Public-Private Distinction in Judicial Review - A Comparative Analysis of India and England

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Santanu Sabhapandit
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Judicial Review

Administrative Procedure and Judicial Review: A ‘Common Core’ Research

2021 ◽  
pp. 3-20
Author(s):  
Giacinto della Cananea ◽  
Mads Andenas
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Level ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Long Period ◽  
History Of ◽  
Political Choices ◽  
National Systems

This chapter begins by explaining why judicial review of administration is interesting terrain for a comparative analysis, also in the light of European and international principles. It is helpful to bear in mind that, for a long period of time, a strand of thought in public law has contested not just the usefulness, but even the possibility of a meaningful comparison between national systems of judicial review. It is important, however, to take cognisance of two fundamental dimensions of change: one is the increasing specialization of the courts that exercise control over administrative power and the other is the emergence of common principles at European and international level. The chapter then highlights the importance of procedural fairness and propriety, although the legal relevance and significance of these principles will differ depending upon the history of any society and its political choices. It also addresses some methodological issues, including the nature of the 'factual analysis' and the choice of legal systems.

Significance of and Comparative Trends in Procedural Regulation of Right to Information

2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 31-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Polonca Kovač
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
International Studies ◽  
Good Practices ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
Rti Implementation ◽  
Right To Information ◽  
Legal Right

Any legal right is (more) efficiently pursued if sufficient procedural regulation supports its substantive setting. This article is dedicated to an analysis of procedural regulation of right to information (RTI) since its significance is increasing in terms of developing good governance and good administration within contemporary transparent, open and collaborative society. The comparative analysis of selected countries (USA, Ireland, Sweden, Austria, Germany, Slovenia, Croatia) included herein proves that selected procedural institutions, such as time limits and an appeal to an independent body or judicial review, contribute to a significantly higher level of implementation of the RTI in practice as also indicated by several international studies. In conclusion, the author recommends certain good practices, especially significance of RTI implementation in relation to different authorities in the context of administrative procedure guaranteeing constitutional and supranational transparency principles.

scholarly journals THE NEO-JURISPRUDENCE OF PIL IN SUPERIOR COURTS OF PAKISTAN: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PRE AND POST LAWYERS’ MOVEMENT WORKING OF SUPERIOR COURTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-44
Author(s):  
Hatim Aziz Solangi
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
State Legislature ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Public Interest Litigation ◽  
Legislative Action ◽  
Proactive Approach ◽  
The People ◽  
Before And After

The dynamics of the superior judiciary in Pakistan have undergone a drastic transformation in its approach and working in post 2007 emergency followed by a landmark movement of civil and legal fraternity for restoration of constitutional supremacy. The neo-jurisprudence is being applauded and criticized at the same time.  The excessive use of Suo-motto and public interest litigation at one hand and frequent judicial review of executive and legislative action on other have been the main source of contention between judiciary and other two pillars of state, legislature and executive. The Superior Court is being recognized as the ultimate savior of fundamental rights and guardian of the constitution as well as rights of the people. At the other extreme, the criticism like activist judiciary; disrespect for popular will and making rather interpreting law are most commonly attributed to Superior Judiciary. The study is qualitative in nature and presents a comparative analysis of trends in Superior Court before and after Lawyers’ movement. The study also aims in justifying the proactive approach especially in providing social justice on failure of state organs to respond to the exigency of time.

Shadow constitutional review: The dark side of pre-enactment political review in Ireland and Japan

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-77
Author(s):  
David Kenny ◽  
Conor Casey
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Dark Side ◽  
Major Area ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
Central Aspect ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

Abstract Political constitutionalism is a major area of inquiry in contemporary constitutional discourse. A significant and increasingly central aspect of political constitutionalism is pre-enactment political review: laws being reviewed for constitutionality or rights compliance by parliament or the executive. This institution is said to be a good augmentation of, or even replacement for, the institution of judicial review, and it is said to bring with it a host of normative benefits. In this article, we wish to highlight an under-explored dark side to pre-enactment review. By undertaking a comparative analysis of functional pre-enactment review in several similar jurisdictions—Canada, New Zealand, and the UK—we contrast these systems, and the ordinary failings they display, with the much deeper problems of pre-enactment review in Ireland and Japan. These latter jurisdictions, we argue, not only fail to instantiate the benefits of pre-enactment review but in fact show that, in the right circumstances, pre-enactment review can have negative effects that are antithetical to the goals and values of political constitutionalism. We call this phenomenon “shadow constitutional review,” and suggest that it adds a layer of complexity and nuance to contemporary discussions of political constitutionalism.

scholarly journals Constitutional Interpretation and Foreign Law: A Comparative Analysis between the U.S. Supreme Court and the German Federal Constitutional Court

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (66) ◽  
pp. 85-129
Author(s):  
Mher Arshakyan ◽  
Jacopo Paffarini ◽  
Márcio Ricardo Staffen
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Interpretation ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Foreign Law ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

The central purpose of this paper is to show that there are no major differences in the methods of constitutional interpretation in countries with varying degree of judicial review. Despite the fact that legal culture and traditions, underlying political theories, and values all affect methods of interpretation, there is no big gap in constitutional interpretation in practice in view of wide interpretive discretion. Obviously all legal systems require compliance with some fundamental interpretive standards irrespective of the legal system, and in a democratic society judicial decisions should be justified at least to avoid arbitrariness. The question is what are the limits beyond which judges cannot go in constitutional democracies? Can the foreign law be a parameter for judicial review of legislation? Hence, the style and method of legal argumentation that are used to justify the decision may differ in the countries belonging to different legal systems. Whether there are significant differences between the common law and civil law constitutional interpretation will be assessed through the comparative analysis of the United States Supreme Court and the German Federal Constitutional Court.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document