<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Mak, E.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/14052/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Introduction: The Possibilities of Comparative Law Methods for Research on the Rule of Law in a Global Context (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/17122/</link>
      <pubDate>2009-11-02T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Since its rise at the beginning of the twentieth century, comparative legal research 
has gained an inﬂuential place in legal research concerning national legal systems. 
Comparative legal methodology is used to acquire insight into foreign legal systems, 
to ﬁnd solutions for problems of a speciﬁc legal system, or to promote the uniﬁ cation 
of law between national legal systems. Its methods consist of a comparison of 
different legal systems or legal traditions (external comparison), or of ﬁelds of 
law within national legal systems (internal comparison). With the proliferation 
of regulatory regimes at the international level (e.g. in the context of the United 
Nations or the WTO), comparative legal research has expanded its focus to include 
international law. Consensus, however, has not been reached on the most suitable 
way of applying comparative law methods to the global context. Can the concepts 
and methods developed to conduct comparative legal research of national legal 
systems be transposed to study the international legal system?

In this issue of Erasmus Law Review, a number of scholars with different legal backgrounds reflect on these questions.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>The European judicial organisation in a new paradigm: The influence of principles of 'new public management' on the organisation of the European courts (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/16473/</link>
      <pubDate>2008-12-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Recent reforms regarding the European Courts raise the question in which way do 'new public management' principles influence the European judicial organisation and how is a balance struck between these principles and classic 'rule of law' principles? The article first presents a classification of these types of principles in the framework for discussion regarding the European judicial organisation. Starting out from two paradigms, an inquiry is made into the status of the two sets of principles in the present-day European 'constitutional' framework. Second, the interaction of principles is investigated with regard to a number of current dilemmas, including the demarcation of the judicial domain, the management of the Courts and the distribution of judicial competences.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>De rechtspraak in balans:  een onderzoek naar de rol van klassiek-rechtsstatelijke beginselen en 'new public management'-beginselen in  het kader van de rechterlijke organisatie in Nederland, Frankrijk en  Duitsland (Doctoral Thesis)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/10925/</link>
      <pubDate>2008-01-24T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>De discussie over de rechterlijke organisatie in  
Nederland kenmerkt zich de laatste jaren door een grote aandacht voor  
aspecten als transparantie, effectiviteit en efficientie.  
Tegelijkertijd dient met het oog op de legitimiteit van de rechtspraak  
aandacht te blijven voor het behoud van verworven rechtsstatelijke  
waarborgen van rechterlijke onafhankelijkheid en onpartijdigheid. De  
recente moderniseringsdebatten in Nederland, en ook in andere moderne  
rechtsstaten, komen hiermee in het teken te staan van het vinden van  
een nieuw evenwicht van uitgangspunten voor de rechterlijke organisatie.
In dit boek wordt de discussie over de modernisering van de  
rechterlijke organisatie in Nederland, Frankrijk en Duitsland  
geanalyseerd vanuit een constitutioneel perspectief. Beoogd wordt aan  
te geven welke plaats nieuwe kwaliteitseisen - dat wil zeggen 'new  
public management'-beginselen - in het constitutionele kader innemen  
ten opzichte van klassiek-rechtsstatelijke beginselen. Een  
rechtsvergelijkende analyse biedt aanknopingspunten om het  
constitutionele afwegingskader van beginselen in kaart te brengen en  
de implicaties voor de invoering van nieuwe oplossingen voor de  
rechterlijke organisatie te schetsen.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>The Judicial Domain in View: figures, trends and perspectives (Research Paper)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/11001/</link>
      <pubDate>2007-05-14T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Where will the Dutch judicial system be in 2015? One of us answered a similar type of question elsewhere with a sketch of two frightening scenarios.* In the first scenario the judicial system will have insufficiently adapted itself to its surroundings. The judicial system will become more intensively involved in a decreasing amount of cases that gradually carry less weight. The judicial system, as a social phenomenon, will be marginalized even though the traditional standards of constitutional legitimacy and professionalism of the administration of justice are kept up. Interesting or big cases will be handled outside the judiciary by special courts or through arbitration, mediation or other forms of “alternative dispute resolution” (ADR). The large amount of bulk cases will be transferred to other legal areas or authorities where the involvement of the judge will decrease (for example the Mulderizing of criminal cases, or settlement by the Public Prosecutor). With the decrease in jurisdiction the authority of the judicial system will decline and eventually prise itself out of the market. In the second frightening scenario the judicial system will have adapted itself too much to its surroundings. Van Gunsteren once sketched a picture of the court as a dynamic centre for settling conflicts, a place where the experts fall over each other with seminars, workshops, courses, and new methods. Instead of settling conflicts they get copied within the judicial organization itself.† The judicial system, with its well-meaning efforts at being responsive, will have distanced itself from its core duties: settling disputes through binding judgments. While the judicial system has lost touch with its surroundings in the first scenario, it has lost its own self in the second scenario.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Introduction (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/20599/</link>
      <pubDate>2007-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>It is my pleasure to introduce to you this first issue of the Erasmus Law Review (ELR), a peer-reviewed journal that seeks to foster independent critical scholarship relevant to the discipline of law. This first issue considers the theme of the evolving European ordre public. Subsequent issues will consider the following themes: ‘Multi- and interdisciplinarity: mere theory or just practice’, ‘Class, collective and group actions’, ‘Staying out of court’ and ‘The rule of law in the European Union’. ELR will be published electronically on a quarterly basis and is also available through the Social Science Research Network (SSRN). We of course hope that we may count you among our readership not only on this occasion but also in the future.

We appreciate comments on the articles and on the journal as a whole.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>