The Holocaust of His Discretion Clayton, Tom
Church history and religious culture,
09/2020, Volume:
100, Issue:
2-3
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Abstract
This essay establishes the significance of the concept of "discretion" to the scope and nature of episcopal power in the early Stuart Church. Examples are drawn from the Church's ...constitutional documents and the ecclesiology of Richard Hooker, where "discretion" named a faculty of judgment and the particularly controversial form of autonomous power over adiaphora, or "things indifferent," proper to the clergy. Turning to the manuscript and print records of a dispute between Bishop of Lincoln John Williams and the Archiepiscopal regime of William Laud, the essay argues that contrasting interpretations of discretion within the Church's institutional culture characterized divergent approaches to conformity. These differences were established through the metaphors that translated between objects at the edges of episcopal jurisdictions and the concerns closest to the Church's doctrinal identity. Disputes over these metaphors aggravated constitutional tensions in the years preceding the civil wars.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NMLJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, ZRSKP
Whenever police officers come into contact with citizens there is a chance that the encounter will digress to one in which force is used on a suspect. Fortunately, most police activities do not ...involve the use of force. But those that do reflect important patterns of interaction between the officer and the citizen. This book examines those patterns. It begins with a brief survey of prior research, and then goes on to present data and findings. Among the data are the force factor applied - that is, the level of force used relative to suspect resistance - and data on the sequential order of incidents of force. The authors also examine police use of force from the suspect's perspective. In analyzing this data they put forward a conceptual framework, the Authority Maintenance Theory, for examining and assessing police use of force.
It is commonly asserted that bills of rights have had a ‘righting’ effect on the principles of judicial review of administrative action and have been a key driver of the modern expansion in judicial ...oversight of the executive arm of government. A number of commentators have pointed to Australian administrative law as evidence for this ‘righting’ hypothesis. They have suggested that the fact that Australia is an outlier among common law jurisdictions in having neither a statutory nor a constitutional framework to expressly protect human rights explains why Australia alone continues to take an apparently ‘formalist’, ‘legalist’, and ‘conservative’ approach to administrative law. Other commentators and judges, including a number in Canada, have argued the opposite: that bills of rights have the effect of stifling the development of the common law. However, for the most part, all these claims remain just that—there has been limited detailed analysis of the issue, and no detailed comparative analysis of the veracity of the claims. This book analyses in detail the interaction between administrative and human rights law in Australia and Canada, arguing that both jurisdictions have reached remarkably similar positions regarding the balance between judicial and executive power, and between broader fundamental principles including the rule of law, parliamentary sovereignty, and the separation of powers. It will provide valuable reading for all those researching judicial review and human rights. Volume 16 in the series Hart Studies in Comparative Public Law
The article continues the discussion on the topical issue of administrative discretion for Russian administrative-legal theory and legal practice, organized by the editors of the journal “Siberian ...Law Review” on the pages of two previous issues of the journal with the participation of P. P. Serkov and Yu. P. Solovey. The Author focuses on the state of the modern domestic doctrine of administrative discretion, the contribution of Russian legal scholars to its development, the need and possibility (including criteria and limits) of delimiting administrative discretion from other types of discretion. It is proved that the Russian jurisprudence demonstrates, contrary to the assertions of some experts, not confusion in the face of the problematic category of discretion, but ontological and methodological certainty, although sometimes reaching extremes. At the same time, there is no single Russian doctrine of discretion, there are many such doctrines, and some scholars have the right to claim that specific doctrines are associated with their names. The Author draws attention to the fact that discretion in general and administrative discretion in particular are interdisciplinary (interscientific) categories, so they must first of all be rid of the semantic and meaningful “layers” of other sciences. The sooner a pure theory of discretion appears, the more mistakes and risks will be insured against by legal science and law enforcement practice. In order to avoid terminological confusion and preserve the subject matter of the study, it is absolutely important to distinguishfour concepts: 1) administrative discretion; 2) judicial control over administrative discretion; 3) judicial discretion; 4) judicial discretion in the exercise of judicial control over administrative discretion. These concepts have a certain connection with each other, however, they designate different (partly even by their branch affiliation) categories, phenomena, processes and institutions. As a conclusion, it is indicated that the motives of each discretionary decision of the public administration must sooner or later (better sooner than later) be made public. To make this a reality, legal science needs to develop and offer effective legal guarantees for ensuring the rights of citizens and their associations when public authorities exercise their discretionary powers.
Managerial Discretion Wangrow, David B.; Schepker, Donald J.; Barker, Vincent L.
