Cross-cultural competence

Main article: Cultural competence

Cross-cultural competence (3C) has generated confusing and contradictory definitions because it has been studied by a wide variety of academic approaches and professional fields. One author identified eleven different terms that have some equivalence to 3C: cultural savvy, astuteness, appreciation, literacy or fluency, adaptability, terrain, expertise, competency, awareness, intelligence, and understanding.^[2] The United States Army Research Institute, which is currently engaged in a study of 3C has defined it as "A set of cognitive, behavioral, and affective/motivational components that enable individuals to adapt effectively in intercultural environments."^[3]

Organizations in academia, business, health care, government security, and developmental aid agencies have all sought to use 3C in one way or another. Poor results have often been obtained due to a lack of rigorous study of 3C and a reliance on "common sense" approaches.^[2]

Cross-cultural competence does not operate in a vacuum, however. One theoretical construct posits that 3C, language proficiency, and regional knowledge are distinct skills that are inextricably linked, but to varying degrees depending on the context in which they are employed. In educational settings, Bloom's affective and cognitive taxonomies^[4][5] serve as an effective framework for describing the overlapping areas among these three disciplines: at the receiving and knowledge levels, 3C can operate with near-independence from language proficiency and regional knowledge. But, as one approaches the internalizing and evaluation levels, the overlapping areas approach totality.

The development of intercultural competence is mostly based on the individual's experiences while he or she is communicating with different cultures. When interacting with people from other cultures, the individual experiences certain obstacles that are caused by differences in cultural understanding between two people from different cultures. Such experiences may motivate the individual to acquire skills that can help him to communicate his point of view to an audience belonging to a different cultural ethnicity and background.

Immigrants and international students

A salient issue, especially for people living in countries other than their native country, is the issue of which culture they should follow: their native culture or the one in their new surroundings.

International students also face this issue: they have a choice of modifying their cultural boundaries and adapting to the culture around them or holding on to their native culture and surrounding themselves with people from their own country. The students who decide to hold on to their native culture are those who experience the most problems in their university life and who encounter frequent culture shocks. But international students who adapt themselves to the culture surrounding them (and who interact more with domestic students) will increase their knowledge of the domestic culture, which may help them to "blend in" more. Such individuals may be said to have adopted bicultural identities.

26. The American system of government

In struggling to determine whether or not the American political system is pluralistic, elitist, or a representative democracy one must first understand what these systems are. A pluralistic system of government focuses upon interest groups to convey the interests and views of public opinion. An elitist system focuses upon a small �elite� class to rule. Representative government relies upon the voting majority of citizens to reflect who�s best to rule. The representative system of democracy was the intentional method of government initiated by the Founding Fathers (Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, Ben Franklin). They saw this as the antithesis of the English Parliamentary and Monarchical systems. Representation for the people by the people was the objective. Some two-hundred years later this system still exists after minor modification and adjustments. With the twentieth century coming to a close one might make amends to say that our system of government has reverted to a more pluralistic system. Interest groups have gained so much power that it is unfair to say that they play no role in the validity of government. Our system has adopted pluralism instead of transforming into it. Today interest groups are a vehicle in which people can join and become a part of. They have the power to sway votes and change political action but do not dominate everyday life. They have merely become a part or extension of people�s everyday lives. A truly democratic political system has certain characteristics (laws) which are guaranteed and enforced. These characteristics are defined in the Constitution. This contractual agreement between the people and government ensures that neither one can overpower or limit the other. The only way to change the characteristics within the constitution is through the use of representative government. Elected officials have the right to challenge and change the Constitution as time passes. One essential characteristic of a valid and legitimate democracy is that it allows people to freely make choices without government intervention. Another necessary characteristic of representative government is that every vote must count equally: one vote for every person. For this equality to occur, all people must be subject to the same laws, have equal civil rights, and be allowed to freely express their ideas. Failure to do so results in violation of the rights guaranteed in the Constitution. The U.S. government may be considered representative in some aspects, and unrepresentative in others. Because voting is class-biased, it may not be classified as a completely representative process. Although in theory the American system calls for one vote per person, the low rate of turnout results in the upper and middle classes ultimately choosing candidates for the entire nation. Class is determined by income and education, and differing levels of these two factors can help explain why class bias occurs. For example, because educated people tend to understand politics more, they are more likely to vote. People with high income and education also have more resources, and poor people tend to have low political efficacy (feelings of low self-worth). Minority rights are crucial in a representative democracy. No matter how unpopular their views, all people should enjoy the freedoms of speech, press and assembly. Public policy should be made publicly, not secretly, and regularly scheduled elections should be held. Since representative government may be defined as a constitutional system of government with defined laws and institutions, then there must necessarily be a connection between what the people want and what the government is doing if justice is to occur. One way of ensuring that justice occurs and people become involved is by having the ability to vote. Since the early 1960s voter turnout has been declining overall. The �winner-take-all� system in elections may be criticized for being undemocratic because the proportion of people agreeing with a particular candidate on a certain issue may not be adequately represented under this system. For example, �a candidate who gets 40 percent of the vote, as long as he gets more votes than any other candidate, can be elected�even though sixty percent of the voters voted against him�. Political parties in America are weak due to the anti-party, anti-organization, and anti-politics prejudices of liberal groups. Because in the U.S. there is no national law which forces citizens into identifying with a political party, factional identification tends to be an informal psychological commitment to a party. This informal allegiance allows people to be apathetic if they wish, willingly giving up their input into the political process. Though this apathy is the result of greater freedom in America than in other countries, it ultimately decreases citizens� incentive to express their opinions about issues, therefore making the democratic system less representative by the people. Private interests distort public policy making because, when making decisions, politicians must take account of campaign contributors. An �interest� may be defined as �any involvement in anything that affects the economic, social, or emotional well-being of a person.� When interests become organized into groups, then politicians may become biased due to their influences. �Special interests buy favors from congressmen and presidents through political action committees (PACs), devices by which groups like corporations, professional associations, trade unions, investment banking groups�can pool their money and give up.

