English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The court of law is often adversarial; the more usual question, after all, is binary: guilty or not guilty? The parliament which makes the law, however, need not subject complex questions to dichotomous judgements, or a series of dichotomies: indeed, the corresponding debate should consider all relevant options on an equal basis. Accordingly, this article questions the propriety of a majoritarian polity, considers a less adversarial voting procedure, and contemplates a more inclusive political structure, in order then to argue that human rights legislations should be far more specific on the subject of democratic rights. Such a development may depend less upon the politician and more upon the lawyer

Democratic Rights: Decision-Making by Law Makers and Law Enforcers