Recent orders
A Good Constitution
A Good Constitution
Contents
TOC o “1-3” h z u HYPERLINK l “_Toc377207442” Requirements of a Good Constitution PAGEREF _Toc377207442 h 2
HYPERLINK l “_Toc377207443” Features of the independent constitution of Kenya PAGEREF _Toc377207443 h 3
HYPERLINK l “_Toc377207444” Bibliography PAGEREF _Toc377207444 h 5
A constitution is a set of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organization is governed. These rules together make up, i.e. constitute, what the entity is. When these principles are written down into a single or set of legal documents, those documents may be said to comprise a written constitution.
The term constitution comes through French from the Latin word constitutio, used for regulations and orders, such as the imperial enactments (constitutiones principis: edicta, mandata, decreta, rescripta). Later, the term was widely used in canon law for an important determination, especially a decree issued by the Pope, now referred to as an apostolic constitution.
Most commonly, the term constitution refers to a set of rules and principles that define the nature and extent of government. Most constitutions seek to regulate the relationship between institutions of the state, in a basic sense the relationship between the executive, legislature and the judiciary, but also the relationship of institutions within those branches. For example, executive branches can be divided into a head of government, government departments/ministries, executive agencies and a civil service/bureaucracy. Most constitutions also attempt to define the relationship between individuals and the state, and to establish the broad rights of individual citizens. It is thus the most basic law of a territory from which all the other laws and rules are hierarchically derived; in some territories it is in fact called “Basic Law”.
A fundamental classification is codification or lack of codification. A codified constitution is one that is contained in a single document, which is the single source of constitutional law in a state. An uncodified constitution is one that is not contained in a single document, consisting of several different sources, which may be written or unwritten.
Constitutions may also provide that their most basic principles can never be abolished, even by amendment. In case a formally valid amendment of a constitution infringes these principles protected against any amendment, it may constitute a so-called unconstitutional constitutional law.
Codified constitutions normally consist of a ceremonial preamble, which sets forth the goals of the state and the motivation for the constitution, and several articles containing the substantive provisions. The preamble, which is omitted in some constitutions, may contain a reference to God and/or to fundamental values of the state such as liberty, democracy or human rights.
Requirements of a Good ConstitutionA good constitution is one made by the people, for the people. It is people-centred. Like the new constitution of Kenya, its very first article should proclaim sovereignty of the country and its people. This is unlike the old constitution which proclaimed the sovereignty of the president. The most essential prerequisite for success of the constitution is that the people act as its custodian. It must provide people with opportunities of participation at different levels of the state, to advance the fight against corruption and against pervasive poverty. It must transcend the politics of ethnicity, manufactured by politicians and immorality of plundering the country’s resources. A good constitution must uphold the values of a democratic and caring society, based on inclusion and social justice, fundamental human rights, respect for cultural differences but united in our search for harmony and unity, and the common commitment to the worth and dignity of us all.
Features of the independent constitution of KenyaKenyan voters adopted the new constitution in a national referendum on 4 August 2010. President Mwai Kibaki’s signature formally ended a long struggle to reduce the power of the President. Kenya’s new Constitution is part of a reform package, which took place after a power-sharing deal was signed in February 2008. The deal put an end to the violence which took place after Kenya’s controversial December 2007 Presidential elections.
Under the new constitution of Kenya there will be a decentralized political system which would limit the powers of the President and there will be local counties in place of corrupt provincial governments. The constitution of Kenya changed the structure of the government by creating 47 counties. The senate will have 47 members, each member elected from the counties. The President is to continue his rule over the nation, but he will be restricted by checks and balances and the Senate will examine key appointments made by him. The Presidents and Senate will have fixed term with elections taking place after every five years.
The previous constitution allowed the concentration of powers in the hands of the President, left courts with little control over the executive, and allowed politicians to exploit the tribal differences. The demand for new constitution in Kenya was for a long time and every new political crisis in the nation only bolstered the demand. The ethnic violence in Kenya following the disputed Presidential elections of 2007 saw the killing of more than 1000 persons. In the wake of the violence it was agreed that there is a need for a new constitution to avoid any more trouble in future.
