Multilevel Ambivalence…Providers, Systems, and Now the Courts

Pakistan's Law for Removal of Superior Courts Judges: Safeguards to Independence of Judiciary v/s Duty of Executive to Probe into Conduct of Judges

As laws legalizing physician-assisted suicide gain ground

There was a conflict between the judgment of the lower court and the Supreme Court regarding the adequacy of the right of defense granted to public officials in disciplinary proceedings. In other words, the Supreme Court made a judgment 2022du33323 on July 14, 2022, which is against the original trial in the lower court (2020nu52759, sentenced by Seoul High Court, on January 13). the Supreme Court judged that there is a reason not to disclose the victim's personal information and that The disciplinary agency fully guaranteed the right to defend. Also, the Supreme Court judged that the plaintiff knew who the anonymous victims were and there was no problem with the plaintiff's exercise of defense rights. However, the Supreme Court’s judgement, 2022du33323 has the following problems. First of all, it was used as a basis for judging that there was no problem in guaranteeing the plaintiff's right to defense during the disciplinary process due to the fact that there was no objection that the victim was not specified during the disciplinary process. Secondly, It was wrong to dismiss the plaintiff’s claim, citing the situation in which the plaintiff was already aware of the victim while allowing the anonymous treatment of the witness due to the victim's secondary damage. Lastly, It is unfair to cause the plaintiff to fundamentally lose the opportunity to deny his or her disciplinary charges. For this reason, it is thought that a disciplinary agency, the defendant violated the plaintiff's right to defend, and that the Supreme Court's judgment ignored the principle of due process in this case. Paradoxically, 2022du33323 demonstrated the need for institutional supplementation in the following areas of the disciplinary process. Among them, this paper presents three supplementary points. ① First of all, the administrative agency sufficiently informs the person of the right to participate in an attorney until the time of disciplinary action, so that the person subject to disciplinary action is given an opportunity to utilize it. ② Next, The Appeal Review Committee shall facilitate the submission of data by both parties apart from keeping the victim confidential. ③ Lastly, in disciplinary action, the victim's personal information, reasons for disciplinary action, and the contents of disciplinary action must be disclosed to the parties, and the Defendant Administrative Agency must faithfully prove the contents of the disciplinary action. In the end, such institutional improvements are necessary to ensure the principle of due process. by improvements, it is expected that the person subject to disciplinary action will exercise the right to defend more effectively in the disciplinary process and that an appropriate level of relief will be achieved.

For strengthening the legal system of justice against the menace of bribery, a highly cogent and sensitive forensic technique has been developed using an indicator dye of triphenylmethane group---Bromocresol green (BCG)---as corruption marker. By means of BCG, a bribe-seeker can be so firmly trapped that not only his/her hand or finger(s) get colored blue upon treatment with water, that even the shirt's pocket as well as some of the coercively-received currency notes also get tainted with deep blue color. The new technique replaces the age-old use of phenolphthalein for trapping the bribe-seeker wherein, when bribe-taker's hand is dipped in sodium carbonate solution a pink color is produced. The necessity for a new and cogent technique has become desirable because owing to several procedural deficiencies and techno-legal lacunae as pointed out in various High Courts’ and Supreme Court's judgments, and also because of the instability of the pink color generated by phenolphthalein and alkali, the trapped-and-convicted persons are quite often set free upon appeals. But the sturdy blue color produced by BCG is of highly stable in nature which firmly and truly ratifies the “Locard's Exchange Principle” of forensic science. The strong blue spots specially on the hand or fingers and the blue-spotted shirt pocket along with the blue-tinted currency notes, can all act collectively as strong incriminating legal evidence(s) against the trapped person. Unlike phenolphthalein, sodium carbonate is not required in the BCG method to generate the color (blue) either in water or on other (hard) objects. Moreover, any additional stabilizer like hydroquinone, etc., is also not required either for storing the blue solution, or for safekeeping the blue-spotted hard materials like shirt, handkerchief, or currency notes for showing them in the court of law at appropriate stage. Since the BCG-produced blue color on the currency notes is of utmost stability and can not be wiped away by ordinary means, a special method has also been reported to safely remove (conceal) the blue spots from the currency notes used in the ‘Operation BCG’. Having all these (hard) bluish objects in the hands of anti-corruption bureau (ACB) as irrefutable evidences against the accused, there is hardly left any need for safekeeping the blue-colored water solution (the liquid obtained after dipping trapped person's hand in water).

