Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
74,184
result(s) for
"Constitutional courts"
Sort by:
Comparative constitutional reasoning
To what extent is the language of judicial opinions responsive to the political and social context in which constitutional courts operate? Courts are reason-giving institutions, with argumentation playing a central role in constitutional adjudication. However, a cursory look at just a handful of constitutional systems suggests important differences in the practices of constitutional judges, whether in matters of form, style, or language. Focusing on independently-verified leading cases globally, a combination of qualitative and quantitative analysis offers the most comprehensive and systematic account of constitutional reasoning to date. This analysis is supported by the examination of eighteen legal systems around the world including the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice. Universally common aspects of constitutional reasoning are identified in this book, and contributors also examine whether common law countries differ to civil law countries in this respect.-- Provided by Publisher.
Book
The Politics of Principle
Under its first chief justice, Arthur Chaskalson, the South African Constitutional Court built an unrivalled reputation in the comparative constitutional law community for technically accomplished and morally enlightened decision-making. At the same time, the Court proved remarkably effective in asserting its institutional role in post-apartheid politics. While each of these accomplishments is noteworthy in its own right, the Court's simultaneous success in legal and political terms demands separate investigation. Drawing on and synthesising various insights from judicial politics and legal theory, this study offers an interdisciplinary explanation for the Chaskalson Court's achievement. Rather than a purely political strategy of the kind modelled by rational choice theorists, the study argues that the Court's achievement is attributable to a series of adjudicative strategies in different areas of law. In combination, these strategies allowed the Court to satisfy institutional norms of public reason-giving while at the same time avoiding political attack.
eBook
The Constitutional Court and Democracy in Indonesia
The Constitutional Court and Democracy in Indonesia provides detailed, English-language analysis of Indonesia's Constitutional Court. Established in 2003, the Court has been at the forefront of democratic reform in Indonesia, shaping the rules under which Indonesian elections are run, enforcing democracy-related rights, and resolving hundred of electoral disputes. The Court has established itself as an accessible and largely professional body that actively and independently performs its functions and one which does not shy away from difficult cases. It has earned the respect of Indonesian citizens and members of government who comply with the Court's decisions as a matter of course, despite the Court's lack of official enforcement powers. Many of the Court's decisions have been controversial, yet criticism has focused on the perceived unfairness of the outcomes. This book seeks to forge a new path in this debate by offering a balanced critique of the Constitutional Court's jurisprudence and decision-making practices.
eBook
Post Amendment of Judicial Review in Indonesia: Has Judicial Power Distributed Fairly?
Distribution of power in Indonesian constitutional system not only occur amongst state organs but also within Indonesian judicial system. The Supreme Court and Constitutional Court share their power to review several regulations. The 1945 Constitution delivers power to review act against constitution for Constitutional Court and to review regulations below an act for the Supreme Court. However, this distribution of power is vulnerable to contradicting each other, with the possibility of having clash of judgment. There is no guarantee that the Supreme Court will fully obey the Constitutional Court judgment. So, the research question needs to be solved such as judicial Review pre-the Amendment of the 1945 Constitution process, and judicial Review Post the Amendment of the Constitution implement, that will be main points of research purposes. Furthermore, the main problem is the distribution power between Constitutional Court and Supreme Court, whether have distributed fairly or not. Another problem after amendment is about disagreement amongst judges. Before amendment, judges were forbidden to show their disagreement clearly in the verdict, but now allowed. This fact has led to public distrust. They have questioned the legitimacy of the verdict having disagreement, whether should be obeyed or be denied.
Journal Article
Apex courts and the common law
\"For centuries, courts across the common law world have developed systems of law by building bodies of judicial decisions. In deciding individual cases, common law courts settle litigation and move the law in new directions. By virtue of their place at the top of the judicial hierarchy, courts at the apex of common law systems are unique in that their decisions and, in particular, the language used in those decisions, resonate through the legal system. Although both the common law and apex courts have been studied extensively, scholars have paid less attention to the relationship between the two. By analyzing apex courts and the common law from multiple angles, this book offers an entry point for scholars in disciplines related to law--such as political science, history, and sociology--who are seeking a deeper understanding and new insights as to how the common law applies to and is relevant within their own disciplines.\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
The National Courts’ Mandate in the European Constitution
The reform of the European Constitution continues to dominate news headlines and has provoked a massive debate, unprecedented in the history of EU law. Against this backdrop Monica Claes’ book offers a “bottom up” view of how the Constitution might work, taking the viewpoint of the national courts as her starting point, and at the same time returning to fundamental principles in order to interrogate the myths of Community law. Adopting a broad, comparative approach, she analyses the basic doctrines of Community law from both national constitutional perspectives as well as the more usual European perspective. It is only by combining the perspectives of the EU and national constitutions, she argues, that a complete picture can be obtained, and a solid theoretical base (constitutional pluralism) developed. Her comparative analysis encompasses the law in France, Belgium, Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany, Ireland, Italy and the United Kingdom and in the course of her inquiry discusses a wide variety of prominent problems. The book is structured around three main themes, coinciding with three periods in the development of the judicial dialogue between the ECJ and the national courts. The first focuses on the ordinary non-constitutional national courts and how they have successfully adapted to the mandates developed by the ECJ in Simmenthal and Francovich. The second examines the constitutional and other review courts and discusses the gradual transformation of the ECJ into a constitutional court, and its relationship to the national constitutional courts. The contrast is marked; these courts are not specifically empowered by the case law of the ECJ and have reacted quite differently to the message from Luxembourg, leaving them apparently on collision course with the ECJ in the areas of judicial Kompetenz Kompetenz and fundamental rights. The third theme reprises the first two and places them in the context of the current debate on the Constitution for Europe and the Convention, taking the perspective of the national courts as the starting point for a wide-ranging examination of EU’s constitutional fundamentals. In so doing it argues that the new Constitution must accommodate the national perspective if it is to prove effective.
eBook
Courts and democracies in Asia
\"What is the relationship between the strength of a country's democracy and the ability of its courts to address deficiencies in the electoral process? Drawing a distinction between democracies that can be characterised as 'dominant-party' (for example Singapore, Malaysia, and Hong Kong), 'dynamic' (for example India, South Korea, and Taiwan), and 'fragile' (for example Thailand, Pakistan ,and Bangladesh), this book explores how democracy sustains and is sustained by the exercise of judicial power. In dominant-party systems, courts can only pursue 'dialogic' pathways to constrain the government's authoritarian tendencies. On the other hand, in dynamic democracies, courts can more successfully innovate and make systemic changes to the electoral system. Finally, in fragile democracies, where a country regularly oscillates between martial law and civilian rule, their courts tend to consistently overreach, and this often facilitates or precipitates a hostile take-over by the armed forces, and lead to the demise of the rule of law\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
Judging Russia: Constitutional Court in Russian Politics, 1990-2006
This is a study of the actual role that the Russian Constitutional Court played in protecting fundamental rights and resolving legislative-executive struggles and federalism disputes in both Yeltsin's and Putin's Russia. Trochev argues that judicial empowerment is a non-linear process with unintended consequences and that courts that depend on their reputation flourish only if an effective and capable state is there to support them. This is because judges can rely only on the authoritativeness of their judgments, unlike politicians and bureaucrats, who have the material resources necessary to respond to judicial decisions. Drawing upon systematic analysis of all decisions of the Russian Court (published and unpublished) and previously unavailable materials on their (non-)implementation, and resting on a combination of the approaches from comparative politics, law, and public administration, this book shows how and why judges attempted to reform Russia's governance and fought to ensure compliance with their judgments.
eBook