Publications
The record of our research.
Reports, briefs, working papers, and books — gathered as one citable, filterable archive of the Institute's published work.
№ 01
The record
Every publication
12 publications
dataset · May 2026
Emergency-powers statutes: a comparative database
Tariq Saleh، Hanan Al-Mansouri، Lina Karam
This Dataset catalogues the codified emergency-powers frameworks of 24 jurisdictions across five regions, with structured tagging across the five procedural features identified in the Institute's companion comparative Report. The Dataset is intended for use by researchers, practitioners, and legislators; it supports both the structured framework for assessing legislative proposals and broader cross-jurisdictional research on emergency-regime design.
Read →journal article · May 2026
Sovereignty and the limits of consent
Omar Faraj، Lina Karam
Modern international law rests, in significant part, on a doctrinal architecture of consent: states are bound by what they have consented to, and not by what they have not. This Journal Article examines the procedural and doctrinal limits of that architecture, with particular attention to the conditions under which consent operates as a legitimate basis for binding obligation and the conditions under which it does not.
Read →commentary · May 2026
What the record shows: a note on evidence
Sara Habib
A short Commentary on the discipline of reading the documentary record — what it permits, what it requires, and the temptations that pull careful work toward easier but less defensible conclusions.
Read →policy paper · May 2026
Public reasoning and democratic legitimacy
Hanan Al-Mansouri، Sara Habib
Democratic decisions are legitimate not only because of who makes them but because of how the reasoning is conducted, recorded, and made available to scrutiny. This Policy Paper examines the procedural architecture of public reasoning in policymaking and proposes standards for the documentation and disclosure of policy reasoning.
Read →policy paper · May 2026
Institutional design for accountability mechanisms
Yusuf Shaheen، Hanan Al-Mansouri
Accountability mechanisms designed to address past harms must also survive long enough to do their work. This Policy Paper examines the institutional features that condition that survival — independence guarantees, funding architecture, sunset and renewal provisions — and offers a structured framework for assessing accountability-mechanism design.
Read →brief · May 2026
Consent and digital identity
Omar Faraj
Consent does difficult work in modern data law: it is asked to legitimate uses of personal data that are neither knowingly authorised in any meaningful sense nor practically refusable. This Brief examines the operational realities of consent in digital-identity systems and proposes procedural standards that recognise consent's limits while preserving its protective function.
Read →brief · May 2026
Judicial independence under reform pressure
Hanan Al-Mansouri
Judicial independence is not a static property of a constitutional system but a relationship that must be maintained against the pressure of ordinary politics. This Brief examines three structural features that condition that maintenance, and notes the patterns by which judicial-reform agendas have, in various jurisdictions, hollowed out independence under the language of reform.
Read →working paper · May 2026
Methodology in comparative legal research
Yusuf Shaheen
Comparative legal research is a craft, not a formula. This Working Paper sets out the methodological commitments that govern the Institute's comparative work — case selection, source discipline, the limits of comparison, and the conditions under which comparative claims are warranted.
Read →working paper · May 2026
Evidentiary standards in transitional accountability
Sara Habib، Yusuf Shaheen
Transitional accountability mechanisms must construct an evidentiary record under conditions that diverge sharply from ordinary criminal procedure. This Working Paper develops a framework for evidentiary practice in transitional contexts, organised around three commitments: openness about provenance, openness about doubt, and openness about the limits of what evidence can be made to do.
Read →report · May 2026
Surveillance, privacy, and the rule of law
Omar Faraj
This Report examines how surveillance authorisations are reviewed in practice across five jurisdictions, focusing on the procedural standards that govern judicial or quasi-judicial approval. The Report finds that the formal availability of prior judicial authorisation correlates weakly with the substantive rigour of review, and identifies the institutional conditions under which procedural review functions as a meaningful constraint rather than as a rubber stamp.
Read →report · May 2026
Administrative detention and the limits of executive power
Lina Karam، Tariq Saleh
Administrative detention occupies an ambiguous space between criminal procedure and pure executive action. This Report examines the procedural standards that should govern administrative-detention regimes and the operation of judicial supervision in practice across six jurisdictions, with particular attention to the gap between formal review rights and the practical accessibility of those rights for detained persons.
Read →report · May 2026
Due process under emergency powers: a comparative review
Hanan Al-Mansouri، Sara Habib، Tariq Saleh
This Report compares the procedural architecture of emergency-powers regimes across eight constitutional systems, asking how each preserves — or fails to preserve — the due-process guarantees that ordinarily govern detention, judicial review, and the conduct of trials. Drawing on the comparative method developed in the Institute's Strategic Unit, the Report identifies five procedural features that distinguish bounded emergency regimes from those that drift toward executive consolidation, and offers a structured framework for assessing legislative proposals in this area.
Read →
Get in touch
Citing or republishing our work
For press inquiries, citation requests, or republication permissions, our team welcomes correspondence from scholars, journalists, and aligned organisations.