מעודכן ל: 11.12.2024
ביקורת שיפוטית
אקטיביזם שיפוטי
משפט חוקתי
בית משפט לחוקה
Judicial review and political question
Political question and judicial review
Judicial empowerment
Judicial supervision
Constitutional review
Abstract judicial review
Discretionary powers
Democratic backsliding
Constitutional law
Administrative law
Responsive Judicial Review: Democracy and Dysfunction in the Modern Age by
Democratic dysfunction can arise in both 'at risk' and well-functioning constitutional systems. It can threaten a system's responsiveness to both minority rights claims and majoritarian constitutional understandings. Responsive Judicial Review aims to counter this dysfunction using examples from both the global north and global south, including leading constitutional courts in the US, UK, Canada, India, South Africa, and Colombia, as well as select aspects of the constitutional jurisprudence of courts in Australia, Fiji, Hong Kong, and Korea.In this book, Dixon argues that courts should adopt a sufficiently 'dialogic' approach to countering relevant democratic blockages and look for ways to increase the actual and perceived legitimacy of their decisions--through careful choices about their framing, and the timing and selection of cases. By orienting judicial choices about constitutional construction toward promoting democratic responsiveness, or toward countering forms of democratic monopoly, blind spots, and burdens of inertia, judicial review helps safeguard a constitutional system's responsiveness to democratic majority understandings. The idea of 'responsive' judicial review encourages courts to engage with their own distinct institutional position, and potential limits on their own capacity and legitimacy. Dixon further explores the ways that this translates into the embracing of a 'weakened' approach to judicial finality, compared to the traditional US-model of judicial supremacy, as well as a nuanced approach to the making of judicial implications, a 'calibrated' approach to judicial scrutiny or judgments about proportionality, and an embrace of 'weak - strong' rather than wholly weak or strong judicial remedies. Not all courts will be equally well-placed to engage in review of this kind, or successful at doing so. For responsive judicial review to succeed, it must be sensitive to context-specific limitations of this kind. Nevertheless, the idea of responsive judicial review is explicitly normative and aspirational: it aims to provide a blueprint for how courts should think about the practice of judicial review as they strive to promote and protect democratic constitutional values.
ביקורת שיפוטית על שיקול דעת מינהלי by
ביקורת שיפוטית על חוקיותן של החלטות המינהל היא הכלי החשוב ביותר להבטחת יישומם של עקרונות המשפט הציבורי על ידי רשויות השלטון במדינה דמוקרטית. בישראל, הביקורת השיפוטית המינהלית היא עמוד השדרה של פיתוח המשפט הציבורי, המינהלי והחוקתי מאז הקמת המדינה ועד היום. השפעתה של הביקורת השיפוטית במישור המינהלי, החברתי והפוליטי היוותה גם נושא למחלוקות בין משפטנים ואישי ציבור. בספר זה מציג פרופסור יואב דותן סקירה וניתוח מקיפים של עקרונות הביקורת השיפוטית המינהלית ושל עילות הביקורת השונות. מטרתו העיקרית של הספר היא לבחון באופן ביקורתי את התפתחות הביקורת השיפוטית לאור היסודות העיוניים והמדיניים של השיטה המשפטית בישראל תוך ניתוח עקרונות היסוד של הביקורת בדין הקיים ובדין הרצוי. הטענה המרכזית המוצגת היא כי התשובות לשאלות היסוד הנוגעות לביקורת השיפוטית צריכות להינתן אגב בחינת היתרון המוסדי היחסי של בית המשפט מול מוסדות אחרים המקבלים החלטות שלטוניות ומנגנוני ביקורת חלופיים הקיימים במערכות הציבוריות. יואב דותן הוא פרופסור ומופקד הקתדרה למשפט ציבורי ע"ש אדווין א. גודמן בפקולטה למשפטים באוניברסיטה העברית וכיהן כדיקן הפקולטה למשפטים. מחקריו עוסקים במשפט מינהלי, משפט חוקתי, רגולציה וחקר אמפירי של התנהגות שיפוטית.
