This episode of the podcast focuses on an underexplored theme in comparative constitutional law methodology: how languages shape the legal research in the field. The point of departure of the conversation is whether being proficient in a foreign language is required to engage in comparative constitutional law. The four speakers (Rosalind Dixon, Berihun Gebeye, Melissa Crouch and Francesco Palermo) are all established or emerging constitutional law scholars who have extensively worked and researched comparatively. They share their wide expertise and insights on the issue, and suggest that languages are not necessarily a barrier, as there are strategies that can be employed to overcome the lack of knowledge of a foreign language. The episode also touches upon related issues such as legal translations and foreign legal cultures. 
For more information on the topics discussed in this episode visit www.constitutional-cafe.org

<div>This episode of the podcast focuses on an underexplored theme in comparative constitutional law methodology: how languages shape the legal research in the field. The point of departure of the conversation is whether being proficient in a foreign language is required to engage in comparative constitutional law. The four speakers (Rosalind Dixon, Berihun Gebeye, Melissa Crouch and Francesco Palermo) are all established or emerging constitutional law scholars who have extensively worked and researched comparatively. They share their wide expertise and insights on the issue, and suggest that languages are not necessarily a barrier, as there are strategies that can be employed to overcome the lack of knowledge of a foreign language. The episode also touches upon related issues such as legal translations and foreign legal cultures. </div><div><br></div><div>For more information on the topics discussed in this episode visit www.constitutional-cafe.org</div>

Scholarly but fun conversations about constitutions brought to you by the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at Melbourne Law School.

<p>Scholarly but fun conversations about constitutions brought to you by the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at Melbourne Law School.</p>

Constitutional Cafe

Constitutional Café brings together constitutionalists the world over for informal but scholarly conversations about important issues in constitutional law and politics. It is brought to you by a team of comparative constitutional law scholars at the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at Melbourne Law School. Each episode one of our team assembles a group of experts to discuss recent developments, new ideas or enduring themes in constitutional studies. We are especially interested in emerging and overlooked issues and in places and institutions that are not often discussed It is produced by a team of comparative constitutional law scholars at the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at Melbourne Law School and funded by The Australian Research Council. For more information and to continue the conversation, visit www.constitutional-cafe.org

<p data-v-016c8ba2="">Constitutional Café brings together constitutionalists the world over for informal but scholarly conversations about important issues in constitutional law and politics. It is brought to you by a team of comparative constitutional law scholars at the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at Melbourne Law School. Each episode one of our team assembles a group of experts to discuss recent developments, new ideas or enduring themes in constitutional studies. We are especially interested in emerging and overlooked issues and in places and institutions that are not often discussed It is produced by a team of comparative constitutional law scholars at the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at Melbourne Law School and funded by The Australian Research Council. For more information and to continue the conversation, visit www.constitutional-cafe.org</p>

This episode of the podcast focuses on an underexplored theme in comparative constitutional law methodology: how languages shape the...

Languages and Comparative Constitutional Method

Chile recently saw the defeat at a national referendum of a proposed new democratic constitution. What should we make of this result, and what does it mean for the future of democratic constitutional reform in Chile and globally? Did Chilean constitution-makers try to achieve too much, too fast? Was the vote the product of opposition disinformation, or popular misunderstanding? Or was the defeat a product of deeper forces pushing against the chances of successful democratic constitutional transformation?

In this podcast, Rosalind Dixon explores these questions with an expert Chilean and comparative constitutional panel, including Professor Veronica Undagarra, Javier Cuoso and David Landau.

<p>Chile recently saw the defeat at a national referendum of a proposed new democratic constitution. What should we make of this result, and what does it mean for the future of democratic constitutional reform in Chile and globally? Did Chilean constitution-makers try to achieve too much, too fast? Was the vote the product of opposition disinformation, or popular misunderstanding? Or was the defeat a product of deeper forces pushing against the chances of successful democratic constitutional transformation?</p>
<p>In this podcast, Rosalind Dixon explores these questions with an expert Chilean and comparative constitutional panel, including Professor Veronica Undagarra, Javier Cuoso and David Landau.</p>

Democratic Constitutional Reform in Chile:  Looking Back and Forward

This podcast discusses the notion of ‘post-juristocracy’ – whether we're seeing the end of the broad global shift toward more powerful courts worldwide, which has been an ongoing trend for the almost 80 years post-World War II.
These developments include the declining legitimacy of apex courts in states like the USA and India, preventive actions against the expansion of judicial power in states like the UK, capture of previously powerful courts in countries like Hungary, as well as trends such as the increasing scholarly and policy focus on fourth branch institutions such as electoral commissions and the 'deliberative wave' that mark a shift in focus on rights protection and achieving constitutional change from courts to bodies like citizens’ assemblies.
While it’s not a monolithic phenomenon, these disparate but interacting political and scholarly trends raise a host of questions for constitutional lawyers about comparative methodology, constitutional design, and constitutional resilience.

<div>This podcast discusses the notion of ‘post-juristocracy’ – whether we're seeing the end of the broad global shift toward more powerful courts worldwide, which has been an ongoing trend for the almost 80 years post-World War II.</div><div><br></div><div>These developments include the declining legitimacy of apex courts in states like the USA and India, preventive actions against the expansion of judicial power in states like the UK, capture of previously powerful courts in countries like Hungary, as well as trends such as the increasing scholarly and policy focus on fourth branch institutions such as electoral commissions and the 'deliberative wave' that mark a shift in focus on rights protection and achieving constitutional change from courts to bodies like citizens’ assemblies.</div><div><br></div><div>While it’s not a monolithic phenomenon, these disparate but interacting political and scholarly trends raise a host of questions for constitutional lawyers about comparative methodology, constitutional design, and constitutional resilience.</div><div><br></div>

This podcast discusses the notion of 'post-juristocracy' - whether we're seeing the end of the broad global shift toward more powerful...

Post-Juristocracy - the End of Powerful Courts?

Associate Professor William Partlett speaks with Marina Agaltsova about her work at Memorial Human Rights Centre in Moscow and why that organisation is now facing liquidation. 

<div>Associate Professor William Partlett speaks with Marina Agaltsova about her work at Memorial Human Rights Centre in Moscow and why that organisation is now facing liquidation. </div>

Associate Professor William Partlett speaks with Marina Agaltsova about her work at Memorial Human Rights Centre in Moscow and why that...

Languages and Comparative Constitutional Method

Constitutional Cafe

In 1 playlist(s)

Constitutional Cafe

Follow podcast

Recent clips