Constitutional comparison : Japan, Germany, Canada, and South Africa as constitutional states / Francois Venter.
2000
K3165 .V46 2000 (Map It)
Available at Cellar
Formats
| Format | |
|---|---|
| BibTeX | |
| MARCXML | |
| TextMARC | |
| MARC | |
| DublinCore | |
| EndNote | |
| NLM | |
| RefWorks | |
| RIS |
Items
Details
Author
Title
Constitutional comparison : Japan, Germany, Canada, and South Africa as constitutional states / Francois Venter.
Published
Cape Town, South Africa : Juta ; Cambridge, MA, USA : Kluwer Law International, 2000.
Call Number
K3165 .V46 2000
Former Call Number
Comp 910 V565 2000
ISBN
0702153729 (Juta)
9041115102 (Kluwer)
9041115102 (Kluwer)
Description
xxxv, 274 pages ; 25 cm
System Control No.
(OCoLC)46643341
Bibliography, etc. Note
Includes bibliographical references (pages xi-xxviii) and index.
Record Appears in
Portion of Title
Japan, Germany, Canada, and South Africa as constitutional states
Table of Contents
Preface
Bibliography
Table of Cases
Ch. 1
Considerations of Comparative Methodology
1
1.1Law and state as common denominators of humanity
1
1.2Comparative law: nature and issues
15
1.3Comparison in the field of constitutional law
19
1.4A matrix for constitutional comparison
44
Ch. 2
Predominance of the Constitution
53
2.1Introduction
53
2.2Why is the Constitution supreme?
53
2.3History and foundations of the predominance of the constitution
59
2.4The impact of the predominance of the Constitution
79
2.5Comparative conclusions
123
Ch. 3
Constitutional Rights
127
3.1Introduction
127
3.2The classification of constitutional rights
130
3.3The culture of rights
132
3.4Analysis of selected constitutional rights
147
3.5Limiting and balancing interests
181
3.6Conclusion: constitutional rights in the contemporary constitutional state
190
Ch. 4
Democracy and the Distribution of Authority
193
4.1Introduction
193
4.2Democracy
193
4.3The horizontal distribution of authority
211
4.4The vertical distribution of authority
224
4.5Democracy and Authority in the Constitutional State
255
Ch. 5
Comparing Constitutions in 2000
255
5.1Motives for practising comparative constitutional law
256
5.2Limitations of constitutional comparison
257
5.3A method for comparing constitutions
263
Index
265