ביקורת חוקתית : התפתחות, דגמים והצעה לעיגון הביקורת השיפוטית בישראל by
כיצד התפתחה הביקורת החוקתית? אילו מודלים קיימים בעולם ומה המודל הראוי לישראל? באיזה הרכב ראוי לפסול חקיקה של הכנסת? האם ראוי לאמץ "פסקת התגברות"?
מלחמות הבג"ץ : המהפכה החוקתית ומהפכת הנגד by
למי שעוקב אחרי הוויכוח הסוער שמתנהל סביב מעמד בית המשפט העליון בשנים האחרונות, נדמה כאילו יש רק שתי עמדות אפשריות: תומכי בית המשפט הסבורים שבידיו הסמכות לשמור על מערכת הערכים וזכויות האדם במדינת ישראל. ומנגד, אלו הסבורים כי בית המשפט נטל לעצמו זכויות לא דמוקרטיות, ופועל נגד הרוב הנבחר.
בספר מלחמות הבג"ץ: המהפכה החוקתית ומהפכת הנגד, מבקש פרופ' עמיחי כהן לצאת נגד הקביעה המציבה זו מול זו את שתי התפיסות המנוגדות. שכן, בתווך קיים מרחב גדול של הסכמה אפשרית על תפקידו של בית המשפט.
מחשבות על שפיטה by
מחשבות על שפיטה מציע נקודות מבט מגוונות ביחס לפרקטיקה של השפיטה ולאתגרים שהיא מציבה, בכל הנוגע לחתירה לצדק במשפט. בין השאר, נבחנות בו שאלות הנוגעות להגינות ההליך השיפוטי, ליחס בין הכלל לחריג, לדרכי הכתיבה וההנמקה של פסקי דין, לחילוקי דעות שיפוטיים ולפרשנות. בכך הוא פותח צוהר לדילמות המיוחדות לעבודת השפיטה ולהתמודדות עמן.
.jpg)
שופט בחברה דמוקרטית by
מהו תפקידו של שופט - בעיקר שופט בבית המשפט העליון - בחברה דמוקרטית ומהן הדרכים שבאמצעותן הוא מגשים תפקיד זה? לדעת המחבר, שניים הם תפקידיו העיקריים של השופט: גישור על הפער הטבעי שבין המשפט לבין מציאות החיים המשתנה; והגנה על החוקה (אצלנו- חוקי היסוד) ועל ערכיה. אלה ערכיה כמדינה יהודית וכמדינה דמוקרטית, ובהם שלטון החוק, הפרדת רשויות, עצמאות השפיטה, ערכי היסוד וזכויות האדם.
להגשמת תפקידים אלו עומדים לרשות השופט כמה אמצעים. העיקריים שבהם הם הפרשנות (במובנה הרחב), האיזון בין אינטרסים ובין ערכים מתנגשים, השימוש ב"מונחי שסתום" (ובהם סבירות ותום לב), דיני המעמד, השפיטות והמשפט המשווה. פעילות זו של השופט, שהיא יצירתית במהותה, יוצרת מתח בין הרשות השופטת לבין הרשות המחוקקת והרשות המבצעת. הספר מנתח מתח זה. הוא בוחן את הדרכים לטיפול בו, ובמרכזן הדיאלוג בין הרשויות. על רקע זה נבחן האקטיביזם או הריסון העצמי של השופט.
הספר פורש מסכת רחבה של משפט ושיפוט בחברה דמוקרטית ומהווה ביטוי לפילוסופיה משפטית ושיפוטית. הוא מכוון לקוראים - משפטנים ושאינם משפטנים - המבקשים להבין את הבסיס לדמוקרטיה וליחסים הראויים בין הרשויות, ובוחן יחסים אלה על רקע ערכיה של ישראל כמדינה יהודית ודמוקרטית.
