From dialogue to disagreement in comparative rights constitutionalism / Scott Stephenson.
2016
K3240 .S7453 2016 (Map It)
Available at Cellar
Formats
Format | |
---|---|
BibTeX | |
MARCXML | |
TextMARC | |
MARC | |
DublinCore | |
EndNote | |
NLM | |
RefWorks | |
RIS |
Items
Details
Title
From dialogue to disagreement in comparative rights constitutionalism / Scott Stephenson.
Published
Annandale, N.S.W. : The Federation Press, 2016.
Call Number
K3240 .S7453 2016
ISBN
9781760020675
1760020672
1760020672
Description
xxv, 243 pages ; 25 cm
System Control No.
(OCoLC)951742871
Summary
"The bills of rights adopted in the Commonwealth countries of Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and, at the subnational level, Australia in recent decades, have prompted scholars and institutional actors involved in the process of constitutional design and reform to rethink how to evaluate and compare the different approaches to human rights protection. They have challenged a number of assumptions in the field, for example, that courts must have the power to invalidate laws that are found to violate rights (i.e. courts can now be given non-binding powers), that courts must have the 'final word' on rights issues (i.e. legislatures can now be given the power to override judicial decisions) and that bills of rights are enforced exclusively by courts (i.e. legislators can now be given new responsibilities to ensure that the laws they enact are compatible with rights). This book addresses three questions arising from these developments. How do these new bills of rights differ from the traditional approaches to rights protection? Why, if at all, should we consider the Commonwealth's approach over the traditional approaches? What compromises must be struck in the course of adopting a bill of rights of this variety? In answering these questions, the book sets out a new framework for comparison that focuses on the types of inter-institutional disagreement facilitated by and found in the different approaches to rights protection. It also identifies a previously unrecognised element of the Commonwealth's approach - the normative trade-offs with other constitutional principles and values - that is pivotal to understanding its operation. Finally, it seeks to contribute to future debates about rights reform in Australia and elsewhere by setting out a number of lessons that emerge from the answers to these three questions."-- Provided by publisher.
Bibliography, etc. Note
Includes bibliographical references (pages 220-236) and indexes.
Record Appears in
Gift
Purchased from the income of the Soll Fund
Gift

The Arthur W. Diamond Law Library
Purchased from the income of the Soll Fund
Table of Contents
The advent of multi-stage rights review
Framework for comparison
Legislative supremacy
Multi-stage rights review
Normative trade-offs
The United Kingdom
Canada
New Zealand
Australia.
Framework for comparison
Legislative supremacy
Multi-stage rights review
Normative trade-offs
The United Kingdom
Canada
New Zealand
Australia.