scholarly journals Symposium Summary: The State of Canada's Constitutional Democracy

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Cheryl Milne ◽  
John Greiss ◽  
Deborah Boswell
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Personal Experience ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
National Level ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
University Of Alberta ◽  
University Of Toronto ◽  
The University

Dramatic changes have taken place in recent years at the national level with respect to the day to day functioning of our constitutional democracy. These changes impinge on the separation of powers, the rule of law and the supremacy of the constitution. The David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights at the University of Toronto partnered with the Centre for Constitutional Studies at the University of Alberta to organize a two day symposium in February 2016, at the Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, designed to bring together a diverse group of academic experts and individuals with experience in public service at high levels, as well as academics with personal experience in governance, to discuss these changes.

scholarly journals Introduction

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorraine Weinrib ◽  
Patricia Paradis
Keyword(s):  
Conference Proceedings ◽  
The State ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
University Of Alberta ◽  
University Of Toronto ◽  
The University

This Special Issue of the Forum is a compilation of articles presented at a Symposium held at the University of Toronto in February 2016 on “The State of Canada’s Constitutional Democracy”. The Symposium was organized by Cheryl Milne (Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights) and Professor Lorraine Weinrib (University of Toronto), and they were later joined by Patricia Paradis (Centre for Constitutional Studies, University of Alberta). Its purpose was to examine the extent to which current Canadian governance is complying with modern constitutional principles.It is the organizers’ hope that the publication of these conference proceedings will broaden and deepen our understanding of the reform projects discussed at the “State of Canada’s Constitutional Democracy” Symposium that lie ahead.

Part 4 Constitutionalism and Separation of Powers, 4.4 Yemen: A Burgeoning Democracy on the Arab Peninsula?

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glosemeyer Iris ◽  
Shamiri Najib Abdul-Rehman ◽  
Würth Anna
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Constitutional History ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Islamic Jurisprudence ◽  
Central Elements

This chapter examines constitutional developments in Yemen. It covers Yemeni constitutional history before unification, the fate of the 1991 Constitution, and the Constitution of 2001. It argues that despite the relative political continuity (in the sense that there have not been successful military coups or significant elite changes in decades), constitutionalism in the country may be characterized as being two-fold. First, numerous constitutional articles are ambiguous and amenable to adverse interpretations because they leave too much of the constitutional rights to be defined by laws, thereby undermining the effectiveness of the said articles. The same applies to ordinary parliamentary laws, for they refer many important details to executive regulations, by-laws, ministerial resolutions, or Islamic jurisprudence. Second, while there has been a tradition of constitutionalist thinking at least since the 1940s, central elements of constitutionalism are missing. Checks and balances are weak, and the rule of law is far from being reality. Separation of powers is not even constitutionally fully guaranteed, much less applied in practice.

scholarly journals Harnessing Distrust and the Power of Intercession for the Separation of Powers

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 37-44
Author(s):  
Yann Allard-Tremblay
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Partisan Politics ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Party Members

In what follows, I reflect on themes arising from my reading of Jacob Levy’s The Separation of Powers and the Challenge to Constitutional Democracy. According to Levy, the separation of powers in contemporary constitutional democracies is failing, thus endangering the rule of law. Briefly, this is because political parties have bridged the gap between the legislature and the executive: by giving rise to partisan politics that cross the institutional divide, political parties have dampened, if not disabled, the institutional incentive and motivation of the legislature to keep the executive in check. Furthermore, when this is combined with the myth of the united and undifferentiated people, which the executive, populistically, can easily claim to embody, the simple act of opposing the executive may be framed as seditious. In the end, the power of the executive is set free by the partisan loyalty of fellow party members and by the framing of opposition as disloyal and deleterious to the polity.

scholarly journals Checking the Other and Checking the Self: Role Morality and the Separation of Powers

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 45-54
Author(s):  
Hillary Nye
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
Moral Concept ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Role Morality ◽  
Moral Ideals ◽  
The Relationship

The concepts of the rule of law, the separation of powers, and checks and balances are related in complicated ways. Jacob T Levy brings this to light in his thought-provoking McDonald Lecture, “The Separation of Powers and the Challenge to Constitutional Democracy.”1 In this response to Levy’s paper I want to further explore the relationship between these three ideas. I will argue that, when thinking about the rule of law, we must consider the idea of “role morality” and its place in constraining power. We should think of the constraints on power that stem from role morality as “internal” as opposed to “external” checks on power. I also suggest that we would do well to broaden our understanding of what the rule of law requires, and to think of it not just as a matter of ensuring impartiality and formal legal equality in the sense that the law applies to all actors within the system. We might benefit from thinking of the rule of law as a weightier moral concept that demands that decision-makers comply with moral ideals, and not just with the rules as laid out.

The Independence of the Judiciary under the Third Republican Constitution of Nigeria

1990 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 145-158 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. A. Ikhariale
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Political Order ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
Basic Form ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Good Government ◽  
Economic Underdevelopment ◽  
The Government

One of the fundamental principles underlying the Nigerian constitutional process is that of the independence of the judiciary. The concept, in its basic form, embodies the entire philosophy of constitutional democracy especially as emphasised by the preamble to the Constitution which is for “promoting the good government and welfare of all persons … on the principles of Equality, Freedom and Justice”. In a country such as Nigeria which is presently characterised by political and economic underdevelopment, it is generally considered constitutionally desirable that a viable contrivance such as the institutional separation of the judiciary from the other arms of the government is a necessary bulwark against all forms of political and social tyranny, administrative victimisation and oppression. In other words, the freedom of the judicature from any influence, whether exerted by the legislature or the executive, or even from the judiciary itself, which is capable of leading to any form of injustice, abuse, miscarriage of justice, judicial insensitivity or other court-related vices is a condition sine qua non for the establishment of a durable political order based on the rule of law and constitutionalism.The notion of the independence of the judiciary has its philosophical ancestry in the time-honoured theory of the separation of powers, a doctrine which incidentally features prominently in the allocation of state powers under the Nigerian constitutional scheme.

