Nicht lieferbar
Counterterrorism and the Comparative Law of Investigative Detention
Versandkostenfrei!
Nicht lieferbar
"A must read and a breakthrough work ... The book makes clear the importance of comparing, learning from, and adapting legal systems to the ever-changing world, while maintaining the integrity of the Constitution. The subtlety of the book shows deep understanding of these legal regimes, something most legal analysts and policy makers from both systems sorely lack ... a most timely and valuable analysis."- Prof. Christopher L. Blakesley, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and author of Terrorism and Anti-Terrorism: A Normative and Practical Assessment "A careful and authoritative account of the c...
"A must read and a breakthrough work ... The book makes clear the importance of comparing, learning from, and adapting legal systems to the ever-changing world, while maintaining the integrity of the Constitution. The subtlety of the book shows deep understanding of these legal regimes, something most legal analysts and policy makers from both systems sorely lack ... a most timely and valuable analysis."- Prof. Christopher L. Blakesley, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and author of Terrorism and Anti-Terrorism: A Normative and Practical Assessment "A careful and authoritative account of the controversial practice of investigative detention as a tool for responding to terrorism in a post-September 11th world. Informed by an impressive knowledge of American, British, and French law, Stigall's book reflects a distinctive comparative perspective. It deserves to be read not only by scholars and students in the field but also by policy makers on both sides of the Atlantic." - Prof. Stuart P. Green, Rutgers School of Law-Newark "Dan Stigall's analysis highlights the danger of dismissing a comparative approach, for he has most effectively used the British and French experience in discussing detention. While no regime has the answer (an illusion, at best), democratic nations can well learn from each other's successes and failures. Precisely for that reason, policy makers, jurists, and the concerned public owe Dan a collective thanks; in addressing the extraordinarily complicated issue of detention from a comparative perspective, he has truly bitten off a very large bite of a problematic apple. That he has done so is to our benefit; that he has done so successfully is to his credit. While we shall continue to struggle with the limits of detention and what legal paradigm is the "correct" one, we are the richer for Dan's book. It can serve as an effective "guide" as we continue to traverse the never-ending field of terrorism and counterterrorism." - Amos N. Guiora, Professor of Law, S. J. Quinney College of Law, University of Utah
