FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2103014057> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2103014057 endingPage "85" @default.
• W2103014057 startingPage "61" @default.
• W2103014057 abstract "This article compares and contrasts the development of the legal systems of two British colonies that occuped almost opposite ends of the colonial judicial continuum: what in colonial times were known as the Gold Coast and Basutoland. Both became British colonies in the late nineteenth century, but followed considerably different paths to that status. In the case of the Gold Coast it followed centuries of contact between Europeans and the coastal peoples in this area of West Africa. In the case of Basutoland incorporation into the European world was a nineteenth-century phenomenon and far more rapid. Nevertheless, at the turn of the century, as indirect rule became the officially accepted wisdom as to how colonial peoples should be ruled, administrators in both colonies sought to make the chiefly order an integral part of the colony's administration and award its chiefs judicial responsibilities. In the Gold Coast, however, chiefly courts remained in competition with a highly developed British-style Supreme Court. In Basutoland there were basically only chiefly courts until late in the colonial period, which applied Sesotho customary law that was written down as the Laws of Lerotholi in 1903. The two-tier judicial system of the Gold Coast allowed far more contestation and was far more flexible and responsive to social changes than was the case in Basutoland. Incremental changes over time meant that the judicial system evolved far more smoothly than in Basutoland. When in the latter colony changes did not come ‘from above’ in the 1940s, there was a serious outbreak of ‘medicine murders’ that many observers felt was directly related to the chiefs losing their judicial role. Also, the colony's high court ruled against the validity of the Laws of Lerotholi in the controversial ‘Regency case’. Apart from being a return to comparative analyses of the impact of colonial rule on former African colonies, much in vogue in the 1960s, this study is an attempt to modify the emphasis on ‘cleavage’ and the ‘coercive’ that has characterised historians' approach to the study of colonial law." @default.
• W2103014057 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2103014057 creator A5041021991 @default.
• W2103014057 date "1997-01-01" @default.
• W2103014057 modified "2023-10-15" @default.
• W2103014057 title "Colonial rule and the ‘legal factor’ in Ghana and Lesotho" @default.
• W2103014057 cites W1510207282 @default.
• W2103014057 cites W1827959400 @default.
• W2103014057 cites W1869780992 @default.
• W2103014057 cites W2071441152 @default.
• W2103014057 cites W2170189112 @default.
• W2103014057 cites W2271452883 @default.
• W2103014057 cites W2277228856 @default.
• W2103014057 cites W2477580089 @default.
• W2103014057 cites W2504614752 @default.
• W2103014057 cites W2796327093 @default.
• W2103014057 cites W4300101097 @default.
• W2103014057 doi "https://doi.org/10.2307/1161270" @default.
• W2103014057 hasPublicationYear "1997" @default.
• W2103014057 type Work @default.
• W2103014057 sameAs 2103014057 @default.
• W2103014057 citedByCount "9" @default.
• W2103014057 countsByYear W21030140572017 @default.
• W2103014057 countsByYear W21030140572018 @default.
• W2103014057 countsByYear W21030140572021 @default.
• W2103014057 countsByYear W21030140572022 @default.
• W2103014057 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2103014057 hasAuthorship W2103014057A5041021991 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C182306322 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C2776445246 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C2779101304 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C2780765947 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C2992580947 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C531593650 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C10138342 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C162324750 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C166957645 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C17744445 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C182306322 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C199539241 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C2776445246 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C2778272461 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C2779101304 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C2780765947 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C2992580947 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C531593650 @default.
• W2103014057 hasConceptScore W2103014057C95457728 @default.
• W2103014057 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2103014057 hasLocation W21030140571 @default.
• W2103014057 hasOpenAccess W2103014057 @default.
• W2103014057 hasPrimaryLocation W21030140571 @default.
• W2103014057 hasRelatedWork W1976269216 @default.
• W2103014057 hasRelatedWork W1982653819 @default.
• W2103014057 hasRelatedWork W2034346628 @default.
• W2103014057 hasRelatedWork W2037097007 @default.
• W2103014057 hasRelatedWork W2237795485 @default.
• W2103014057 hasRelatedWork W2607911523 @default.
• W2103014057 hasRelatedWork W3089659132 @default.
• W2103014057 hasRelatedWork W3129097961 @default.
• W2103014057 hasRelatedWork W3139765827 @default.
• W2103014057 hasRelatedWork W4387217542 @default.
• W2103014057 hasVolume "67" @default.
• W2103014057 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2103014057 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2103014057 magId "2103014057" @default.
• W2103014057 workType "article" @default.