This book examines the practices of contesting evidence in democratically constituted knowledge societies. It provides a multifaceted view of the processes and conditions of evidence criticism and how they determine the dynamics of de- and re-stabilization of evidence. Evidence is an essential resource for establishing claims of validity, resolving conflicts, and legitimizing decisions. In recent times, however, evidence is being contested with increasing frequency. Such contestations vary in form and severity – from questioning the interpretation of data or the methodological soundness of studies to accusations of evidence fabrication. The contributors to this volume explore which actors, for what reasons and to what effect, question evidence in fields such as the biological, environmental and health sciences. In addition to actors inside academia, they examine the roles of various other players, including citizen scientists, counter-experts, journalists, patients, consumers and activists. The contributors tackle questions of how disagreements are framed and how they are used to promote vested interests. By drawing on methodological and theoretical approaches from a wide range of fields, this book provides a much-needed perspective on how evidence criticism influences the development and state of knowledge societies and their political condition. Evidence Contestation will appeal to scholars and advanced students working in philosophy of science, epistemology, bioethics, science and technology studies, the history of science and technology and science communication.

Fernando Castillo de la Torre and Eric Gippini Fournier, two of the most experienced competition litigators at the European Commission, undertake an in-depth analysis of the case law of the EU Courts on the rules of evidence, proof and judicial review, as they are applied in EU competition law. These topics often engage with fundamental rights, and the book takes stock of the most frequent criticisms that are made of the EU enforcement system and review by EU Courts. The result is an extremely thorough and well-structured review of the relevant rules of law and of the precedents. The authors combine valuable insights and critical analysis to construct a definitive yet balanced portrayal of the state of EU competition law.

This book provides a multidisciplinary and comparative look at the contemporary phenomenon of conscientious objection or contestation in the name of religion and examines the key issues that emerge in terms of citizenship and democracy. These are analysed by looking at the different ways of challenging or contesting a legal obligation on the grounds of religious beliefs and convictions. The authors focus on the meaning of conscientious objection which asserts the legitimacy of convictions – in particular religious convictions – in determining the personal or collective relevance of the law and of public action. The book begins by examining the main theoretical issues underlying conscientious objection, exploring the implications of the protection of freedom of conscience, the place of religion in the secular public sphere and the recognition and respect of ethical pluralism in society. It then focuses on the question of exemptions and contestations of civil norms, using a multidisciplinary approach to highlight the multiple and diverse issues surrounding them, as well as the motives behind them. This book will be of great interest to scholars, specialists and graduate and advanced undergraduate students who are interested in issues of religious diversity. Researchers and policymakers in think-tanks, NGOs and government units will find the volume useful in identifying key issues in understanding the phenomenon of conscientious objection and its implications in managing ethical diversity in contemporary societies.

It has become a commonplace assumption in modern political debate that white and rural working- and middle-class citizens in the United States who have been rallied by Republicans in the “culture wars” to vote Republican have been voting “against their interests.” But what, exactly, are these “interests” that these voters are supposed to have been voting against? It reveals a lot about the role of the notion of interest in political debate today to realize that these “interests” are taken for granted to be the narrowly self-regarding, primarily economic “interests” of the individual. Exposing and contesting this view of interests, Dean Mathiowetz finds in the language of interest an already potent critique of neoliberal political, theoretical, and methodological imperatives—and shows how such a critique has long been active in the term’s rich history. Through an innovative historical investigation of the language of interest, Mathiowetz shows that appeals to interest are always politically contestable claims about “who” somebody is—and a provocation to action on behalf of that “who.” Appeals to Interest exposes the theoretical and political costs of our widespread denial of this crucial role of interest-talk in the constitution of political identity, in political theory and social science alike.

A comprehensive source of the most authoritative statements of the International Criminal Court's appellate jurisprudence. Its clear format includes commentaries followed by excerpts of the decisions and judgments, carefully selected by lawyers based on their relevance and grouped by topic. It provides a practical background to the International Criminal Court's appellate jurisprudence from experienced current and former Appeals Counsel of the Office of the Prosecutor of the Court, highlighting pertinent issues. In doing so, readers are given the tools to discern the meaning of the case law themselves, while attention is drawn to the most important developments in the jurisprudence. This text presents an authoritative and comprehensive digest of the Appeals Chamber's jurisprudence, bringing the relevant case extracts together for the first time with clear and informative commentary.