The new constitution of Kenya covers several main features. The first important feature in the new constitution is that the powers of the President are reduced according to the wishes of the Kenyan citizens. Another feature is the transfer of power to regions which ensures equitable sharing of resources between the National government and the County government through a resolution of Parliament. The new constitution also contains an advanced bill of rights that among other things recognizes socio-economic rights of the Kenyan citizens. It has also created a Judicial Service Commission in which independence of the judiciary is affirmed in article 160. Another important feature in the new constitution is the creation of an Independent National Land Commission to maintain oversight and manage all public land belonging to National and County governments and recommend policy on addressing complaints from the public, planning, and dispute resolution.
The new constitution features clauses that emphasize on representation in elective bodies to effectively meet gender equity with a constitutional requirement of at least a third of elective posts to be filled by women. The constitution also includes an advanced human rights and equality commission with powers to summon and investigate individuals involved in human rights violations be they within the government or the public. Another feature is the establishment of the freedom of media to protect media houses from penalties on expression by the state on any opinion and dissemination of news. Lastly another major inclusion in the new constitution is the recognition of Muslim Kadhi courts as legal establishments.
BibliographyClottey, Peter (). “Human Rights Official Says Kenyans Want an Accountable Government”. 15December 2009. VOA. Retrieved 1 April, 2011<http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/africa/Human-Rights-Official-Says-Kenyans-Want-an-Accountable-Government–79367812.html>
George Mousourakis. The historical and institutional context of Roman law. New York: Pearson,2003.
Ghai, Yash and Jill Cottrell Ghai. Kenyan constitution: History in the making. The challenges ofimplementation. Pambazuka, Issue 493, 5 August, 2010.
Kenyayetu.comxa.com. Judicial system of Kenya, supreme court, appeal,high court,kadhi’s, chiefjusticeand Establishment of the Judicial Service Commission. 06 November, 2010.Retrieved 30 March, 2011<http://kenyayetu.comxa.com/chapter10.html>
The New Oxford American Dictionary. (2nd ed.). Edited by Erin McKean. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 2005.
The Revolt Against Immanence Neo-Orthodoxy of Barth, Brunner, Bultmann, and Niebuhr
Neo-Orthodoxy Paper
Topic 2: The Revolt Against Immanence: Neo-Orthodoxy of Barth, Brunner, Bultmann, and Niebuhr
Write an essay (1,250-1,500 words) evaluating the theologies of each of the four theologians discussed in this module (i.e., Barth, Brunner, Bultmann, and Niebuhr). Your analysis should explore each theology and how each can be considered neo-orthodox. Determine what is distinctive about each theology, and the positives and negatives for each.
The Revolt Against Immanence: Neo-Orthodoxy of Barth, Brunner, Bultmann, and Niebuhr
Name
Institution
Course
Date
Introduction
Neo-orthodoxy also known as called theology of crisis, was a theological movement that occurred between first and second world war as a result of aftermath of the first world war. Bromiley (2000) and Busch (1976) concur that this theological movement was a reaction against the 19th century liberal theology. Neo-orthodoxy was marked by four major theologians: Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, Rudolf Bultmann, and Reinhold Niebuhr. As a result of different perspectives from which the theologians argued, the individualization and contextualization of the idea, the theologians were split in arguments and isolated streams of thoughts. This resulted to ethnic, gender based and economic based theologies. This essay explores the four theologies and how each can be regarded as neo-orthodox. The distinctiveness of each theory, the positive and negative aspects are also discussed.
Karl Barth (1886-1968)
According to Karl Barth, there is no truth in and about the gospel. In this theologian’s hoax argument, he saw the revelation of God through reason and empirical study. The theologian spent his time marking questions about religion against all the beliefs and biblical facts. As a result, he changed the course of the modern theology thus becoming neo-orthodox. According to Karl Barth, God does not meet man anywhere except through the Bible, even though he argued that Bible was written in sinful humanity.
