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 American appeal appellate courts apply authority basic become body called central century chapter China Chinese civil claims clearly common law complete conflict resolution consent constitutional course created criminal decision district doctrine empire England English essentially evidence existence fact final French functions hear highly imperial important imposed instance institutions interests involved Islamic Italy judges judicial independence jurisdiction jury justice kadis king king's land lawmaking lawyers least legal rules legal systems less litigation magistrate major matter mediation nature noted officers opinion Parliament particular parties persons political practice preexisting Press principal procedures punishment questions reasons regime religious result Roman law seen sense social social control societies solution specific statutes statutory sultan theory third tion tradition trial court typically United University usually various village writs
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...