Gør som tusindvis af andre bogelskere
Tilmeld dig nyhedsbrevet og få gode tilbud og inspiration til din næste læsning.
Ved tilmelding accepterer du vores persondatapolitik.Du kan altid afmelde dig igen.
In 2009 and 2010, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights underwent reforms to their judicial appointments processes, with the result that many of the candidates proposed by Member State governments were rejected. This book examines the rationale behind these reforms from the point of view of the Member States.
This book compares how and why the European Court of Justice, the French Cour de cassation and the United States Supreme Court offer different approaches for generating judicial accountability and control, judicial debate and deliberation, and ultimately judicial legitimacy.
Tilmeld dig nyhedsbrevet og få gode tilbud og inspiration til din næste læsning.
Ved tilmelding accepterer du vores persondatapolitik.