Sovereignty S Promise

Arguing that the state and its people stand in a fiduciary relationship, Sovereignty's Promise puts forward a bold new account of political authority and its legal limits. In doing so it presents a fresh argument for common law constitutionalism and a novel theoretical framework for understanding the requirements of the rule of law.

The subject of this thesis is the justification of sovereignty, legal order and the rule of law. That justification, I argue, is best articulated within a vision of the state as an entrusted and authorised fiduciary of each person subject to its powers. As fiduciary, the state is authorised to exercise public powers for the purpose of securing and administering legal order. But because this authorisation---the state's legal authority---flows from a fiduciary relationship with those subject to it, state authority is encumbered with an overarching obligation to use public powers exclusively for the public good. Seeing the state as fiduciary explains its authority to legislate, conduct administration, adjudicate and otherwise guarantee legal order. The fiduciary relationship also explains the default limits of that authority, limits which constitute the rule of law and manifest themselves as free-standing public duties such as fairness and reasonableness. Those common law duties guarantee that exercises of public power necessarily take place within an institutional legal framework that locates its legitimacy in the fiduciary principle's authorisation of it. When exercises of public power conform to the demands of this authorisation---the demands of the rule of law, of fairness and reasonableness---they respect the autonomy and dignity of the persons in whom the fiduciary justification of public authority ultimately lies.

Political theory is traditionally concerned with the justification and limits of state power. It asks: Can states legitimately direct and coerce non-consenting subjects? If they can, what limits, if any, constrain sovereign power? Public law is concerned with the justification and limits of judicial power. It asks: On what grounds can judges 'read down' or 'read in' statutory language against the apparent intention of the legislature? What limits, if any, are appropriate to these exercises of judicial power? This book develops an original constitutional theory of political authority that yields novel answers to both sets of questions. Fox-Decent argues that the state is a fiduciary of its people, and that this fiduciary relationship grounds the state's authority to announce and enforce law. The fiduciary state is conceived of as a public agent of necessity charged with guaranteeing a regime of secure and equal freedom. Whereas the social contract tradition struggles to ground authority on consent, the fiduciary theory explains authority with reference to the state's fiduciary obligation to respect legal principles constitutive of the rule of law. This obligation arises from the state's possession of irresistible public powers. The author begins with a discussion of Hobbes's conception of legality and the problem of discretionary power in administrative law. Drawing on Kant, he sketches a theory of fiduciary relations, and develops the argument through three parts. Part I shows that it is possible for the state to stand in a public fiduciary relationship to its people through a discussion of Crown-Native fiduciary relations recognized by Canadian courts. Part II sets out the theoretical underpinnings of the fiduciary theory of the state. Part III explores the implications of the fiduciary theory for administrative law and common law constitutionalism. The final chapter situates the theory within a broader philosophical discussion of the rule of law.

Over 500,000 copies sold “Why is God allowing this? What have I done wrong?” Many of us have asked these questions when life hits us hard. When our circumstances defy explanation, it is difficult to untangle our emotions from the truth. Before long, we feel confused and frustrated. We doubt His care for us. We wonder how He could allow these circumstances at all, or if He is really in control. During a time of darkness and adversity in his own life, Jerry Bridges dug deep into the Bible for answers on God’s sovereignty. What he learned changed his life—and it will change yours too. Find the answers to some of your most heartfelt questions, such as: Is God in control? Can I trust God? What is our responsibility when things are hard? How can I grow through adversity? And more Explore the scope of God’s care and control over nations, nature, and the tiny details of your life. You’ll find yourself trusting Him more completely―even when life hurts. Now with an added study guide for personal use or group discussion so you can dive deeper into this staple of Jerry Bridges’s classic collection. “The writings of Jerry Bridges are a gift to the church. He addresses a relevant topic with the wisdom of a scholar and the heart of a servant.” —Max Lucado, pastor and bestselling author

The book deeply analyses the bilateral relations between Switzerland and the European Union and their effect on the former's sovereignty in the context of Europeanisation. This touches on philosophical debates on the complexity of sovereignty. What sovereignty is at stake when talking about Swiss-EU relations? This issue not only faces the elusiveness of sovereignty as a concept, but also the proliferation of hypocrisy on its presence within states. The book encounters the deconstructionist hypothesis stating that there is nothing to worry about but the belief there is something to worry about. Derrida’s deconstruction of sovereignty allows indeed one to grasp the fictional essence of sovereignty based on the metaphysics of presence. The presence of self-positing sovereign ipseity is fictional since absent in the present, but spectrally present in the belief of its presence to come. Sovereignty is a matter of credibility, or the credible promise of a normative statement to come. Hence, the book challenges the realist/neorealist argument stating that states are credibly sovereign until proven otherwise and explains that the debate on state sovereignty calls for the unveiling of this hypocritical epistemology cunningly disguised as an objective presence. Swiss-EU relations thus become the cornerstone to not only theorise but also test sovereignty and deconstruct the two ontological and epistemological sides of the same coin, or the modern hypocrisy of sovereignty. This deconstruction constitutes the very problématique of any attempt to understand whether and how a state can be sovereign and solve the problem as to how to neutralise the différance and identify the difference between credible and incredible claims of sovereignty. This problématique connects the theory and practice of sovereignty innovatively, providing positivist evidence on the arguable credibility of the Swiss claim of sovereignty and confirming the presence of a theological dimension within politics.

Altered States: Globalisation, Sovereignty, and Governance

The cornerstone of Clark's argument is the 1763 Royal Proclamation which forbade non-natives under British authority to molest or disturb any tribe or tribal territory in British North America. Clark contends that this proclamation had legislative force and that, since imperial law on this matter has never been repealed, the right to self-government continues to exist for Canadian natives.

In 2012, the United Nations General Assembly determined that affordable Internet access is a human right, critical to citizen participation in democratic governments. Given the significance of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to social and political life, many U.S. tribes and Native organizations have created their own projects, from streaming radio to building networks to telecommunications advocacy. In Network Sovereignty, Marisa Duarte examines these ICT projects to explore the significance of information flows and information systems to Native sovereignty, and toward self-governance, self-determination, and decolonization. By reframing how tribes and Native organizations harness these technologies as a means to overcome colonial disconnections, Network Sovereignty shifts the discussion of information and communication technologies in Native communities from one of exploitation to one of Indigenous possibility.