The Constitution of Israel: A Contextual Analysis by
This book presents the main features of the Israeli constitutional system and a topical discussion of Israel's basic laws. It focuses on constitutional history and the peculiar decision to frame a constitution 'by stages'. Following its British heritage and the lack of a formal constitution, Israel's democracy grew for more than four decades on the principle of parliamentary supremacy. Introducing a constitutional model and the concept of judicial review of laws, the 'constitutional revolution' of the 1990s started a new era in Israel's constitutional history. The book's main themes include: constitutional principles; the legislature and the electoral system; the executive; the protection of fundamental rights and the crucial role of the Supreme Court in Israel's constitutional discourse. It further presents Israel's unique aspects as a Jewish and democratic state, and its ongoing search for the right balance between human rights and national security. Finally, the book offers a critical discussion of the development of Israel's constitution and local projects aimed at enacting a single and comprehensive text.
Israeli Constitutional Law in the Making by
In the domain of comparative constitutionalism, Israeli constitutional law is a fascinating case study constituted of many dilemmas. It is moving from the old British tradition of an unwritten constitution and no judicial review of legislation to fully-fledged constitutionalism endorsing judicial review and based on the text of a series of basic laws. At the same time, it is struggling with major questions of identity, in the context of Israel's constitutional vision of 'a Jewish and Democratic' state. Israeli Constitutional Law in the Making offers a comprehensive study of Israeli constitutional law in a systematic manner that moves from constitution-making to specific areas of contestation including state/religion relations, national security, social rights, as well as structural questions of judicial review. It features contributions by leading scholars of Israeli constitutional law, with comparative comments by leading scholars of constitutional law from Europe and the United States.
Constitutional Law in Israel by
Derived from the renowned multi-volume International Encyclopaedia of Laws, this very useful analysis of constitutional law in Israel provides essential information on the country's sources of constitutional law, its form of government, and its administrative structure. Lawyers who handle transnational matters will appreciate the clarifications of particular terminology and its application. Throughout the book, the treatment emphasizes the specific points at which constitutional law affects the interpretation of legal rules and procedure. Thorough coverage by a local expert fully describes the political system, the historical background, the role of treaties, legislation, jurisprudence, and administrative regulations. The discussion of the form and structure of government outlines its legal status, the jurisdiction and workings of the central state organs, the subdivisions of the state, its decentralized authorities, and concepts of citizenship. Special issues include the legal position of aliens, foreign relations, taxing and spending powers, emergency laws, the power of the military, and the constitutional relationship between church and state. Details are presented in such a way that readers who are unfamiliar with specific terms and concepts in varying contexts will fully grasp their meaning and significance. Its succinct yet scholarly nature, as well as the practical quality of the information it provides, make this book a valuable time-saving tool for both practising and academic jurists. Lawyers representing parties with interests in Israel will welcome this guide, and academics and researchers will appreciate its value in the study of comparative constitutional law.
Can Courts Be Bulwarks of Democracy? Judges and the Politics of Prudence by
Liberal concepts of democracy envision courts as key institutions for the promotion and protection of democratic regimes. Yet social science scholarship suggests that courts are fundamentally constrained in ways that undermine their ability to do so. Recognizing these constraints, this book argues that courts can influence regime instability by affecting inter-elite conflict. They do so in three ways: by helping leaders credibly reveal their rationales for policy choices that may appear to violate legal rules; by encouraging leaders to less frequently make decisions that raise concerns about rule violations; and by encouraging the opposition to accept potential rule violations. Courts promote the prudent use of power in each of these approaches. This book evaluates the implications of this argument using a century of global data tracking judicial politics and democratic survival.
