Under the Human Rights Act, British courts are for the first time empowered to review primary legislation for compliance with a codified set of fundamental rights. In this book, Aileen Kavanagh argues that the HRA gives judges strong powers of constitutional review, similar to those exercised by the courts under an entrenched Bill of Rights. The aim of the book is to subject the leading case-law under the HRA to critical scrutiny, whilst remaining sensitive to the deeper constitutional, political and theoretical questions which underpin it. Such questions include the idea of judicial deference, the constitutional status of the HRA, the principle of parliamentary sovereignty and the constitutional division of labour between Parliament and the courts. The book closes with a sustained defence of the legitimacy of constitutional review in a democracy, thus providing a powerful rejoinder to those who are sceptical about judicial power under the HRA.
In the United Kingdom during the past decade, individuals and groups have increasingly tested the extent to which principles of English administrative law can be used to gain entitlements to health and welfare services and priority for the needs of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups. One of the primary purposes of this book is to demonstrate the extent to which established boundaries of judicial intervention in socio-economic disputes have been altered by the extension of judicial powers in sections 3 and 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998, and through the development of a jurisprudence of positive obligations in the European Convention on Human Rights 1950. Thus, the substantive focus of the book is on developments in the constitutional law of the United Kingdom. However, the book also addresses key issues of theoretical human rights, international and comparative constitutional law. Issues of justiciability in English administrative law have therefore been explored against a background of two factors: a growing acceptance of the need for balance in the protection in modern constitutional arrangements afforded to civil and political rights on the one hand and socio-economic rights on the other hand; and controversy as to whether courts could make a more effective contribution to the protection of socio-economic rights with the assistance of appropriately tailored constitutional provisions.
Constitutional review has become an essential feature of modern liberal democratic constitutionalism. In particular, constitutional review in the context of rights litigation has proved to be most challenging for the courts. By offering in-depth analyses on changes affecting constitutional design and constitutional adjudication, while also engaging with general theories of comparative constitutionalism, this book seeks to provide a heightened understanding of the constitutional and political responses to the issue of adaptability and endurance of rights-based constitutional review. These original contributions, written by an array of distinguished experts and illustrated by the most up-to-date case law, cover Australia, Belgium, Finland, France, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States, and include constitutional systems that are not commonly studied in comparative constitutional studies. Providing structured analyses, the editors combine studies of common law and civil law jurisdictions, centralized and decentralized systems of constitutional review, and large and small jurisdictions. This multi-jurisdictional study will appeal to members of the judiciary, policymakers and practitioners looking for valuable insights into the case law of a range of constitutional and supreme courts in this rapidly expanding field of constitutional adjudication. It also serves as an excellent resource for academics, scholars and advanced students in the fields of law, human rights and political science.
Constitutions serve to delineate state powers and enshrine basic rights. Such matters are hardly uncontroversial, but perhaps even more controversial are the questions of who (should) uphold(s) the Constitution and how constitutional review is organised. These two questions are the subject of this book by Maartje de Visser, which offers a comprehensive, comparative analysis of how 11 representative European countries answer these questions, as well as a critical appraisal of the EU legal order in light of these national experiences. Where possible, the book endeavours to identify Europe's common and diverse constitutional traditions of constitutional review. The raison d'Ãatre, jurisdiction and composition of constitutional courts are explored and so too are core features of the constitutional adjudicatory process. Yet, this book also deliberately draws attention to the role of non-judicial actors in upholding the Constitution, as well as the complex interplay amongst constitutional courts and other actors at the national and European level. The Member States featured are: Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Spain, Poland, and the United Kingdom. This book is intended for practitioners, academics and students with an interest in (European) constitutional law.