He criticized the orthodox belief further by stating that the Bible itself, written in humanity is incapable of revealing the truth about God. One of the drawbacks of Karl Barth was that his argument was based on finding void in Orthodox Christianity. The arguments were tailored toward the negatives of theology and the truth within that left untouched. This theologian’s strength in relation to teaching of theology as that he constantly cited Jesus Christ as the only revelator on whom God is. He argued that though the Scripture may not be accurate in some aspect, yet it points to the man Christ, revealer of truth about God. Barth unique identifies God as having relation with humanity through nature only.
Emil Brunner (1889-1966)
Like his fellow theologian, Karl Barth, Emil Brunner insisted that God can only be revealed through the revelation of nature. That is sot say, any truth about God and His divinity can only be known through His works of creation. According to Emil, God could access and punish humanity through nature suppose they failed to meet a given natural standard. This was neo-orthodox as it tended to thwart and suppress the biblical truth that the Lord shall judge everyone at the end of the age. Brunner appeared to follow the saying by Apostle Paul in Romans 4:15, ‘where there is no law, there also is no violation’. For the theologian, Brunner, this quote was never correct and to orthodox, denying this revelation makes void the notion of meaning of creation. like Barth, he rejected underpinnings of both orthodoxy and liberalism. He is of the same opinion like Barth that God cannot reveal himself to humanity through the Bible. He also believed that the truth about God is only revealed through the man Christ. The uniqueness of this theology is that revelation is a personal correspondence between humanity and God. He also states that God does not make known Himself to through any other means but by communicating Himself (Hesselink, I John).
The strength of Brunner in support to Orthodox religion was seen in His quote of Biblical scripture John 1:1 (NIV): “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This theologian believed that God reveals Himself to those He has chosen and not through theological ideology. He personalized relation between God and humanity. The other strength was that Brunner’s knowledge of God and divinity was expansive and differed from Barth’s on various aspects. As a matter of fact, he denied Barth’s analysis of God and His revelation to man.
Rudolf Bultmann (1884 − 1976)
Bultmann’s theological argument commences with Barth’s assertions. Having the foundation of Barth’s theology, he extended his theology from existentialism. He insisted that major part of the New Testament was mythical and not historical. However, he could not refuse that Christ is the Lord. The theologian’s commitment to conscience above conformity made him seem to support the church. Bultmann’s most important and contentious work was positioned on demythologization of the Bible and this stood as the uniqueness of this theological argument.
Developing from Barth’s arguments, Bultmann did not believe that all accounts in the Bible were historically accurate. According to Erickson, the scriptural objective was to inform the humanity and transform their lives and not to add information to them, but to impact on their lives and existences (2000, p. 910). An essential point about this demythologization can be seen how Bultmann views and argues Galatians 2:20, ‘I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.” According to this theologian, the humanity does not have to literally take this verse as they read it. Bultmann argues that the man Christ was not crucified on the cross as means of paying sins of humanity, and this was a myth. According to him, this verse could be properly interpreted as the need for humanity to kill its own evil desires.
Arguing from orthodoxy’s perspective, Bultmann had a positive perspective as he started by stating that Christ was God, a theology taught and practiced by the orthodox church. However, the assertions that part of the scripture was myth was hurtful to the orthodox church.
Reinhold Niebuhr (1893-1971)
Contrary to other theologians, Niebuhr openly confessed the authenticity of Apostles Paul’s writing in Romans 1:19-20. He supported the planetary exists of God and argued that since the Earth is not self-sufficient, self-explanatory, its existence is beyond what humanity can think or perceive. Humanity cannot tackle ass the mystical happenings in the universe and attempt to results in endless confrontations with something beyond their ability and capability and this explains the existence of someone greater.
The inability to solve all their problems explains why God exists and has wo major impressions. First, there is a sense of reverence and reliance on greater source of power and authority beyond human nature. Second, there is a sense of responsibility laid on humanity by someone beyond their understanding and subsequent sense of moral unfitness and quiet before someone who judges over humanity. According to Niebuhr, the bible is a writing with no authority of human surroundings like social, political or economic, rather is a written word of God that contains the ultimate facts than everything else.
