Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Beyond DisagreementOpen Remedies in Human Rights Adjudication$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Aruna Sathanapally

Print publication date: 2012

Print ISBN-13: 9780199669301

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: January 2013

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199669301.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 12 November 2019

Conclusion

Conclusion

Chapter:
(p.223) Conclusion
Source:
Beyond Disagreement
Author(s):

Aruna Sathanapally

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199669301.003.0011

Institutional design is generally unpredictable until tried, perhaps even repeatedly tried, and this is one reason why test cases are valuable. This chapter captures the main conclusions of this book’s investigation into the innovation of declarations of incompatibility (DOIs). Drawing lessons for institutional design to support a deliberative democracy, the author argues that it is useful to think of DOIs in terms of mechanisms of ‘institutional design writ small’, for seemingly small matters of design can be significant to better realising democratic values and human rights protection.

Keywords:   institutional design, constitutional design, reasonable disagreement

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .