What is the purpose of comparative constitutional law? Comparing constitutions allows us to consider the similarities and differences in forms of government, and the normative philosophies behind constitutional choices. Constitutional comparisons offer 'hermeneutic' help: they enable us to see 'our' own constitution with different eyes and to locate its structural and normative choices by references to alternatives evident in other constitutional orders. This Cambridge Companion presents readers with a succinct yet wide-ranging companion to a modern comparative constitutional law course, offering a wide-ranging yet concise introduction to the subject. Its twenty-two chapters are arranged into five thematic parts: starting with an exploration of the 'theoretical foundations' (Part I) and some important 'historical experiences' (Part II), it moves on to a discussion of the core 'constitutional principles' (Part III) and 'state institutions' (Part IV); finally it analyses forms of 'transn
In this 2010 book, Roger Masterman examines the dividing lines between the powers of the judicial branch of government and those of the executive and legislative branches in the light of two of the most significant constitutional reforms of recent years: the Human Rights Act (1998) and Constitutional Reform Act (2005). Both statutes have implications for the separation of powers within the United Kingdom constitution. The Human Rights Act brings the judges into much closer proximity with the decisions of political actors than previously permitted by the Wednesbury standard of review and the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, while the Constitutional Reform Act marks the emergence of an institutionally independent judicial branch. Taken together, the two legislative schemes form the backbone of a more comprehensive system of constitutional checks and balances policed by a judicial branch underpinned by the legitimacy of institutional independence.
What is the purpose of comparative constitutional law? Comparing constitutions allows us to consider the similarities and differences in forms of government, and the normative philosophies behind constitutional choices. Constitutional comparisons offer 'hermeneutic' help: they enable us to see 'our' own constitution with different eyes and to locate its structural and normative choices by references to alternatives evident in other constitutional orders. This Cambridge Companion presents readers with a succinct yet wide-ranging companion to a modern comparative constitutional law course, offering a wide-ranging yet concise introduction to the subject. Its twenty-two chapters are arranged into five thematic parts: starting with an exploration of the 'theoretical foundations' (Part I) and some important 'historical experiences' (Part II), it moves on to a discussion of the core 'constitutional principles' (Part III) and 'state institutions' (Part IV); finally it analyses forms of 'transn
By providing enforceable remedies for breaches of Convention Rights in domestic courts, and in allowing judges to scrutinise parliamentary legislation on human rights grounds, the United Kingdom's Hum
