2017 605 Legal Transplantation
[Lecture Course Basic Information]
|Whether mandatory or not:||Mandatory|
|Outline of Lecture Course||It has been six years since Uzbek government forces killed hundreds of
unarmed protesters in the eastern city of Andijan on May 13, 2005, following prison attacks by armed men.
Divergent views persist today with regard to this Andijan tragedy in the
context of human rights and democracy.
The position taken by the Uzbek government, supported by Russia, China and countries in Central Asia, places the blame on the terrorists. It claims that the armed group belonged to the terrorists group known as Akramia - a faction of the illegal Hizb-ut-Tahri (an Islam fundamentalist Party), which sought to establish an Islamic State refusing to accept human rights and democracy. They attacked the prison and used citizens as human shield while attempting to withdraw. That was how the gun battle started and they should be held responsible for the deaths. Uzbekistan has no choice but to respond to “violence” by the Islamic fundamentalists, who reject human rights and democracy, with equal “violence”. The argument states that, for a premature secular state that had gained independence for merely 20 years, any response to “violence” by means of respects for human rights and democracy would lead to the demise of the State and therefore the ends of human rights and democracy. (Cry like a wolf when living with the wolf).
Against this first view, countries in the West and international human
rights NGOs come up with their critical arguments that human rights have
been violated in Uzbekistan under the pretext of fighting terrorism led by
the Islamic fundamentalists. Even a young independent State of 20 years old
has the duty to respect human rights and democracy. Notwithstanding the
future goal of human rights and democracy, “violence” in response to
“violence” will create a vicious circle of violence and hatred. The future goal will never be achievable.
Six years after the Andijan tragedy, this criticism against Uzbekistan has not changed. For example, the Human Rights Watch includes the following
wordings in its 2012 World Report: Uzbekistan’s human rights record remains appalling, with no meaningful improvements in 2011. Torture remains endemic in the criminal justice system. Authorities continue to target civil society activists, opposition members, and journalists, and to persecute religious believers who worship outside strict state controls.
What should be the appropriate way for Uzbekistan, a State in the process
of building and the front line of the war against terror, to develop its own goals of human rights and democracy? How should legal assistance proceed to promote the development of human rights and democracy in this country? This paper reviews some lessons learned from the JICA’s experience of legal assistance (assistance in drafting the law on administrative procedure) in Uzbekistan and raises some issues which may be useful for the development of comparative studies in administrative law.
|Course Objectives||Students will be necessary to learn the key view points on the Admnistrative Law assistance as follow:
① Importance of the “process”
② Importance of “institution”
③ Importance of “comparisons”
④ Importance of “history”
⑤ Importance of the mechanism of institutional change
|Course Materials/Supplementaries||-Fenton, Howard N. 2000. "Administrative Law Reform in the Former Soviet Union," The Journal of East European Law 7:47.
-Russell-Einhorn, M., J. Lubbers, and V. Milor. 2002. "Strengthening Access to Information and Public Participation in Transition Countries- Latvia as a Case Study in Administrative Law Reform," Administrative Law Review 54(1):459.
-Russell-Einhorn, M. and H. Fenton. 2008. Using Administrative Law Tools and Concepts to strengthen USAID Programming- A Guide for USAID Democracy and Governmental Officers. USAID.
-Tamanaha, Brian Z. 2011. "The Primacy of Society and the Failures of Law and Development," Cornell International Law Journal 209:44.
-Tamanaha, Brian Z. 2011. "The Rule of Law and Legal Pluralism Development," Legal Studies Research Paper Series, Paper No. 11-07-01.
|Assessment||Participation and Class Contribution: 30%
Written Report: 70%
|Other Notes||-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --
[Subject: Legal Transplantation]
|Lecture||Theme||Lecture Course Description||Learning outside the class||Related page|
|2||Legal Assistance in Administrative Law ①|
|3||Legal Assistance in Administrative Law ②|
|4||Meta-Theory of Administrative Law Assistance ①|
|5||Meta-Theory of Administrative Law Assistance ②|
|6||Administrative Law Reform in the Former Soviet Republics|
The syllabus page shows a table-oriented view of the course schedule, and the basics of course grading. You can add any other comments, notes, or thoughts you have about the course structure, course policies or anything else.
To add some comments, click the "Edit" link at the top.