Not exact matches
Its three volumes include more than 300 articles on
key individuals (from Abraham, al - Ghazali and Rumi to Malcolm X, Salman Rushdie and Osama bin Laden), empires (
such as those of the Mughals and Ottomans), contemporary countries (Algeria, Indonesia, Syria and so on), important
doctrines (including those related to abortion, the afterlife, fasting and suicide), and groups and movements often in the headlines (
such as Hamas, al - Qaeda and the Nation of Islam).
His Ten Religions: An Essay in Comparative Theology dealt with the historical origin and development of individual religions as well as the historical survey of certain
key ideas and
doctrines,
such as
doctrines of God, man, and salvation.
And that perhaps is why its
doctrines demand
such strict servility to the law; it is in the duty for the strict and correct application of legal
doctrine that the
key to judicial accountability lies, as I think the comments earlier this year of Mr. Justice David Stratas made clear (succinctly described and linked here: https://doubleaspectblog.wordpress.com/2016/01/15/taking-
doctrine-seriously/).
(correct test for Barrister appeals; whether outside the ex improviso rule, prosecutor may call evidence after prosecution and defence case closed; use of debarring orders against prosecutor; whether tribunal may «enter the arena» and strongly request the attendance of a prosecution witness; whether BSB has power to summons witnesses; whether prosecutor may communicate with disciplinary judge behind the back of the defence; whether
such communication redolent of actual bias of judge where judge wishes prosecutor good luck on appeal; whether apparent bias
doctrine can be engaged by post-trial conduct of judge; legal effect of serving BSB prosecutions department officer being 1 of 4 appointing members of the COIC «Tribunals Appointments Body» (TAB); whether TAB ultra vires the Bar's Constitutions; whether open - ended power of removal of member of COIC pool without cause, unlawful given position of BSB Chair and senior staff on COIC; whether ECHR Article 6 guarantees against pressure on disciplinary judges to conform with a prosecutorial mentality; whether disciplinary judges Art. 6 «independent» within Findlay v United Kingdom given
key role of BSB prosecutions department in appointing disciplinary judges; serious non-disclosure by BSB of notes of secret meeting between BSB and disciplinary judge until day before appeal and despite requests and application for disclosure by defence)