From Executive Appointment to the Collegium System: The Impact on Diversity in the Indian Supreme Court

The Supreme Court will hear the case of Gonzales v. Oregon in the fall of2005 to determine if prescriptions written under Oregon's Death with Dignity law violate the Controlled Substances Act. The Attorney General of the United States also believes that hastening death is a public health danger because of the vulnerability of people with terminal illness, primarily because of the possibility of depression or other psychological problems. This friend of the court brief will help to inform the court about the research related to mental capacity, depression, and end-of-life decision making. The National Association of Social Workers, Clinical Social Work Federation, Oregon Chapter of NASW, two state psychological associations, and many mental health professionals signed this brief in support of its findings.

Perhaps the most remarkable feature of Australian constitutional development in the past decade has been the advent of the constitutional protection of political communication. One important effect of this development has been to focus Australian constitutional debate on the long standing and rich tradition of constitutional protection of speech in the United States. Reference to American constitutional law is not unprecedented. The United States Constitution has long been a source for Australian constitutional lawyers. It was extensively referred to by the framers of the Australian Constitution and over the century since the framing, it has been a constant point of reference for the High Court of Australia. However, the influence of the First Amendment is particularly significant since the Bill of Rights and the other rights provisions of the United States Constitution have traditionally been thought of as a part of the American constitutional tradition which Australia does not share. The influence of American constitutional jurisprudence, and specifically First Amendment law, in the High Court of Australia has never been more significant than in the most adventurous of its decisions on the freedom of political communication: Theophanous v Herald and Weekly Times and Stephens v West Australian Newspapers. Here, the High Court significantly expanded the protection of political communication by adopting a rule similar to the New York Times v Sullivan doctrine. That is, the Court limited the capacity of political figures to bring actions for defamation. However, most unusually for recent decisions of the High Court, these cases were reconsidered and considerably reformulated by the Court only three years after they were first announced, in Lange v Australian Broadcasting Commission. The short life of these cases appears to lend fuel to those who argue against the use of the American precedent, and specifically First Amendment jurisprudence, in interpreting the Australian Constitution. In this article, I will join those who have expressed such concerns. My focus, however, is somewhat different from previous analyses. I will consider a difference between the two systems that has been overlooked: the different jurisdictions of the highest appellate courts. The High Court, unlike the Supreme Court of the United States, has jurisdiction to hear appeals from all courts, state and federal. In hearing these appeals, it has jurisdiction over matters of common law as well as federal law and the Constitution. The significance of the High Court's role as the interpreter of the common law was highlighted by Theophanous and Stephens. In those cases, argument was addressed to the High Court on both the protection of freedom of speech by the Constitution and by the common law of defamation. Had it been so inclined, the Court could have avoided the constitutional issue entirely through a decision on the common law. However, the principal basis of the decision of the majority was the Constitution. In my view, the Court’s failure to appreciate the significance of its common law jurisdiction helps explain where the High Court went wrong in Theophanous and Stephens, and how it might have avoided facing so serious a challenge to recent cases as it did in Lange. Before proceeding to make this point, however, I devote Part I of this article to explaining the nature and origins of the High Court’s jurisdiction on matters of common law and compare it to the jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court. In Part II, I outline Theophanous and Stephens and compare the constitutional approach of the majority to the common law approach of two of the dissenting Justices. Part III contains the heart of my argument. I consider how the High Court ought to proceed when a case before it can be decided either by the common law or by interpretation of the Constitution. I argue that the common law brings with it significant advantages so that in many cases where the two overlap, the High Court ought to prefer the common law and I use Theophanous and Stephens to illustrate my point. In Part IV, I identify more precisely the kinds of cases in which the benefits of a common law solution should lead the High Court to prefer it and defend my argument against some of the most obvious objections to it. Finally, in Part V, I consider the reformulation of the Theophanous doctrine in Lange and the extent to which that decision is responsive to the critique I have launched.

At the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, the American reform movements tried to match American ideals with the challenges of the times. Progressive attitudes highlighted the necessity of reforms. The Chinese issue, often risen in the public dialogue, was the subject of deliberation of the Supreme Court, the Congress, and the federal executive branch of government. Chae Chan Ping v. United States and subsequent cases established the doctrine of consular noneviewability referring to immigration law and delineating the scope of judicial review for decisions concerning the admission of immigrants to the United States. They also strengthened the plenary power doctrine. We may ask if the Supreme Court judgments were in conformity with the ideas of American Progressivism. Unfortunately, the Chinese Exclusion Cases were not compatible with the visions of progressive reformers and reflected anti-Chinese sentiment rather than an aspiration for reforms.