Writing in the fifth edition of this Handbook, author Michael Fordham described his ambition when writing the first edition (and indeed all subsequent editions) of this book as "to read as many judicial review cases as I could and to try to extract, classify and present illustrations and statements of principle". Behind this aim lay the practitioner's overwhelming need to know and understand the case-law. Without it, as Fordham says "much can be achieved in public law through instinct, experience and familiarity with general principles which are broad, flexible and designed to accord with common sense". But with knowledge of the case law comes the vital ability to be able to point to and rely on an authoritative statement of principle and working illustration. Knowing the case-law is crucial: "the challenge is to find it". This, the sixth edition of the Handbook, continues the tradition established by earlier editions, in rendering the voluminous case-law accessible and knowable. This Handbook remains an indispensable source of reference and a guide to the case-law in judicial review. Established as an essential part of the library of any practitioner engaged in public law cases, the Judicial Review Handbook offers unrivalled coverage of administrative law, including, but not confined to, the work of the Administrative Court and its procedures. Once again completely revised and up-dated, the sixth edition approximates to a restatement of the law of judicial review, organised around 63 legal principles, each supported by a comprehensive presentation of the sources and an unequalled selection of reported case quotations. It also includes essential procedural rules, forms and guidance issued by the Administrative Court. As in the previous edition, both the Civil Procedure Rules and Human Rights Act 1998 feature prominently as major influences on the shaping of the case-law. Their impact, and the plethora of cases which explore their meaning and application, were fully analysed and evaluated in the previous edition, but this time around their importance has grown exponentially and is reflected in even greater attention being given to their respective roles. Attention is also given to another new development - the coming into existence of the Supreme Court. Here Michael Fordham casts an experienced eye over the Court's work in the area of judicial review, and assesses the early signs from a Court that is expected to be one of the key influences in the development of judicial review in the modern era. The author, a leading member of the English public law bar, has been involved in many of the leading judicial review cases in recent years and is the founding editor of the Judicial Review journal. "...an institution for those who practise public law...it has the authority that comes from being compiled by an author of singular distinction". (Lord Woolf, from the Foreword to the Fifth Edition)
A great deal has been written on the relationship between politics and law. Legislation, as a source of law, is often highly political, and is the product of a process or the creation of officials often closely bound into party politics. Legislation is also one of the exclusive powers of the state. As such, legislation is plainly both practical and inevitably political; at the same time most understandings of the relationship between law and politics have been overwhelmingly theoretical. In this light, public law is often seen as part of the political order or as inescapably partisan. We know relatively little about the real impact of law on politicians through their legal advisers and civil servants. How do lawyers in government see their roles and what use do they make of law? How does politics actually affect the drafting of legislation or the making of policy? This volume will begin to answer these and other questions about the practical, day-to-day relationship between law and politics in a number of settings. It includes chapters by former departmental legal advisers, drafters of legislation, law reformers, judges and academics, who focus on what actually happens when law meets politics in government.
As an Advocate of the Supreme Court, John Dugard observes the South African legal order daily in operation. In this book he provides a thorough description and probing analysis of the workings of the system. He places South Africa's legal order in a comparative context, examining the climate of legal opinion, crucial judicial decisions, and their significance in relation to contemporary thought and practice in England, America, and elsewhere. He also considers South Africa's laws in the light of its history, politics, and culture. Originally published in 1978. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905.
The last decade has seen radical changes in the way we are governed. Reforms such as the Human Rights Act and devolution have led to the replacement of one constitutional order by another. This book is the first to describe and analyse Britain's new constitution, asking why it was that the old system, seemingly hallowed by time, came under challenge, and why it is being replaced. The Human Rights Act and the devolution legislation have the character of fundamental law. They in practice limit the rights of Westminster as a sovereign parliament, and establish a constitution which is quasi-federal in nature. The old constitution emphasised the sovereignty of Parliament. The new constitution, by contrast, emphasises the separation of powers, both territorially and at the centre of government. The aim of constitutional reformers has been to improve the quality of government. But the main weakness of the new constitution is that it does little to secure more popular involvement in politics. We are in the process of becoming a constitutional state, but not a popular constitutional state. The next phase of constitutional reform, therefore, is likely to involve the creation of new forms of democratic engagement, so that our constitutional forms come to be more congruent with the social and political forces of the age. The end-point of this piecemeal process might well be a fully codified or written constitution which declares that power stems not from the Queen-in Parliament, but, instead, as in so many constitutions, from `We, the People'. The old British constitution was analysed by Bagehot and Dicey. In this book Vernon Bogdanor charts the significance of what is coming to replace it. The expenses scandal shows up grave defects in the British constitution. Vernon Bogdanor shows how the constitution can be reformed and the political system opened up in`The New British Constitution'.
