ICON S Conference 17 – 19 June 2016 Humboldt University Berlin

Recommendations

Info

in confronting this challenge. The article analyzes the nature and essence of the constitutional claims against the detention of unlawful enemy combatant in Israel. Based on this analysis, the article identifies three constitutional key elements used by Israel in confronting the challenge of detaining unlawful enemy combatant. The article argues against the over-individualized interpretation to the Unlawful Combatant Law. Michal Tamir and Dana Pugach: Nudging the Criminal Justice System into listening to Crime Victims in Plea Agreements Most criminal cases end with a plea agreement. However, the issue of crime victims’ place in plea agreements has gained little notice. The federal Crime Victims Rights Act of 2004 law as provided victims some meaningful and potentially revolutionary rights, including the right to be heard in the proceeding and a right to appeal against a decision made while ignoring the victim’s rights. References to this provision in the general literature about plea agreements are sparse and there are only few cases mentioning this right. This article purports to bridge between these two bodies of legal thinking – the vast literature concerning plea agreements and victims’ rights research – by using behavioral economics. The article will, firstly, trace the possible structural reasons for the failure of this right to be materialized. Relevant incentives of all actors involved will be identified as well as their inherent consequential processes that lead to the victims’ rights malfunction. Secondly, the article will use nudge theory in order to suggest solutions that will enhance incentives for the repeat players in the system (prosecution, judges, defense attorneys) and lead to the strengthening of weaker group’s interests – the crime victims. 77 THE RIGHT TO THE CITY In our panel, we plan to explore the “right to the city”, a concept well-known in other social sciences, from a legal perspective. The panel will unite a number of legal scholars that attempt to make sense of the concept from different perspectives. Participants Helmut Philipp Aust Cindy Wittke Michèle Finck Tilman Reinhardt Michael Denga Anél du Plessis Name of Chair Janne E. Nijman Room DOR24 1.403 Helmut Philipp Aust: The Good Urban Citizen The paper discusses the emergence of international normative expectations about what it means to be a good urban citizen in the beginning 21st century. It connects local expressions of such expectations with global normative discourses. The departure point is a poster campaign run by Atlanta’s Midtown district, calling on everyone to “be a neighbour, start a business, commute by foot, etc.”. The underlying values of this campaign are, even if internally conflicted, related to current leitmotifs of urban governance, such as ideas pertaining to the sustainable and secure city. These notions are the result of both top-down and bottom-up processes: international organizations contribute to a shaping of the available policy spaces of urban actors today. At the same time, cities and their governments become increasingly active on the global level. Cindy Wittke: Building and Keeping Peace in the City 21st century cities are objects, subjects, laboratories, and agents of emerging forms of global, local, and transnational governance. So-called global or mega city regions for instance operate not only within but also parallel to and beyond States’ institutions on the local, regional, as well as global stages. They use the language of inter-state relations and international law, and mimic States’ practiced forms of institutionalised and legalised interaction. Yet, cities are also sites of (violent) conflict between different intra-city groups as well as between city governments and different groups. The paper will address legal and political analytical challenges that arise when addressing intra-city violent conflict and peace making. How do the described cities govern intra-city (violent) conflict situations? How are new political settlements negotiated, by whom, and according to which norms for building and keeping the peace in the city? Concurring panels 118
Michèle Finck: The Right to the City From a Legal Perspective My paper engages with the so-called ‘right to the city’, a concept that has recently gained in popularity in urban studies and urban social movements. In its essence, it refers to the fact that the inhabitants of a city should have the right to actively shape their city, and hence minimize the power of politics and markets in this regard. The paper briefly introduces the concept and then sets out to examine it from a legal perspective, taking into account a number of different legal orders. I analyze whether the law can actually recognize any such thing as a ‘right to the city’ or whether any precise legal rights may flow from the concept, such as for instance the right to political participation or housing at local level. In this context, I will examine, for instance, the right to the city as it exists