27. The jury and the verdict

A jury verdict is the conclusion reached by jurors based on the evidence presented by both parties to a criminal or civil trial. The verdict is different from a judgment, which is based on the jury verdict and entered by the judge, who must apply state laws. In criminal trials, court verdicts are either guilty or not guilty. In civil trials, the jury renders a general verdict to determine liability and damages or a special verdict to find factual findings on which a judge can determine a verdict. If the jury cannot reach a verdict, then the court will deem it a hung jury, and the case is often dismissed.

After both parties have presented closing arguments, the judge will instruct the jury on the applicable laws and the requirements for reaching a verdict. The process of reaching a verdict is referred to as jury deliberation. Members of the jury often take a vote at the beginning, during, and end of jury deliberation to determine whether a verdict is reached. There are some occasions in which the evidence is so overwhelming that the legal requirement for the jury to reach a unanimous or majority vote takes place within minutes of deliberation, upon the first vote. The foreman, one member of the jury selected by the other members, will announce the verdict in court to the judge.

Parties to a civil lawsuit can avoid a jury verdict by settlement as long as the case is settled prior to closing arguments. For example, a defendant may offer to pay for some of the damages that the plaintiff is seeking in exchange for ending the legal battle. Judges often give both parties the opportunity to settle the case, and the settlement has to be in writing. The defendant in a criminal trial can also reach an agreement with the prosecution prior to a jury verdict, which is often accepted by the judge. In those cases, the defendant usually admits guilt to some charges, and the prosecution agrees to dismiss some.

An attorney, pro se plaintiff, or pro se defendant can research a jury verdict as part of the case preparation in order to formulate strategies for the trial. There are regional and national databases that collect, review, and analyze jury verdicts, and the information is often compiled by trial attorneys. Judges will sometimes utilize the database in order to evaluate verdicts, especially if the verdict includes an award for damages.

28. Elections in the Republic of Kazakhstan

Elections in Kazakhstan are held on a national level to elect a President and the Parliament, which is divided into two bodies, the Majilis (Lower House) and the Senate (Upper House). Local elections for maslikhats (local representative bodies) are held every five years.^[1]

Elections are administered by the Central Election Commission of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Kazakhstan is a one party dominant state. This party is a union of several parties and it was elected in 2007. Opposition political parties are allowed, but are widely considered to have no real chance of gaining power.

In the recent Kazakh elections, many Kazakh voters were offered a choice of voting on electronic voting machines or on paper ballots. At least some of the ballot boxes used in Kazakhstan are transparent in order to defend against ballot box stuffing. Each polling place was equipped with both a large ballot box and smaller mobile ballot boxes. The latter are designed to be carried, by poll-workers, to voters outside the polling place.^[2] This is an alternative to offering absentee ballots or proxy voting for voters with disabilities that prevent them from going to the polls.