Author: Henry J. Steiner,Philip Alston,Ryan Goodman
Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA
The third edition of International Human Rights in Context continues to bring sophisticated and thought-provoking analysis to the study of human rights within its wider social and cultural context. This widely acclaimed interdisciplinary coursebook presents a diverse range of carefully edited primary and secondary materials alongside extensive text, editorial commentary, and study questions. Within its conceptual framework, the book thoroughly covers the major topics of internationalhuman rights: the basic characteristics of international law; evolution of the human rights movement movement; civil, political, economic and social rights; the humanitarian laws of war; globalization; self-determination; women's rights; universalism and cultural relativisim; intergovernmental and nongovernmental institutions; implementation and enforcement; internal application of human rights norms; and the spread of constitutionalism. The third edition has been considerably revised and restructured to incoroprate new themes and topics including: human rights in relation to terrorism amd national security; responsibility of nonstate actors for human rights violations; recent substantial changes in sources and processes of international law; achieved and potential reforrm within UN human rights institution; theories about international organizations and their influence on state behavior. Its scope, challenging enquiries, and clarity make it the ideal companion for human rightsstudents, scholars, advocates and practitioners alike. Online Resource Centre The third edition will be accompanied by a new online resource centre which will house the Annex of Documents, allowing them to be updated between editions.
C. F. Forsyth,University of Cambridge. Centre for Public Law
Author: C. F. Forsyth,University of Cambridge. Centre for Public Law
Publisher: Hart Publishing
This collection of essays presents opposing sides of the debate over the foundations of judicial review. In this work,however, the discussion of whether the 'ultra vires' doctrine is best characterised as a central principle of administrative law or as a harmless, justificatory fiction is located in the highly topical and political context of constitutional change. The thorough jurisprudential analysis of the relative merits of models of 'legislative intention' and 'judicial creativity' provides a sound base for consideration of the constitutional problems arising out of legislative devolution and the Human Rights Act 1998. As the historical orthodoxy is challenged by growing institutional independence, leading figures in the field offer competing perspectives on the future of judicial review. "Confucius was wrong to say that it is a curse to live in interesting times. We are witnessing the development of a constitutional philosophy which recognises fundamental values and gives them effect in the mediation of law to the people". (Sir John Laws)Contributors Nick Bamforth, Paul Craig, David Dyzenhaus, Mark Elliott, David Feldman, Christopher Forsyth, Brigid Hadfield, Jeffrey Jowell QC, Sir John Laws, Dawn Oliver, Sir Stephen Sedley, Mark Walters. With short responses by: TRS Allan, Stephen Bailey, Robert Carnworth, Martin Loughlin, Michael Taggart, Sir William Wade.
The Human Rights Act 1998 is criticised for providing a weak protection of human rights. The principle of parliamentary legislative supremacy prevents entrenchment, meaning that courts cannot overturn legislation passed after the Act that contradicts Convention rights. This book investigates this assumption, arguing that the principle of parliamentary legislative supremacy is sufficiently flexible to enable a stronger protection of human rights, which can replicate the effect of entrenchment. Nevertheless, it is argued that the current protection should not be strengthened. If correctly interpreted, the Human Rights Act can facilitate democratic dialogue that enables courts to perform their proper correcting function to protect rights from abuse, whilst enabling the legislature to authoritatively determine contestable issues surrounding the extent to which human rights should be protected alongside other rights, interests and goals of a particular society. This understanding of the Human Rights Act also provides a different justification for the preservation of Dicey's conception of parliamentary sovereignty in the UK Constitution.
This book of essays,the product of a conference held at the University of Birmingham in the spring of 1998, contains contributions from a group of extremely distinguished scholars in the fields of both public and private law. The meaning of proportionality is examined in a number of different contexts, including those of EC law, the domestic law of the Member States of the EU and the law of the European Convention on Human Rights. Its substantive content and procedural implications are analysed and contrasted, in particular, with the concept of Wednesbury unreasonableness. Its use in criminal and anti-discrimination law is also examined, as is its future likely impact in the UK after incorporation of the European Convention.Contributors: Paul Craig, Evelyn Ellis, David Feldman, Nicholas Green QC, Lord Hoffmann, Francis G. Jacobs, Jeremy McBride, Takis Tridimas, Walter van Gerven.
In this completely revised and updated second edition of Human Rights Law, the judicial interpretation and application of the United Kingdom's Human Rights Act 1998 is comprehensively examined and analysed. Part I concerns key procedural issues including: the background to the Act; the relationship between UK courts and the European Court of Human Rights; the definition of victim and public authority; determining incompatibility including deference and proportionality; the impact of the Act on primary legislation; and damages and other remedies for the violation of Convention rights. In Part II of the book, the Convention rights as interpreted and applied by United Kingdom courts, are discussed in detail. All important Convention rights are included with a new chapter on freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Other Convention rights considered in the national context include: the right to life; freedom from torture; the right to liberty; fair trial; the right to private life, family life and home; the right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions; and the right to freedom from discrimination in the enjoyment of Convention rights. The second edition of Human Rights Law will be invaluable for those teaching, studying and practising in the areas of United Kingdom human rights law, constitutional law and administrative law.