in Brazil as well as elements of direct democracy at local level in Germany, in particular in Berlin. The paper will conclude that despite the existence of these tools most legal orders, as they currently stand, are incapable of recognizing ‘the right to the city’ for a number of reasons, including the conflict that would arise between this right and a number of established rights, especially the right to private property. Tilman Reinhardt and Michael Denga: From Dupnitsa to Inner London – Exploring the legal dimension of Lefebvre’s “Right to the City” Two major trends are changing the face of Europe’s capitals: Migration and Privatization. Whilst they are turning them into vibrant, cosmopolitan centers of our civilization, they are also associated with increasing segregation and social stratification. Be it at the limits, as in Paris’ sprawling Banlieues, or right in the center, as in London’s Borough of Tower Hamlets, migrant communities are often clustered together in socioeconomically marginalized quarters. As more and more public goods are left to the private sector, this clustered distribution may result in material differences in living conditions (insurance costs, access to health and education, “food deserts”, etc.). States and municipalities, when trying to counter spatial inequalities, are typically relying on topdown approaches, such as urban planning, housing schemes, and regulation. A recent ECJ-judgement C-83/14, CHEZ however, draws attention to the potential of addressing spatial inequalities “bottom-up” through European Antidiscrimination Law. Various legal questions arise in this context: Which subject matters are covered by Art. 21 CFR? Could the unequal treatment of residents from multiethnic quarters be considered a “racial or ethnic” discrimination? How could one define appropriate spatial reference frames? Does Art. 21 CFR imply positive duties to prevent unequal results? Our presentation seeks to answer these questions and put the results into the larger context of Antidiscrimination Law, European Social Law and Urban Governance. 78 HOW CAN THE ABSENT SPEAK? PRESUMPTIONS AND PARADOXES OF PRESENCE IN PUBLIC LAW As states exercise power outside of their territory and against nonmembers, public law is made to step out of its national and territorial context to negotiate its place within and beyond its own borders. As boundaries of state power become less fixed, the boundaries between national, transnational, and international principles and domains are also being redefined. Where public law is so intimately dependent on democratic legitimacy for its authority, the transgression of borders and the exercise of state power over ‘others’ raises questions of how public law deals with the absent. This panel tackles the conference themes by considering the relationship between presence, absence and legitimacy. How does public law negotiate legitimacy of authority over the ‘other’ who is physically absent, as in the case of migrants? What role does the ‘reasonable person’ play in creating legitimacy through absence? And how does the mere presence of the state complicate how we think about legitimacy? Participants Dana Schmalz Valentin Jeutner Nino Guruli Name of Chair Michaela Hailbronner Room DOR24 1.404 Dana Schmalz: The part of the absent – or: physical boundaries and democracy Every notion of democracy operates with an idea of the respective people (or demos). My focus here is on those notions, which have abandoned any essentialist conception of the people, notably different approaches of radical democracy. Whereas the demos in these approaches is generally understood as open, the possibility to participate in actions identified as democratic typically hinges on the physical (co-)presence of persons. This gains significance for the question whether and how rules, which condition or hinder physical presence, can become subject to democratic contestation. We find numerous examples of such rules in the area of border and migration policies. In analyzing how these rules become contested, several scholars have drawn on a Rancièrian account of democratic struggle as the “climbing of a stage” (Rancière 1999, 81). It is my suggestion that this Rancièrian account can be misleading when thinking about the position of persons, who are physically distanced by the rules from the polities and publics that decide about these very rules. Against this background, I would like to discuss the significance of physical presence for democratic processes and possible consequences for conceptualizing rules of physical deterrence. Anél du Plessis: Commentator Concurring panels 119
Page 1 and 2:
ICON S Conference 17 - 19 June 201
Page 3 and 4:
ICON S Conference 17 - 19 June 201
Page 5 and 6:
ICON S Inaugural Governance The In
Page 7 and 8:
Saturday 18 June 2016 Sunday 19 Jun
Page 9 and 10:
EVENTs Plenary PLENARY Events 7
Page 11 and 12:
FRIDAY 17 JUNE 2016 → UL6 Audima
Page 13 and 14:
FRIDAY 17 JUNE 2016 → UL6 Audima
Page 15 and 16:
saturday 18 JUNE 2016 → UL6 Audi
Page 17 and 18:
concurring panels Concurring panels