This theologian asserted that Bible gives meaningful disclosures of whom God is through symbols or myths. The myths as in the bible help the humanity to comprehend the life meaning by pointing them to divinity. These myths however cannot be validated through scientific or logical means. One of the positive of Reinhold Niebuhr’s theology is that he recognized the biblical facts.
References
Bromiley, G.W (2000), An Introduction to the Theology of Karl Barth, Continuum International,
ISBN 0-567-29054-9.
Busch, E (1976). Karl Barth: His Life from Letters and Autobiographical Texts. Grand Rapids,
Wm. B. Eerdmans. ISBN 0-8028-0708-9.
Hesselink, I. J. (1989,December). Emil Brunner: A centennial perspective.The Christian
Century,106(38),1171. Retrieved January 22, 2010, from ProQuest Religion. (Document
ID:1823265).
Erickson, M. (2000). Christian theology. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books.
The restrictions on steel manufacturing in France and Japan for the sake of environmental protection
The restrictions on steel manufacturing in France and Japan for the sake of environmental protection
Student’s Name
Course Number and Name
Instructor’s Name
Due Date
Introduction
The steel industry is one of biggest energy consuming manufacturing industries in the world and it has the largest share in the economy of the world. China and Japan are the two countries that lead in the production of steel globally (Olmez et al. 2016). France being part of the European Community is expected to not only protect the environment but also to improve its quality. France is also targeted to serve the human health protection and to guarantee efficient and cautious natural resource use. Since, steel manufacturing consumes a high level of energy, both Japan and France have restricted steel manufacturing for the sake of environmental protection.
Legal Environment
Japan’s fundamental environmental laws and regulations include 242 regulations, statutes, and administrative directives, including the Basic Law on Environmental Protection and Related Laws Supporting Environmental Law Implementation, as well as the Basic Law on Environmental Protection and Related Laws Supporting Environmental Law Implementation. In addition to the Environmental Effect Assessment Law and the Environmental Effect Assessment Implementation Order and Rules, there are other laws and regulations that regulate investment environmental impact assessment, such as the Environmental Impact Assessment Implementation Rules. Air pollution in metropolitan areas, eutrophication, solid waste, environmental safety, and climate change are among the most pressing environmental concerns facing Japan today. In order to address these environmental challenges, the regulatory approach has been widely adopted in Japan, with incentives-based measures such as environmental fees being largely ignored. In comparing the rules for air pollution in Japan with those in other OECD nations, Japan has stricter limits for air pollution but less rigorous regulations for water pollution in catchment areas such as rivers, lakes, and coastal zones.
As a vocal signatory to the Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods), France has one of the globe’s strictest environmental protection laws. The French legal system is quite complicated. Given the difficulty of understanding French law for a non-native speaker, it is recommended that international law or an arbitration system be used. France has strict control of the air pollution and emissions areas of manufacturing, including the quarrying and mining processes, handling of raw materials, coking, dust and fumes, leakage control, gases and vapors from the processes and other related emissions. Even the process of selling a plant is heavily regulated by French laws.
Recommendation on which Country to Locate
One of the requirements of steel manufacturing is large coke inputs which extremely damages the environment. Coke ovens leads to the emission of air pollution like naphthalene which can cause cancer due to its toxicity (Petkar, 2014). The wastewater from the process of coking is increasingly toxic as well and contains carcinogenic organic compounds, ammonia, ammonium, sulfides, and cyanides. On average, there is an emission of 1.83 tons of carbon dioxide of each ton of steel that is manufactured which makes steel manufacturing one of the major contributors to global warming (Olmez et al. 2016). In addition, thanks to the emission of greenhouse gases, steel production leads to climate change in Japan and France. With this information, Japan is better placed to be the next destination for the firm because, despite its numerous laws, the demands are less strict and manageable compared to the complex legal environment in France.