Like the immensely successful previous edition of this highly respected work, this new edition has been jointly prepared and thorough updated by Colin Turpin and Adam Tomkins. It takes fully into account constitutional developments under the coalition government and examines the most recent case law of the Supreme Court, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. While it includes extensive material and commentary on contemporary constitutional practice, the book covers the historical traditions and the continuity of the British constitution as well as the current tide of change. Designed principally for law students, the book includes substantial extracts from parliamentary and other political sources, as well as from legislation and case law, making it ideal for politics and government students. With its fresh design it provides a full yet accessible account of the British constitution at a fascinating moment in its ongoing development.
Author: Helen Fenwick,Gavin Phillipson,Roger Masterman
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Judicial Reasoning under the UK Human Rights Act is a collection of essays written by leading experts in the field, which examines judicial decision-making under the UK's de facto Bill of Rights. The book focuses both on changes in areas of substantive law and the techniques of judicial reasoning adopted to implement the Act. The contributors therefore consider first general Convention and Human Rights Act concepts – statutory interpretation, horizontal effect, judicial review, deference, the reception of Strasbourg case-law – since they arise across all areas of substantive law. They then proceed to examine not only the use of such concepts in particular fields of law (privacy, family law, clashing rights, discrimination and criminal procedure), but also the modes of reasoning by which judges seek to bridge the divide between familiar common law and statutory doctrines and those in the Convention.
The Margin of Appreciation in Post-National Contexts
Author: Petr Agha
Publisher: Bloomsbury Publishing
This book analyses human rights in post-national contexts and demonstrates, through the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, that the Margin of Appreciation doctrine is an essential part of human rights adjudication. Current approaches have tended to stress the instrumental value of the Margin of Appreciation, or to give it a complementary role within the principle of proportionality, while others have been wholly critical of it. In contradiction to these approaches this volume shows that the doctrine is a genuinely normative principle capable of balancing conflicting values. It explores to what extent the tension between human rights and politics, embodied in the doctrine, might be understood as a mutually reinforcing interplay of variables rather than an entrenched separation. By linking the interpretation of the Margin of Appreciation doctrine to a broader conception of human rights, understood as complex political and moral norms, this volume argues that the doctrine can assist in the formulation of the common good in light of the requirements of the Convention.
Judicial Review and Social Welfare Rights in Comparative Constitutional Law
Author: Mark Tushnet
Publisher: Princeton University Press
Unlike many other countries, the United States has few constitutional guarantees of social welfare rights such as income, housing, or healthcare. In part this is because many Americans believe that the courts cannot possibly enforce such guarantees. However, recent innovations in constitutional design in other countries suggest that such rights can be judicially enforced--not by increasing the power of the courts but by decreasing it. In Weak Courts, Strong Rights, Mark Tushnet uses a comparative legal perspective to show how creating weaker forms of judicial review may actually allow for stronger social welfare rights under American constitutional law. Under "strong-form" judicial review, as in the United States, judicial interpretations of the constitution are binding on other branches of government. In contrast, "weak-form" review allows the legislature and executive to reject constitutional rulings by the judiciary--as long as they do so publicly. Tushnet describes how weak-form review works in Great Britain and Canada and discusses the extent to which legislatures can be expected to enforce constitutional norms on their own. With that background, he turns to social welfare rights, explaining the connection between the "state action" or "horizontal effect" doctrine and the enforcement of social welfare rights. Tushnet then draws together the analysis of weak-form review and that of social welfare rights, explaining how weak-form review could be used to enforce those rights. He demonstrates that there is a clear judicial path--not an insurmountable judicial hurdle--to better enforcement of constitutional social welfare rights.
This book analyses the Nordic constitutional systems of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden in a comparative context. It has two main aims: first to fill a gap in the literature by providing an accessible English language account of the Nordic constitutions, and second to provide a comparative analysis of them, revealing their similarities and differences within their political, historical and cultural contexts. In this respect, the book challenges the assumption that the Nordic countries form a homogeneous constitutional system due to their cultural and historical affinities, a view not necessarily supported by a close comparative examination. A key issue is EU membership –where the Nordic countries have made different choices at different times – and the book will show how this has affected the individual countries and whether a divide between EU member states (Denmark, Finland and Sweden) and non-members (Iceland and Norway) has appeared. Another key issue is how the ECHR has impacted the Nordic constitutional systems and whether the convention draws the Nordic systems closer to each other. The book represents a first of its kind in the English language, and will provide constitutional scholars with a valuable comparative resource on the Nordic region.