Good Governance

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henk Addink
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
National Level ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Modern State ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
Further Development

The pivotal aim of this book is to explain the creation, development, and impact of good governance from a conceptual, principal perspective and in the context of national administrative law. Three lines of reasoning have been worked out: developing the concept of good governance; specification of this concept by developing principles of good governance; and implementation of these principles of good governance on the national level. In this phase of further development of good governance, it is important to have a clear concept of good governance, presented in this book as the third cornerstone of a modern state, alongside the concepts of the rule of law and democracy. That is a rather new national administrative law perspective which is influenced by regional and international legal developments; thus, we can speak about good governance as a multilevel concept. But the question is: how is this concept of good governance further developed? Six principles of good governance (which in a narrower sense also qualify as principles of good administration) have been further specified in a systematic way, from a legal perspective. These are the principles of properness, transparency, participation, effectiveness, accountability, and human rights. Furthermore, the link has been made with integrity standards. The important developments of each of these principles are described on the national level in Europe, but also in countries outside Europe (such as Australia, Canada, and South Africa). This book gives a systematic comparison of the implementation of the principles of good governance between countries.

scholarly journals A Populist Monster and the future of Constitutional Democracy

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-100
Author(s):  
Andraž Teršek
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The central objective of the post-socialist European countries which are also Member States of the EU and Council of Europe, as proclaimed and enshrined in their constitutions before their official independence, is the establishment of a democracy based on the rule of law and effective legal protection of fundamental human rights and freedoms. In this article the author explains what, in his opinion, is the main problem and why these goals are still not sufficiently achieved: the ruthless simplification of the understanding of the social function and functioning of constitutional courts, which is narrow, rigid and holistically focused primarily or exclusively on the question of whether the judges of these courts are “left or right” in purely daily-political sense, and consequently, whether constitutional court decisions are taken (described, understood) as either “left or right” in purely and shallow daily-party-political sense/manner. With nothing else between and no other foundation. The author describes such rhetoric, this kind of superficial labeling/marking, such an approach towards constitutional law-making as a matter of unbearable and unthinking simplicity, and introduces the term A Populist Monster. The reasons that have led to the problem of this kind of populism and its devastating effects on the quality and development of constitutional democracy and the rule of law are analyzed clearly and critically.

James Bertram Collip, 1892-1965

1973 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 234-267 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Family Life ◽  
Clinical Medicine ◽  
National Research Council ◽  
Pituitary Hormones ◽  
University Of Alberta ◽  
University Of Toronto ◽  
Mcgill University ◽  
Medical Importance ◽  
The University ◽  
Happy Family

James Bertram Collip was a pioneer in endocrine research, especially in its biochemical aspects. Following an excellent training in biochemistry under Professor A. B. Macallum, F.R.S., at the University of Toronto, he spent thirteen years at the University of Alberta in Edmonton. There was a momentous year at the University of Toronto about midway through the Edmonton period; this coincided with the discovery of insulin by Sir Frederick G. Banting, F.R.S., and Professor Charles S. Best, F.R.S., and the experience altered the course of his career. Henceforth, Professor Collip’s life was dominated by an urge to discover hormones that would be useful in clinical medicine. Success attended these efforts, first in the isolation of the parthyroid hormone, called parathormone, while he was at the University of Alberta and later in the identification of placental and pituitary hormones during particularly fruitful years at McGill University. There were other important facets to Professor Collip’s career. These included the training of young scientists, many of whom subsequently came to occupy positions of responsibility, work with the National Research Council of Canada, and in his latter years an important contribution as Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, University of Western Ontario. In addition to a life of fulfilment through accomplishments of scientific and medical importance, Professor Collip’s career was enriched by a happy family life and by the friendship of a host of individuals who were attracted to his brilliance as a scientist and his warm personality.

Crisis of the Rule of Law in Europe: The Cases of Hungary, Poland and Spain

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 379-398
Author(s):  
David Parra Gómez
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Institutional Reforms ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Division Of Powers ◽  
European Democracy ◽  
Aggressive Interference

Democracy is an instrument at the service of a noble purpose: to ensure the freedom and equality of all citizens by guaranteeing the civil, political and social rights contained in constitutional texts. Among the great principles on which this instrument rests is the division of powers, which consists, substantially, in the fact that power is not concentrated, but that the various functions of the State are exercised by different bodies, which, moreover, control each other. Well, the increasingly aggressive interference of the Executive and, to a lesser extent, the Legislative in material spheres that should be reserved exclusively for the Judiciary, violates this principle and, for this reason, distorts the idea of democracy, an alarming trend that, for some time now, are observed in European Union countries such as Hungary, Poland and Spain. Preventing the alarming degradation of European democracy, of which these three countries are an example, requires not only more than necessary institutional reforms to ensure respect for these principles and prevent the arbitrariness of the public authorities, but also a media network and an education system that explains and promotes these values and principles, that is, one that makes citizens aware of and defend constitutionalism. Keywords: Rule of law; Democracy; Separation of powers; judicial independence; Europe.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document