Journal of management,
01/2015, Volume:
41, Issue:
1
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Scholars have long been interested in when and to what degree managers are able to exert control over their organizations. In this review, we examine managerial discretion, or the latitude of action ...available to managers. Since its introduction, scholars have attempted to explain when managers will have discretion, what discretion means for organizational outcomes, and how discretion may differentially influence organizational outcomes when it enables or constrains leaders. Our review indicates that while a significant number of studies have examined discretion, few have attempted to validate the prescriptions of the managerial discretion construct. Furthermore, studies to date have primarily focused on the industry task environment as a measure of discretion, with less attention focused on the manager’s characteristics and the internal organization. We then assess construct validity and the measurement of managerial discretion, offering recommendations to future researchers for improving the operationalization of this construct. Finally, we consider how discretion forces may interact as either complements or substitutes and how such interactions may have both organizational- and individual-level consequences.
Full text
Available for:
NUK, OILJ, SAZU, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
We introduce multiple refinements to the standard method for assessing CEO effects on performance, variance partitioning methodology, more accurately contextualizing CEOs' contributions. Based on a ...large 20-year sample, our new 'CEO in Context' technique points to a much larger aggregate CEO effect than is obtained from typical approaches. As a validation test, we show that our technique yields estimates of CEO effects more in line with what would be expected from accepted theory about CEO influence on performance. We do this by examining the CEO effects in subsamples of low-, medium-, and high-discretion industries. Finally, we show that our technique generates substantially different—and we argue more logical—estimates of the effects of many individual CEOs than are obtained through customary analyses.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to analyze the influence of managerial discretion on the effectiveness of say on pay (SOP) as a governance mechanism. This goal covers an important gap since the ...issue of how effective SOP is in promoting more aligned compensation has proved somewhat controversial.Design/methodology/approachThis empirical research opted for a panel methodology for the period 2003–2017, using a sample of large UK listed-companies (specifically, 3,445 firm-year observations). Data were obtained from several sources (Manifest Ltd, BoardEx, Worldscope, Factset Ownership and DataStream).FindingsResults show that managerial discretion plays an important role in the effectiveness of SOP as a mechanism for increasing aligned CEO compensation. While individual discretion (latitude of objectives) exerts a negative effect, contextual discretion (latitude of action) increases SOP effectiveness. The global effect of managerial discretion is positive when there is high level of both individual and contextual discretion.Originality/valueThis empirical study provides evidence concerning an emerging topic in the literature regarding the impact of SOP as a shareholder activism mechanism of corporate governance on executive compensation. By taking managerial discretion into consideration as a relevant moderating factor, it also offers a better explanation of SOP effectiveness as a governance mechanism.
The terms of discretion have been determined finitely in Article 24 of Law Number 30 of 2014 concerning Government Administration. However, the requirement “not contrary to the provisions of the ...legislation” was removed after the issuance of Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation. This paper examines 3 (three) circumstances related to discretion. First, how is the concept of discretion viewed from the government administration? Second, how is the concept of discretion viewed from the school of legal anti-positivism? Third, what are the parameters of the validity of discretion based on the legislation? This study used a normative juridical method with a statutory, conceptual, and philosophical approach to analyze the norm and concept of discretion. The results of the study indicate that in the administrative field, discretion may be contrary to the provisions of the legislation if there is stagnation of government and it is intended for the public interest. Such a concept departs from a critique of legal positivism which leads to many subsequent ideologies including utilitarianism, legal realism to CLS. The parameters of the validity of discretion are formal legitimacy consisting of authority and procedures as well as material legitimacy. This research suggests that there is a need for heightening the control mechanism for the issuance of discretion through the superiors of the administration officials concerned.
The article analyzes the interaction between administrative discretion and the main social regulators – religion, ethics and law. It is shown that historically discretion arises as a religious ...institution, consisting in the trust of public authorities and their officials in prophets – people who are able to contact with the divine forces. The procedure of discretio spirituum, used in the Middle Ages to determine whether a person is a prophet or a false prophet, is described separately. The significance of this procedure is expressed in the partial secularization of discretion, that is, the assumption by church authorities that the divine injunctions can be interpreted, supplemented, or ignored not only by God, but also by the aforementioned persons (prophets). This recognizes that discretion can be both negative (negative) and positive (positive); that the amounts of discretion granted to prophets must be in direct proportion to the degree of trust in them; and that there are specific criteria according to which to establish what amounts of discretion will be granted to prophets. After many centuries, this concept of administrative discretion has remained virtually unchanged. Ethical science reproduces it almost literally: it again refers to the trust, which this time is granted to executive authorities and their officials, as well as to the degree of such trust, which determines the scope of discretionary powers and is determined by certain criteria. Legal science borrows the above theory less explicitly, but its echoes can be detected there as well. In particular, according to one of the concepts of law understanding the law embodies a distrust (degree of distrust) between the people, and since the law and discretion are usually opposed to each other, discretion is again defined as trust (degree of trust). In the conclusion the conclusion is made about the special relevance of this approach to the administrative discretion because since 2020 the trust is a constitutional category.
PDF
