness of judicial legitimacy. "[FJrom [the triad's] overwhelming appeal to common sense stems the basic political legitimacy of courts everywhere...