ICON S Conference 17 – 19 June 2016 Humboldt University Berlin

Recommendations

Info

23 BEYOND THE INDIVIDUAL: EXPLOR- ING COLLECTIVITIES WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF HUMAN RIGHTS Emerging from the liberal tradition, human rights law has been crafted to reflect an individualistic focus. Over the years a growing awareness to the problems of disadvantaged social groups and minorities brought about changes in theory as well as in social and legal practice. These changes include a re-interpretation of what constitute discrimination and the acknowledgment of minority rights. Despite these changes, the individualistic focus still prevails, and doubts about the compatibility of the existing framework continue to occupy scholarly attention. This panel will explore new perspectives that might contribute to accommodating human rights law and practice with social realities. Four different examples of how a collective dimension has been or can be incorporated into human rights theory and practice will be presented. Panelists will present works dealing with human and collective rights, analyzed in its socio-economic and political implications. Participants Tamar Hofnung Bruck Teshome Limor Yehuda Gabriele D’amico Name of Chair Tomer Broude Room DOR24 1.403 Tamar Hofnung: Translating inequality: Affirmative Action Policy as a collective project The question of how public policy is consolidated has long fascinated political science inquiry. While scholars agree that the way problems are constituted determines the type of state intervention, how people come to conceptualize social issues as problems that deserve a particular state response remains a puzzle. This paper shows how translation within the initial phase of issues rising to public awareness can play a key role in determining policy directions and outcomes. Through examining the implicit role of metaphors and heuristic procedures, the paper sheds light on the subconscious manner through which heuristic processes shape concrete understandings. Utilizing the case of affirmative action in the United States, the paper examines how the issue of inequality has been translated to define statistical discrimination, through the notion of disparate impact, as the problem of the gap between black and white employment rates. This definition then transformed policy focus from the initial focus of equality of opportunity to that of equality of results. The paper illuminates the social conditioning that led to this understanding of the issue, and how, once translated in this manner, these ideas gained ideological prominence, leading to the continuous crafting of affirmative action policy. Concurring panels 52 Bruck Teshome: “Development” as the Common Good: Towards a deeper understanding of the collective aspects of the Right to Development Ever since the Declaration on the Right to Development came about 30 years ago, the concept of the right to development has attracted criticism as much as willful disregard in academic circles. The self-determination component of the right, which alludes to the collective aspect of the right, has been put aside to make way for an interpretation of the right through a “value addition of human rights” that emphasize the individual aspects of the right. There is room to argue that the current understanding of the right could be further enriched through a broader interpretation and application of the right to self-determination, encompassing cultural, political and economic self-determination. Could viewing development as a common-good lead to a better understanding of the various components of the right and towards a better balance of the individual and collective aspects of the right? Limor Yehuda: Beyond Anti-discrimination and Minority Rights: “Collective Equality” in Ethno- National Conflict Resolution Since the end of the cold war, ethnonational conflicts have been acknowledged as one of the dominant causes of political violence. Many such conflicts are settled by peace agreements most of which incorporate new constitutional arrangements. Despite growing recognition of the applicability of International Human Rights Law (IHRL) to such peace agreements, the individualist orientation of IHRL and its inadequate treatment of the group dimension make existing IHRL norms insufficient in the context of the special circumstances of ethnonational conflicts. My central argument is that this problem can be addressed by adding a concept of “collective equality” between rival groups to the normative framework applicable to the transformation of such conflicts. Building on the practice of ethnonational peacemaking and contemporary ideas in political philosophy, the presentation will outline the components of such “collective equality” and suggest what might justify it as a normative obligation. Gabriele D’amico: Human rights integration: Olivetti’s model for blending communitarianism and human rights This paper will showcase the significance of the Olivetti model in understanding the relationship between human rights fragmentation and charities’ sub-efficient (aggregate) performance in facing sociocultural externalities. Many charities and private foundations invest their money with the exclusive goal of maximizing return on investment; paradoxically this often worsens the problems their charitable activities seek to relieve. I argue that this results in part from attempting to implement human rights without taking into consideration their indivisibility and interrelatedness.
The paper strives to present the potential of the Olivetti model to assist in achieving this goal. The Olivetti model provides an example of how to transform a forprofit structure to a non-profit structure at the same time internalizing negative externalities. This paper explores the ways it might be implemented through the US system of public charities and private foundations. 24 BORDERS, OTHERNESS AND CONSTITUTIONAL IDENTITY: EXPERIENCES OF POLAND, CROATIA AND HUNGARY Identity means a subjective sense of selfness visà-vis others. In theories constitutional identity (Jacobsohn, Rodenfeld) appears as a shared identity which is a necessary condition for any constitutional legal system. It seems to have a different meaning when we are discussing European integration and trying to reveal the legal meaning of Article 4.2. TEU. The panel invites a Polish, a Hungarian and a Croatian scholar who can discuss their national approaches towards constitutional identity in the light of EU integration and respective theories. Poland has already expressed views on “Borders”, Hungary has never been so explicit in this regard and Croatia has only recently had a chance to establish her standpoint. During the panel discussion, we will have the opportunity to discover where the legal and theoretical “Borders” are between our national states and the EU and to what extent we are “Others”, in terms of identity, than other member states. Participants Izabela Skomerska-Muchowska Anita Blagojević Tímea Drinóczi Eszter Polgári Name of Chair Erzsébet Sándor-Szalay Room DOR24 1.405 Concurring panels 53 Izabela Skomerska-Muchowska: European Solidarity v. Constitutional Identity: the case of Polish position The aim of the paper is to check how constitutional identity is understood in the light of the principle of sincere cooperation and mutual trust which is the basis for Schengen construction including policies towards third countries nationals and governance of external borders. In this context the Polish position will be analysed. The main question is as follows: Could constitutional values of the particular member state (art. 4 para 2 TFEU) may prevail over sincere cooperation (Article 4 para 3 TFEU) in the field of common European value (security in that case)? The paper aims at exploring whether it is justified in constitutional terms and how constitutional identity and European commitments concerning borders and migration should be balanced in conformity with the rule of law. Anita Blagojević: Searching for the constitutional identity of Croatia in the European Union This paper will discuss the search for the constitutional identity of Croatia, the newest member of the European Union, one among the smaller states and one among former communist states. Altough there is no agreement over what “constitutional identity”
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: 22 QUESTIONING HIERARCHICAL BOUNDAR
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 and 120:
Philipp Kastner and Elisabeth Roy T
Page 121 and 122:
Michèle Finck: The Right to the Ci
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?