This article reviews the decisions of the Supreme Court in Owners of M.V. Alabera v. NAIC (2008)11 NWLR (pt.1097) 182 which held that a State of Nigeria in relation to one another is outside jurisdiction of the Federal High Court of Nigeria and leave is required to issue, serve and mark as concurrent, one within and the other to be served outside jurisdiction and the recent decision of the Supreme Court that the Federal High Court has one jurisdiction means outside the Federal Republic of Nigeria in the case of Biem v. Social Democratic Party & 2ors unreported SC.341/2019. Even the issue of one jurisdiction portends a greater problem in that the courts will continue to be congested as some Federal causes are also determinable by the State High Courts and all appeals from Magistrate Courts, Customary Courts, High Courts all pass through the Court of Appeal, Customary Court of Appeal and Sharia Courts of Appeal all the way to Supreme Court. This article adopts the doctrinal approach of reviewing the cases and incidences of True Federalisms to recommend Constitutional Amendments to create state courts of Appeal and Supreme Courts to help decongest the courts and concludes that in as much as one jurisdiction problem of the Federal High Court has been clarified by the Supreme Court in Biem’s case, a lot in terms of Constitutional amendment to decongest the Court ought to be embarked upon as done in other countries such as the United States of America.

Since 1995, the Chilean Supreme Court counts with specialized chambers for knowing determinate matters. One of the main objectives in creating these specialized chambers consisted in assuring a more certain and uniform application of the law. This article focuses on the case-law produced by the Supreme Court's criminal chamber, trying to assess the extent to which the goal of a uniform application of the law was achieved during the years 1995-2002. In order to do so, the study utilizes the conceptual framework elaborated by relevant American research on the following of precedents, assuming that a more uniform application of the law is the natural result of that kind of court behavior. According to that research, the degree to which the precedents set by a Supreme Court are actually followed can be ascertained in two levels: first, by examining the phenomena within the Supreme Court itself, where a justice's precedential attitude depends on a low level of salience of the issue addressed, which in turns depends on specific historical circumstances (Spaeth & Segal); second, by studying the issue in a 'vertical' direction, that is, through the examination of the extend to which the behavior of lower court's is congruent with the jurisprudence elaborated by the Supreme Court, which depends on certain institutional conditions studied under the principal/agent relationship model (Songer, Segal & Cameron). This study examines precisely the degree of precedent-following exhibited by the Criminal Chamber of the Chilean Supreme Court and by the country's High courts with regard to five precedent-setting cases decided by the former. After an extensive analysis of court decisions and in depth-interviews of Supreme Court's justices and High Court's judges, as well as criminal-lawyers, the study concludes that the introduction of a Supreme Courts' Criminal Chamber has produced ambivalent, if not poor, outcomes in terms of a uniformity of its jurisprudence, both within the Criminal Chamber itself and at the High courts' level.

The Affordable Care Act 10 Years In: What Nursing Leaders Should Know

There are various case laws is available on the topic of nullity in a foreign marriage in India these are decided by the various High Courts and Supreme Court of India and foreign Courts also. In the case of Mrs. M. v. Mr. A where an appeal filed in the Bombay High Court by the wife appellant and had prayed for a decree of nullity, her marriage was solemnized at Huston, U.S.A. On the other hand, wife prayed for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. This petition was initially filed before the trial Court under the stipulations of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, which applied to the spouses by virtue of the stipulations of Section 18 of the Foreign Marriage Act, 1969. The trial Court dismissed this petition on the ground that the Court was not vested with the mandatory jurisdiction, as this is an obligation of law that the petitioner must have been residing in India constantly for a period of three years without delay preceding the filing of the petition. Further, the High Court observed that this Section refers to a time of not less than three years without delay preceding the filing of the petition and that the learned trial Court was not reasonable in having grafted on the word ‘continuously.’ The complexity that had arisen in this case centered on the fact that the petitioner had left India in December, 1986 and returned in August, 1987 and the petition was presented on April, 1988. The Court also took into account the fact that the petitioner had not emigrated from India which was recognized by the fact that, she had gone out of the Country only on a ‘tourist visit’ and she did really come back and has been enduringly domiciled and resident in India all through. The Court said that in marital legislations in this Country, the law confers local jurisdiction on a Court if the party concerned is in fact resident there and not on the basis of casual short- term visits. The finding in the case of Neeraja Saraph v. Jayant Saraph, was decided in the following facts: the wife appellant who got married to a software engineer working in United States was still demanding to get her visa to join her husband, who had returned after the marriage, when she received the petition for annulment of marriage presented by her husband in the U.S. Court. She presented a suit for damages in such situations as she had suffered not just psychologically and spiritually but had also renounced her job in eagerness of her going away to the US. The trial Court passed a decree of Rs. 22 lakhs and the High Court in appeal stayed the execution of the decree pending concluding disposal on the stipulation of deposit of Rs 1 Lakh in the Court. On the appeal by the wife the Supreme Court customized the High Court’s order in favour of the wife by enhancing the deposit amount to Rs. 3 Lakh.

