Uzbekistan Investment and Business Guide - Strategic and Practical Information

This book undertakes the first comparative constitutional analysis of the Kyrgyz Republic and Republics of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan in their cultural, historical, political, economic and social context. The first chapter provides a general overview of the diverse and dynamic constitutional landscape across the region. A second chapter examines the Soviet constitutional system in depth as the womb of the Central Asian States. A third chapter completes the general picture by examining the constitutional influences of the 'new world order' of globalisation, neoliberalism, and good governance into which the five states were thrust. The remaining five chapters look in turn at the constitutional context of presidents and governments, parliaments and elections, courts and rights, society and economy and culture and identity. The enquiry probes the regional patterns of neo-Sovietism, plebiscitary elections, weak courts and parliaments, crony capitalism, and constraints on association, as well as the counter-tendencies that strengthen democracy, rights protection and pluralism. It reveals the Central Asian experience to be emblematic of the principal issues and tensions facing contemporary constitutional systems everywhere.

Bold and unconventional, this book advocates for an institutional turn-about in the relationship between democracy and constitutionalism.

This important volume contains an extensive collection of Uzbekistan legal texts translated and edited by the eminent scholar William E. Butler. All material is translated anew and is prefaced by an introductory note on the legislative history of each enactment and by a contextual observation. The documents translated in this volume have been chosen for their fundamental importance in understanding the Uzbekistan State structure and legal system. All are in force, and there is a strong emphasis on those enactments of key importance to the foreign investor. The broad scope of this work will provide the practitioner, legal scholar, government legal adviser, and student with an excellent reference tool for understanding contemporary Uzbekistan legal structures. This is the third volume in the CIS Legal Texts Series edited by William E. Butler.

Our Constitution speaks in general terms of liberty and property, of the privileges and immunities of citizens, and of the equal protection of the laws--open-ended phrases that seem to invite readers to reflect in them their own visions and agendas. Yet, recognizing that the Constitution cannot be merely what its interpreters wish it to be, this volume's authors draw on literary and mathematical analogies to explore how the fundamental charter of American government should be construed today.

Britain does not have a written constitution. It has rather, over centuries, developed a set of miscellaneous conventions, rules, and norms that govern political behavior. By contrast, Bosnia’s constitution was written, quite literally, overnight in a military hanger in Dayton, USA, to conclude a devastating war. By most standards it does not work and is seen to have merely frozen a conflict and all development with it. What might these seemingly unrelated countries be able to teach each other? Britain, racked by recent crises from Brexit to national separatism, may be able to avert long-term political conflict by understanding the pitfalls of writing rigid constitutional rules without popular participation or the cultivation of good political culture. Bosnia, in turn, may be able to thaw its frozen conflict by subjecting parts of its written constitution to amendment, with civic involvement, on a fixed and regular basis; a ’revolving constitution’ to replicate some of that flexibility inherent in the British system. A book not just about Bosnia and Britain; a standard may be set for other plural, multi-ethnic polities to follow.

Americans hate bureaucracy—though they love the services it provides—and demand that government run like a business. Hence today’s privatization revolution. Jon Michaels shows how the fusion of politics and profits commercializes government and consolidates state power in ways the Constitution’s framers endeavored to disaggregate.

In this groundbreaking analysis of Supreme Court decision-making, Andrew Coan explains how judicial caseload shapes the course of American constitutional law and the role of the Court in American society. Compared with the vast machinery surrounding Congress and the president, the Supreme Court is a tiny institution that can resolve only a small fraction of the constitutional issues that arise in any given year. Rationing the Constitution shows that this simple yet frequently ignored fact is essential to understanding how the Supreme Court makes constitutional law. Due to the structural organization of the judiciary and certain widely shared professional norms, the capacity of the Supreme Court to review lower-court decisions is severely limited. From this fact, Andrew Coan develops a novel and arresting theory of Supreme Court decision-making. In deciding cases, the Court must not invite more litigation than it can handle. On many of the most important constitutional questions—touching on federalism, the separation of powers, and individual rights—this constraint creates a strong pressure to adopt hard-edged categorical rules, or defer to the political process, or both. The implications for U.S. constitutional law are profound. Lawyers, academics, and social activists pursuing social reform through the courts must consider whether their goals can be accomplished within the constraints of judicial capacity. Often the answer will be no. The limits of judicial capacity also substantially constrain the Court’s much touted—and frequently lamented—power to overrule democratic majorities. As Rationing the Constitution demonstrates, the Supreme Court is David, not Goliath.

Uzbekistan Business Law Handbook - Strategic Information and Basic Laws