Page 19 and 20:
Panels Session i FRIDAY, 17 JUNE 20
Page 21 and 22:
p. 61 30 RACIAL OTHERNESS IN EUROPE
Page 23 and 24:
p. 94 57 IRREGULAR IMMIGRANTS ACROS
Page 25 and 26:
p. 127 85 OTHERNESS IN PUBLIC LAW J
Page 27 and 28:
p. 160 112 REFUGEE PRIVILEGE OR HUM
Page 29 and 30:
1 CONSTITUTIONALISM AND CONSTITUTIO
Page 31 and 32:
3 FIGHT OVER THE TURKISH CONSTITUTI
Page 33 and 34:
5 REGIONAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL STRUC
Page 35 and 36:
7 COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVES ON THE L
Page 37 and 38:
will demonstrate that OTC derivativ
Page 39 and 40:
conditionality is still driven only
Page 41 and 42:
mechanisms and practices of surveil
Page 43 and 44:
on the income and social benefits o
Page 45 and 46:
SATURDAY 18 JUNE 2016 9:00 - 10:45
Page 47 and 48:
17 WOMEN IN THE LAW Panel formed wi
Page 49 and 50:
19 WHO DRAWS THE BOUNDARIES? The Is
Page 51 and 52:
Constitutional Court, which engages
Page 53 and 54:
22 QUESTIONING HIERARCHICAL BOUNDAR
Page 55 and 56:
The paper strives to present the po
Page 57 and 58:
25 BORDERS & POPULATION DESIGN: TES
Page 59 and 60:
versities? Who are the national aut
Page 61 and 62:
28 COLLECTIVE MEMORY AND PUBLIC LAW
Page 63 and 64:
Germans from the East, large guest
Page 65 and 66:
ertheless, the introduction of this
Page 67 and 68:
Orla Lynskey: The free movement of
Page 69 and 70: 35 CONSTITUTIONALISM IN RUSSIA: COM
Page 71 and 72: are viewed as “other” by one an
Page 73 and 74: Matej Avbelj: On the Nature of EU C
Page 75 and 76: Christopher Alexander Thomas: Avoid
Page 77 and 78: ench. By so doing, the article atte
Page 79 and 80: SATURDAY 18 JUNE 2016 11:30 am - 1:
Page 81 and 82: 44 CONSTITUTIONAL JURISDICTION, DIA
Page 83 and 84: Jaclyn Ling Chien Neo: Secular Cons
Page 85 and 86: 47 COMPARING LAW(S) AND INSTITUTION
Page 87 and 88: 49 SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOP- MENT
Page 89 and 90: Johannes Eichenhofer: An alternativ
Page 91 and 92: Stephanie Law: The Constitutionalis
Page 93 and 94: offer an expansive protection of re
Page 95 and 96: had inherited from its Socialist pa
Page 97 and 98: Emily Ryo: Developing Legal Cynicis
Page 99 and 100: 59 HUMAN DIGNITY AND “OTHERNESS
Page 101 and 102: explore the relation between securi
Page 103 and 104: 62 THE NEXT LEGAL FRONTIERS IN EURO
Page 105 and 106: ies of government to limit and guid
Page 107 and 108: Jochen von Bernstorff: Ironic Const
Page 109 and 110: estricted to women, children and fa
Page 111 and 112: the court characterizes proportiona
Page 113 and 114: 70 CONSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY IN TIMES
Page 115 and 116: 72 DIFFERENCE DISAGREEMENT AND THE
Page 117 and 118: most important example is the Europ
Page 119: Philipp Kastner and Elisabeth Roy T
Page 123 and 124: small number of Pakistani belies th
Page 125 and 126: mark in the annals of international
Page 127 and 128: ing attention in the constitutional
Page 129 and 130: sity of private enforcement mechani
Page 131 and 132: Federico Caporale: Water Grabbing:
Page 133 and 134: 88 THE INCLUSION OF “THE OTHER”
Page 135 and 136: ment’s purpose in enacting partic
Page 137 and 138: 91 THE INTERNATIONAL RULE OF LAW -
Page 139 and 140: 93 JUDICIAL DIVERSITY: A COMPARATIV
Page 141 and 142: 95 LAW(S) OF REFUGEES II Panel form
Page 143 and 144: are at stake, administrative courts
Page 145 and 146: SUNDAY 19 JUNE 2016 9:00 - 10:45 am
Page 147 and 148: Zsuzsanna Gedeon: Constitutional co
Page 149 and 150: 101 THE BLURRED BORDERS BETWEEN PUB
Page 151 and 152: contractual governance, this can ha
Page 153 and 154: 104 RETHINKING SOCIAL INCLUSION WIT
Page 155 and 156: making, appearing to accord the pol
Page 157 and 158: is ambiguous. Some argue that globa
Page 159 and 160: 109 THE LAW(S) OF WAR Panel formed
Page 161 and 162: in cars in order to generate unreal
Page 163 and 164: lum fit uneasily with the transnati
Page 165 and 166: Clemens Rieder: Boundaries and Soli
Page 167 and 168: 116 THE RIGHT OF NON-CITIZENS TO CO
Page 169 and 170: 118 THE TRANSATLANTIC TRADE AND INV
Page 171 and 172:
120 OTHERNESS IN LATIN AMERICA: LEG
Page 173 and 174:
Caitlin Goss: Constitutional drafti
Page 175 and 176:
development of the political econom
Page 177 and 178:
policy and legal framework around d
Page 179 and 180:
Third, since the EU and the US have
Page 181 and 182:
The ICON S Working Papers Conferenc
Page 183 and 184:
Venue The 2016 ICON S Conference on
Page 185 and 186:
Venues UL6 Unter den Linden 6 Main
Page 187 and 188:
UL6 Unter den Linden 6 Main Buildin
Page 189 and 190:
UL9 Unter den Linden 9 Law Faculty
Page 191 and 192:
Floor 4 1.405 1.404 1.403 1.402 Flo
Page 193 and 194:
A David Abraham University of Miami
Page 195 and 196:
Pauline Endres de Oliveira Justus L
Page 197 and 198:
Ingrid Leijten Leiden University 1
Page 199 and 200:
Tilman Reinhardt Humboldt Universit
Page 201 and 202:
Vanessa Wintermantel WZB Berlin Soc
Page 203 and 204:
With the collaboration of Funded by
show all

ICON S Conference 17 – 19 June 2016 Humboldt University Berlin

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?