Unlike contract law, international law is limited in that it is not codified in a clear and accessible format and the content of the rules is generally less specific than what they can find in a treaty. However, as a source of international humanitarian law, customary international law is fundamental to armed conflicts, as internal conflicts are limited by contract law and important treaties are not ratified. Customary international law exists independently of contract law and, in 2006, the Independent Commission of the Red Cross (ICRC) published a collection of the rules of international humanitarian law, considered as usual. They identified 161 rules of international customary law. The subject of this article is the dynamics of the relationship between democracy and law, in which demonstrations - "the people" - are the source of political law to which they in turn submit. With regard to such a relationship, the article analyzes democracy and law (a) in the old policy as a narrow policy of legislators; b) in a functionally differentiated modern society characterized by the increasing complexity and centralization of an impersonal and bureaucratic state apparatus and c) the idea of a social contract in a complex and pluralistic society characteristic of the late or postmodern Istik. In the latter case, the relationship between democracy and laws is analysed in the light of the increasing scope of state intervention, the increasing complexity of economic organization, the growing concern for human rights and the increasing plurality and differentiation of social relations. This analysis of the relationship between democracy and law in modern societies examines their basis of political and legal integrity. There are a number of other sources of law that may have more or less weight in a given country: despite the pervasive influence of the law, most laws that affect the functioning of their practices, services and clients do not know this. This is partly due to the difficulty of understanding legal terminology and accessing the many different and applicable legal sources.
This is unfortunate because MHP may not receive the benefits that the law can offer them or their clients and may not be able to fully meet the needs of their clients (for example. B Rothstein 1997). On the other hand, legal knowledge can increase the ability of MHPs to cope with the distress of their clients (z.B Shuman and Smith 2000). For example, MHPs who receive legal information are better equipped to facilitate the appointment of a guardian for an abused child or a legally incompetent person (Tor and Sales 1996) and can help correct biased beliefs about what may happen during their trial. In other jurisdictions (mainly civil courts), judicial decisions are formally considered only as an interpretation of existing law and are not a binding legal source, although they are often seen as determinative in practice.
Published by: admin