The Qur'an and the Constitution
The Quran and the Constitution are mutually supportive supreme texts; one does not negate the other. Numerous forms of government, cultural traditions, and economic systems are compatible with both supreme texts. Muslim nations are free to promulgate specific constitutions that reflect their social, political, and economic preferences rooted in history and culture. The specific constitution must reflect the conscience of the nation, for constitutions that fail to do so are vulnerable to amendment, even revolutionary replacement. Because the human condition is constantly evolving, the Quran, though a permanent divine text immune to alteration or amendment, is amenable to the evolutionary calls of believers. Each generation of Muslims is free to understand the Quran for meeting its needs. Interpreters as believers, however, summon the luminosity of faith while analyzing the Word of God and refrain from deforming the meaning of the divine text. They should not project personal agendas into the meaning of the Quran as do some interpreters of the Constitution.
The Is and the Ought of International Constitutionalism: How Far Have We Come on Habermas's Road to a “Well-Considered Constitutionalization of International Law”?
In recent years, a growing chorus of publicists – lawyers, philosophers, political scientists and others – has discussed and often advocated the “constitutionalization” of international law, i.e. the gradual transformation of the whole or at least parts of international law into a world constitution. These “constitutionalists,” many of them having a German background, point to various recent phenomena such as international legal norms with erga omnes effects and peremptory norms (jus cogens) which seem to establish a hierarchical order of global values, going far beyond the classical inter-State relationships of coexistence and synallagmatic exchange. They further list compulsory judicial or quasi-judicial dispute settlement mechanisms (e.g., in the WTO). The constitutionalists put particular emphasis on the human rights revolution since 1945 and the rise of international criminal law that is administered by various international criminal tribunals – phenomena which have transformed individuals into (partial) subjects of international law alongside the states.
We the peoples of the United Nations
Over the past decades there has been a shift in world politics, from a state-centric view of world order towards a new global world order. Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) play an important role in this era of globalisation.

Through an analysis, based on Rosenau´s view of the new global world order, the purpose of this study is to explore and discuss the complexity with an increased role of NGOs in the United Nations. There are obvious benefits with an increased role of NGOs. They serve as positive contributors as agenda setter and watch-dogs, they play an important role in policy implementation and they have a democratizing role. However, there is another side of these benefits. Three problems of an increased role of NGOs in the UN-system have been identified; the problem of state-sovereignty, the politicization of aid and NGOs influence and the deficit of democracy.

Another purpose of this study is to explore why it has been so hard to implement NGOs role in the United Nations. The role of NGOs was a priority in the beginning of the UN-reform process, but it almost disappeared in the final stage. How can this be explained?