This study examines the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the Indian judiciary system, focusing on its potential to address environmental sustainability and climate change challenges while improving judicial efficiency. The Indian courts’ traditional paper-based operations contribute significantly to environmental degradation, necessitating technological solutions for a greener justice system. The research analyzes the current state of AI implementation in Indian courts through examination of three major initiatives: SUPACE (Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court Efficiency), SUVAS (Supreme Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software), and various e-Court projects. The study evaluates both environmental impact data and technological implementation reports from the Supreme Court’s E-Committee and Ministry of Law and Justice. The implementation of AI-driven systems has shown promising results, with SUVAS successfully translating over 36,271 Supreme Court judgments into Hindi and 17,142 judgments into 16 regional languages by 2024. Virtual hearings between 2020 and 2023 prevented an estimated 50,000 metric tons of carbon emissions through reduced travel. While AI integration shows significant promise in reducing environmental impact and improving judicial efficiency, the study identifies key challenges including the need for comprehensive legislation governing AI use in judiciary, substantial infrastructure requirements, and data privacy concerns. The recent allocation of ₹1,500 crore for Phase III of the e-Courts Project and the implementation of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act demonstrate strong governmental commitment to technological advancement in judiciary while addressing legal and privacy concerns.

Article 24 paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution "Judicial power is an independent power to administer justice to uphold law and justice". Will However, Article 24A paragraph 3 makes a provision that candidates for Supreme Court judges are proposed by the Judicial Commission to the DPR for approval and subsequently appointed as Supreme Court justices by the president and the Supreme Court Law states that the appointment of Supreme Court Judges is carried out by the President at the proposal of the DPR or the dismissal of the Chair, Deputy Chairperson. , Junior Chairmen, and Member Judges of the Supreme Court are dismissed by the President at the suggestion of the Supreme Court, so that the President has loopholes that can later affect the psyche of judges in making decisions. This study aims to determine the independence of judicial power in Indonesia in the perspective of Islamic law. This study uses a normative and juridical approach. The authors conclude that the proposal for the appointment and dismissal of Supreme Court judges by the Judicial Commission, the DPR and the President may affect the psychology of a judge in making a decision so that This can eliminate the meaning of Article 24 paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution which shows the lack of independence of the judicial power in upholding justice in accordance with the ideals of the 1945 Constitution. Indeed, in the history of the Islamic judiciary, it is the Caliph (President) who has the authority to appoint and dismiss a judge/qhadi. judges have a fear of Allah so that judges decide cases based on Islamic law.

The paper terminates by outlining the multimedia UI of a prototype of the KR based Innovation Expert System (IES), which tests a claimed classical as well as emerging technology invention under the Substantive Law (SPL) of any National System (NPS), in particular under the 4 §§ 101/102/103/112 of 35 USC, as interpreted by the Supreme Courts' KSR/Bilski/Mayo decisions. Already this IES prototype is capable of indicating the amazing power of the Patent induced by this US Highest Courts' SPL precedents as to such tests for a claimed invention. It works semi-automated when testing in explorative mode and fully automated/real- time when testing in confirmative mode. Developing this powerful Technology has been enabled by performing substantial Mathematical KR research about recent US Highest Courts' patent precedents published by Mathematical KR research papers and amicus briefs submitted to the US Supreme Court and CAFC as to KR insights so obtained into the problems of SPL precedents, e.g. when dealing with claimed emerging technology inventions.  Index Terms—SPL (substantive patent law) and KR based claimed inventions' tests, a KR based IES prototype and its UI, emerging technologies inventions, the supreme court's KSR/Bilski/Mayo decisions and their notions of inventive concept/preemptivity/abstract idea, the CAFC's recent precedents