Related Papers
European Journal of Risk Regulation
From Poisons to Antidotes: Algorithms as Democracy Boosters
Paolo Cavaliere
Under what conditions can artificial intelligence contribute to political processes without undermining their legitimacy? Thanks to the ever-growing availability of data and the increasing power of decision-making algorithms, the future of political institutions is unlikely to be anything similar to what we have known throughout the last century, possibly with parliaments deprived of their traditional authority and public decision-making processes largely unaccountable. This paper discusses and challenges these concerns by suggesting a theoretical framework under which algorithmic decision-making is compatible with democracy and, most relevantly, can offer a viable solution to counter the rise of populist rhetoric in the governance arena. Such a framework is based on three pillars: (1) understanding the civic issues that are subjected to automated decision-making; (2) controlling the issues that are assigned to AI; and (3) evaluating and challenging the outputs of algorithmic decisi...
Mass. Housing Court
Motion to Disqualify Justice Jeffrey M. Winik, with Judicial Notice
2023 •
Rorie Woods, Laura Mello
The PATRIOT ACT is invoked against TREASONOUS Justices aiding and abetting abject fraud culminating in GENOCIDE of the American middle class. Apparently the quickest way to corral the populace into *smart cities* with relentless surveillance is to eliminate the creative thinkers and self starters: the small business owners and the middle class. Jail the Judges, and those left standing will JAIL the BANKSTERS. Copy, Paste, and FILE!
European Constitutional Law Review, 15:3, pp. 574-588
The Implications of the Otegi Case for the Legitimacy of the Spanish Judiciary: ECtHR 6 February, Case Nos. 4184/15 and 4 other applications, Otegi Mondragon and Others v Spain
2019 •
Joan Solanes Mullor
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies
Restricted vision: Censorship and cinematic resistance in Thailand
2021 •
Noah Keone Viernes
Film censorship screens the nation as a 'way of seeing' that is both fundamental to the art of governance and vulnerable to the flexibility of contemporary global images. In Thailand, this historically-conditioned regime arose in the geopolitics of the 1930 Film Act, the Motion Pictures and Video Act of 2008, and a coterminous regulation of visuality as a form of cultural governance. I pursue a close reading of two banned films by Apichatpong Weerasethakul and Nontawat Numbenchapol, respectively, to illustrate the aesthetics of film censorship in light of the development of a national cinema, especially to consider the strategies that film-makers use to negotiate the governance of vision. There will be those who wonder why this matters; why an independent film-maker's movie getting shelved should be of concern to anyone. It's because what happens in the film industry shows us more than how the board of censors works. It shows us how Thailand works. And that really is important. 1
SSRN Electronic Journal
Investment Treaties and National Governance in India: Rearrangements, Empowerment, and Discipline
2020 •
Josef Ostřanský
Cambridge University Press eBooks
Constitutional Challenges in the Algorithmic Society
2021 •
Erik Longo
The Foreclosure Echo
2019 •
Judith Fox
Coming in from the Cold: Canada's National Housing Strategy, Homelessness, and the Right to Housing in a Transnational Perspective
David J DesBaillets
European Constitutional Law Review
External Border Control Techniques in the EU as a Challenge to the Principle of Non-Refoulement
2021 •
Iris Goldner Lang
Principle of non-refoulement protected by EU law-National practices-Deterrence-Pushbacks-Border police deterrence-Reaction of EU institutions-Legal uncertainties-'Safe country of origin'-'First country of asylum'-'Safe third country'-EU values-New Pact on Migration and Asylum
Asian Journal of Law and Society
Politics and the Federal Court of Malaysia, 1960–2018: An Empirical Investigation
2020 •
Bjoern Dressel
Since its inception in 1957, Malaysia’s Federal Court (FC) has often been embroiled in high-profile decisions that have dramatically shaped the rule of law and constitutional practice in Malaysia. Recent political change has renewed hope that the FC can reassert its early role as an independent and impartial arbiter of political conflict. This paper investigates determinants of the FC’s behaviour since 1960. It draws on a unique data set of 102 major political cases and socio-biographic profiles of the 73 judges who voted in these cases. After describing patterns of court decisions across time and judges, we test specifically for the impact on their decisions of the 1988 judicial crisis, length of time on the bench, the terms of successive prime ministers, and judges’ personal attributes, such as religion and ethnicity. Ethnicity, appointment after 1988, and the appointing prime minister proved to be closely associated with the direction of voting. We then position the results in the context of Malaysia’s evolving constitutional democracy and discuss their implications for students of comparative judicial politics.
