|
Real Existing Post-Socialism
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Marci ShoreMuriel Blaive
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Judges Under Pressure
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ivan VejvodaJudy Dempsey
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
Two members of the European Union. Two members of NATO. They couldn't be more different.
Poland and Romania are undergoing transformations that could have a profound effect on the rule of law, particularly on the role of independent judges.
Romania has been consistently criticized by reformers, by human rights activists and by organizations trying to combat the rampant corruption for the weak rule of law and for the constant interference by the political elites in the judiciary.
Since 1989, the country's transformation has been long, complicated and delayed by vested interests and indeed the old guard. Its history and culture do play a role in delaying the transformation. But the past cannot be used as an excuse to postpone a long overdue institutionalization of the rule of law and make the judiciary genuinely independent.
As for Poland, it was supposed to be a kind of model for other countries making the transformation from communism to democracy. But since 2005, a year after Poland joined the European Union, Law and Justice, a nationalist, conservative party, has been doing everything possible to overturn the gains of the post-1989 period.
Its first stint in power was too short-lived for the party to achieve its goal: adapting the law to implement its agenda. But since 2015, it has chiseled away at the fundamental aspects of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.
There are a lot of "whys" with regard to what is happening in Poland and Romania. This will be the topic of my presentation on 4 November.
Read more
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
Two members of the European Union. Two members of NATO. They couldn't be more different.
Poland and Romania are undergoing transformations that could have a profound effect on the rule of law, particularly on the role of independent judges.
Romania has been consistently criticized by reformers, by human rights activists and by organizations trying to combat the rampant corruption for the weak rule of law and for the constant interference by the political elites in the judiciary.
Since 1989, the country's transformation has been long, complicated and delayed by vested interests and indeed the old guard. Its history and culture do play a role in delaying the transformation. But the past cannot be used as an excuse to postpone a long overdue institutionalization of the rule of law and make the judiciary genuinely independent.
As for Poland, it was supposed to be a kind of model for other countries making the transformation from communism to democracy. But since 2005, a year after Poland joined the European Union, Law and Justice, a nationalist, conservative party, has been doing everything possible to overturn the gains of the post-1989 period.
Its first stint in power was too short-lived for the party to achieve its goal: adapting the law to implement its agenda. But since 2015, it has chiseled away at the fundamental aspects of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.
There are a lot of "whys" with regard to what is happening in Poland and Romania. This will be the topic of my presentation on 4 November.
Read more
|
|
Slavic Bazaar: Performances and Instrumentalizations of the Slavic discourse 1791 - 2017
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Katherine YoungerLudger HagedornTomáš Glanc
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
The ideology of Slavic unity and reciprocity has been a crucial pattern of European thought and culture since the beginning of the 19th century, and it is still relevant today.
In his presentation, Tomáš Glanc will discuss the development, the teleology, and the typologies of this heterogeneous discourse. The talk will outline performative practices of “Slaventum” rich in contradictions, geopolitical phantasms and geopoetic fictions. Glanc will use examples from different disciplines such as literature, art, linguistics, but also referring to political essays, institutional history, and the history of gymnastics.
Read more
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
The ideology of Slavic unity and reciprocity has been a crucial pattern of European thought and culture since the beginning of the 19th century, and it is still relevant today.
In his presentation, Tomáš Glanc will discuss the development, the teleology, and the typologies of this heterogeneous discourse. The talk will outline performative practices of “Slaventum” rich in contradictions, geopolitical phantasms and geopoetic fictions. Glanc will use examples from different disciplines such as literature, art, linguistics, but also referring to political essays, institutional history, and the history of gymnastics.
Read more
|
|
The ‘Authoritarian International’
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ludger HagedornMartin KrygierRicardo Pagliuso Regatieri
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Covid-19 and Holocaust Memory
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ludger HagedornTobias Ebbrecht-Hartmann
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Leben im – und Wege aus dem – „Corona-Camp“
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Bernd MarinLudger HagedornAugust Ruhs
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Forced Migration, the Antinomies of Mobility, and the Autonomy of Asylum
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ayşe ÇağlarNicholas de Genova
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
Rather than seeing the ever more devious reaction formations of border policing and militarization, migrant detention, immigration enforcement, and deportation by state powers as if these were purely a matter of control, it is instructive to situate this economy of power in relation to the primacy, autonomy, and subjectivity of human mobility on a global (transnational, intercontinental, cross- border, postcolonial) scale. This is true, I contend, as much for refugees as for those who come to be derisively designated to be mere “migrants.” If we start from the human freedom of movement and recognize the various tactics of bordering as reaction formations, then the various tactics of border policing and forms of migration governance can be seen to introduce interruptions that temporarily immobilize and decelerate human cross-border mobilities with the aim of subjecting them to processes of surveillance and adjudication. Indeed, it is this dialectic that reconstitutes these mobilities as something that comes to be apprehensible, alternately, as “migration,” or “asylum-seeking,” or the “forced migration” of “refugees” in flight from persecution or violence – which is to say, as one or another variety of target and object of government. Yet, even under the most restricted circumstances and under considerable constraint, these human mobilities exude a substantial degree of autonomous subjectivity whereby migrants and refugees struggle to appropriate mobility. Even against the considerable forces aligned to immobilize their mobility projects, or to subject them to the stringent and exclusionary rules and constrictions of asylum, the subjective autonomy of human mobility remains an incorrigible force.
Read more
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
Rather than seeing the ever more devious reaction formations of border policing and militarization, migrant detention, immigration enforcement, and deportation by state powers as if these were purely a matter of control, it is instructive to situate this economy of power in relation to the primacy, autonomy, and subjectivity of human mobility on a global (transnational, intercontinental, cross- border, postcolonial) scale. This is true, I contend, as much for refugees as for those who come to be derisively designated to be mere “migrants.” If we start from the human freedom of movement and recognize the various tactics of bordering as reaction formations, then the various tactics of border policing and forms of migration governance can be seen to introduce interruptions that temporarily immobilize and decelerate human cross-border mobilities with the aim of subjecting them to processes of surveillance and adjudication. Indeed, it is this dialectic that reconstitutes these mobilities as something that comes to be apprehensible, alternately, as “migration,” or “asylum-seeking,” or the “forced migration” of “refugees” in flight from persecution or violence – which is to say, as one or another variety of target and object of government. Yet, even under the most restricted circumstances and under considerable constraint, these human mobilities exude a substantial degree of autonomous subjectivity whereby migrants and refugees struggle to appropriate mobility. Even against the considerable forces aligned to immobilize their mobility projects, or to subject them to the stringent and exclusionary rules and constrictions of asylum, the subjective autonomy of human mobility remains an incorrigible force.
Read more
|
|
Governance of Forced Migration in South Asia
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ayşe ÇağlarSabyasachi Basu Ray Chaudhury
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Eroding Trust
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ivan VejvodaSrdjan Cvijic
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
The Conundrum of Trafficking and Statelessness in West Bengal
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ayşe ÇağlarPaula Banerjee
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|