Electronic voting in Kazakhstan is based on the AIS "Sailau" electronic voting system developed in Belarus and Kazakhstan. This system is best described as an indirect-recording electronic voting system, as opposed to the DRE voting machines that have been more widely studied.^[3] In this system, the touch-screen voting terminal in the voting booth serves as a ballot marking device, recording selections on a smart card. The voting terminal itself retains no record of the vote after the voter takes the smart card. The voter then takes the smart card containing the cast ballot record to the computer at the registration table that serves as the electronic ballot box where the permanent record of the vote is retained and tabulated.

On Nov. 16, 2011, Kuandyk Turgankulov, head of the Kazakh Central Election Commission, said that use of the Sailau system would be discontinued because voters prefer paper, the political parties do not trust it, and the lack of funds required to update the system.

29. Court and justice

1. Justice in the Republic of Kazakhstan shall be exercised only by the court.

2. Judicial power shall be exercised through the constitutional, civil, administrative, criminal and other forms of judicial procedure as established by law. In cases, stipulated by law, criminal procedure shall be carried out with participation of jurymen.

3. The courts of the Republic shall be the Supreme Court of the Republic, local and other courts of the Republic established by law.

4. The judicial system of the Republic shall be established by the Constitution of the Republic and the constitutional law. The establishment of special and extraordinary courts under any name shall not be allowed.

1. Judicial power shall be exercised on behalf of the Republic of Kazakhstan and shall be intended to protect the rights, freedoms, and legal interests of the citizens and organizations for ensuring the observance of the Constitution, laws, other regulatory legal acts, and shall ensure international treaties of the Republic.

2. Judicial power shall be extended to all cases and disputes arising on the basis of this Constitution, laws, other regulatory legal acts, international treaties of the Republic.

3. Decisions, sentences and other judgments of courts shall have an obligatory force on the entire territory of the Republic.

1. A judge when executing justice shall be independent and subordinate only to the Constitution and the law.

2. Any interference in the activity of the court in the exercise of justice shall be inadmissible and accountable by the law. Judges shall not be held accountable with regard to specific cases.

3. In application of law a judge must be guided by the following principles:

1) a person shall be considered to be innocent of committing a crime until his guilt is established by a court’s sentence that has come into force;

2) no one may be subject twice to criminal or administrative prosecution for one and the same offense;

3) no one may have his jurisdiction, as stipulated by law changed without his consent;

4) everyone shall have the right to be heard in court;

5) the laws establishing or intensifying liability, imposing new responsibilities on the citizens or deteriorating their conditions shall have no retroactive force. If after the commitment of an offense accountability for it is canceled by law or reduced, the new law shall be applied;

6) the accused shall not be obligated to prove his innocence;

7) no person shall be compelled to give testimony against oneself, one’s spouse and close relatives whose circle is determined by law. The clergy shall not be obligated to testify against those who confided in them with some information at a confession;

8) any doubts of a person’s guilt shall be interpreted in the favor of the accused;

9) evidence obtained by illegal means shall have no juridical force. No person may be sentenced on the basis of his own admission of guilt;

10) application of the criminal law by analogy shall not be allowed.

4. The principles of justice established by the Constitution shall be common and uniform for all courts and judges in the Republic.

30. British criminal law

The law of the British Virgin Islands is a combination of common law and statute, and is based heavily upon English law.

Law in the British Virgin Islands tends to be a combination of the very old and the very new. As a leading offshore financial centre, the Territory has extremely modern statutes dealing with company law, insolvency, banking law, trust law, insurance and other related matters. However, in a number of areas of law, such as family law, the laws of the British Virgin Islands are based upon very old English laws, and can cause some difficulty in modern times. Other areas of law, such as international law, are essentially regulated externally through the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London by Order-in-Council. A large body of the laws of the British Virgin Islands consists of the common law, which continually updates itself through judicial precedent in the Territory and in other common law countries.

The British Virgin Islands is a dependent territory of the United Kingdom. Although the local legislature and courts are independent from the United Kingdom, the British Government deals with all international relations on behalf of the Territory, although this may change in the near future in relation to ongoing constitutional negotiations (see below under Constitutional law - developments). The British Virgin Islands does not have a separate vote at the United Nations.