| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
147889
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Do public policy debates between activists from different ideological camps in a nondemocratic and illiberal system bridge social divisions or deepen them? Focusing on three controversies regarding family law in Jordan, we argue that activist groups rarely talk to each other in public, and when they do, their discourses aim primarily at mobilizing support within their own camps rather than addressing each other's concerns. Through media analysis, discourse analysis, and in-depth field interviews, we find much polarization and few attempts to build bridges, but also limited though very suggestive exceptions. Those exceptions rely less on public and democratic mechanisms and more on entrepreneurial state actors working quietly, talking opportunistically to each side, and emerging as powerful institutional actors. Authoritarian states can provide sites of deliberation, but deliberation seems to lead to principled agreement beyond the platitudinous only when an institutional actor within the state takes the initiative to get involved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
113859
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
After prolonged lobbying, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005 was implemented in India in October 2006. The Act soon gave rise to cases. This article is based on a preliminary study using questionnaire-based interviews of litigants in Delhi who were involved in cases under the Act. Primary data, taken from all the Delhi Metropolitan Magistrates Courts at that time, concern the background of those who used the law, the litigation process, implementation of the law and the forms of violence addressed. The article seeks to assess the effectiveness of this new legislation and examines specifically what kinds of people bring actions under this new gender-specific law. In addition, qualitative assessment of the perceptions of different kinds of violence by complainants and respondents provides deeper insights into ongoing and potential contestations over gender-based violence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
171309
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
By using the narrative approach and linking it to feminist research ethics and critical race methodology, this article seeks to understand how non-literacy and poverty hinder low-income women's access to justice and how these women experience the Moroccan state. The state here acts as an oppressive and marginalizing entity in women's lives, but also offers the potential for empowerment. This ethnographic study tells the stories of three victims of gender-based violence to demonstrate that the state needs to (1) set up an efficient and responsive infrastructure for those lacking know-how and money; (2) institute proper training of state agents for implementation of laws and to prevent them from acting on personal opinions and attitudes with regard to women's rights; and (3) strengthen procedures so that state agents can respond expeditiously to the needs and grievances of citizens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|