Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Political thinkers from Machiavelli to Ackerman have used the institution of the Roman Dictatorship as a paradigm of emergency powers in constitutional regimes. The dictatorship with its qualities of speed, decisiveness, and flexibility represents, for many of these thinkers, a necessary shift from the rule of law to absolute individual rule. This paper uses the history of this very institution to show that, on the contrary, the dichotomy of the rule of law which is `normal`and individual rule which is `exceptional` is a false one. I argue that a more nuanced understanding of formal and informal power and constraint, such as that which the dictatorship illustrates, is necessary if we are to make emergency powers safer.

Publication Type: Abstract
Abstract: In their 1987 book "From Farming to Biotechnology: A Theory of Agro-Industrial Development," Goodman, Sorj and Wilkinson introduce the twin concepts of "appropriationism" and "substitutionism" in agriculture. Though the authors' target was not agrifood nanotechnology, their theoretical model can easily be applied to the emergence of nanotechnology in agriculture. This paper seeks to shed light on this emerging sector, paying special attention to products and processes that are at or near the point of appropriating or substituting existing agrifood technologies. Understanding what agrifood nanotechnologies are likely to emerge will enable us to more fully grasp the potential social and ethical implications of this emerging technology.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Rigorous academic scholarship, for some time now, depicts the state of Israel as a colonial state. Although the critical perspective of such approach is apparent, the motivation is, however, analytical. Working within this paradigm, this paper studies how Israel�s colonial apparatus is manifested in its legal system. More particularly, this paper analyzes how a principle aspect of a colonial regime, a state of emergency, informs the operation of the Israeli Supreme Court sitting as a High Court of Justice (HCJ). The paper demonstrates how the HCJ, which is the guardian of the rule of law and often serves as the protector of civil liberties, helps to affirm the colonial legal differential citizenship in Israel. As the paper argues, this is the result of the fact that the HCJ uses the state of emergency as an extra-legal tool. The HCJ incorporates the state of emergency into the juridical by applying legal review over it. However, the state of emergency is a fact, a necessity from which the state needs to protect itself, and therefore it is outside any legal frame. Hence, the HCJ does not have legal tools to validate or invalidate actions which derive from a state of exception. The paper will argue that in fusing the extra-legal with the legal, by embracing it with juridical professionalism, the HCJ legitimizes the colonial condition of a legal duality between settlers who enjoy the protection of the law and locals for whom the law is suspended.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The paper contrasts two moments/configurations/orders of international relations during the 20th century. On the one hand, the 40-plus years Cold War. On the other hand, the post-Cold War years.

International order had been associated, during Cold War, with the idea of balance, of "balanced" political relations between sovereign states made possible by rival superpowers’ (USA, USSR) supervision. That kind of international order included ad hoc intervention by the respective superpower in its “area of influence” as well as peace operations (traditional peacekeeping) as a second-best choice in “hot spots” where momentarily no superpower prevailed.

After the demise of the USSR the Cold War competition has, arguably, been replaced by a post-Cold War "managerial" definition of international affairs informed by liberal values. In this new paradigmatic account of international order the “balance” image remains but instead of polarizing superpowers there is a sole superpower selectively presiding over the sketch of a self-regulating international system in which “exceptional” events are labeled as “emergencies” claiming immediate (collective) response.

The symbolic construction of "emergency" turns political action, which was exceptional, during Cold War, in routine under the umbrella of complex, expanded peace operations. In this context statebuilding, humanitarian intervention and post-conflict peacebuilding make sense as instances of “ordering” rather than utopias or practices undermining the (alleged) foundations of an anarchic order of sovereign states.

The paper proposes that such contraposition of moments/configurations/orders can enhance our understanding of peace operations. Considering the paradigmatic account of how peace operations can contribute to the maintenance of peace and security it is possible to depict institutional change in time, as well as describe how international institutions are both constructor and constructed in this context. Current challenges to peace operations also come to the forefront when the paradigmatic change is considered.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The paper is a summary report from a comparative study of the legislative process in Benin, Ghana, Kenya and Senegal sponsored by the World Bank. The paper addresses the puzzle of why the authority of the legislature varies greatly across countries that have experienced a significant measure of liberalization and/or democratization, and explans this variance in terms of the changing structure of incentives facing members of parliament in the four countries.