Judgment Calls: Principle and Politics in Constitutional Law by
Judgement Calls tackles one of the most important and controversial legal questions in contemporary America: How should judges interpret the Constitution? Our Constitution contains a great deal of language that is vague, broad, or ambiguous, making its meaning uncertain. Many people believe this uncertainty allows judges too much discretion. They suggest that constitutional adjudication is just politics in disguise, and that judges are legislators in robes who read the Constitution in accordance with their own political views. Some think that political decision making by judges is inevitable, and others think it can be restrained by "strict constructionist" theories like textualism or originalism. But at bottom, both sorts of thinkers believe that judging has to be either tightly constrained and inflexible or purely political and unfettered: There is, they argue, no middle ground. Farber and Sherry disagree, and in this book they describe and defend that middle ground. They show how judging can be--and often is--both principled and flexible. In other words, they attempt to reconcile the democratic rule of law with the recognition that judges have discretion. They explain how judicial discretion can be exercised responsibly, describe the existing constraints that guide and cabin such discretion, and suggest improvements. In exploring how constitutional adjudication works in practice (and how it can be made better), Farber and Sherry cover a wide range of topics that are relevant to their thesis and also independently important, including judicial opinion-writing, the use of precedent, the judicial selection process, the structure of the American judiciary, and the nature of legal education. They conclude with a careful look at how the Supreme Court has treated three of the most significant and sensitive constitutional issues: terrorism, abortion, and affirmative action. Timely, trenchant, and carefully argued, Judgment Calls is a welcome addition to the literature on the intersection of constitutional interpretation and American politics.
The People Themselves: Constitutionalism and Judicial Review by
The United States Constitution is the foundational document of the longest and most successful democratic experiment in modern human history. It not only serves as the legal bedrock for the world's most powerful nation-state but also, more broadly, reflects that nation's fundamental commitments as a society.; Who then has the authority to interpret a blueprint of such extraordinary influence? Americans have come to treat the Constitution as somehow beyond the purview, even the competence, of the average American citizen. Only lawyers, judges, and academics are deemed fit to state what exactly the Constitution means. This elitist reliance on expert judgement is a radical and troublesome departure from the founding fathers' intent. America's Founding generation, in darling contrast, embraced a; political ideology that celebrated the central role of the "the people" in supplying government with its energy and direction, an ideal that remained at all times in the forefront of their thinking-Federalist and Anti-Federalist alike.; In this groundbreaking interpretation of America's founding and of its entire system of judicial review, Larry Kramer reveals that the colonists fought for and birthed a very different system - and held a very different understanding of citizenship - than Americans believe to be the norm today. "Popular sovreignty" was no historical abstraction nor was the notion of "the people" invoked largely as a flip rhetorical convenience on the campaign trail. Important trials and the prospective passage; of the influentional legislation such as the Alien Act - which granted a president the power to imprison or even deport immigrants - were met with vigorous public debate. The outcomes were greeted with celebratory feasts and bonfires, or riotous resistance. In short, Americans drew a clear parallel; between the law and the lived reality of their daily existence. Theis self-sovreignty in law as much as politics was active not abstract.; With this book, Larry Kramer vaults to the forefront of Constitutional interpretation. In the process, he rekindles the original spark of "we the people," inviting every citizen to join him in enlivening the seemingly deadened sensibilities that mark the relationship between Americans and their constitutional past, present, and future.
Political Constitutionalism: A Republican Defence of the Constitutionality of Democracy by
Judicial review by constitutional courts is often presented as a necessary supplement to democracy. This book questions its effectiveness and legitimacy. Drawing on the republican tradition, Richard Bellamy argues that the democratic mechanisms of open elections between competing parties and decision-making by majority rule offer superior and sufficient methods for upholding rights and the rule of law. The absence of popular accountability renders judicial review a form of arbitrary rule which lacks the incentive structure democracy provides to ensure rulers treat the ruled with equal concern and respect. Rights based judicial review undermines the constitutionality of democracy. Its counter-majoritarian bias promotes privileged against unprivileged minorities, while its legalism and focus on individual cases distort public debate. Rather than constraining democracy with written constitutions and greater judicial oversight, attention should be paid to improving democratic processes through such measures as reformed electoral systems and enhanced parliamentary scrutiny.
Non-Statutory Executive Powers and Judicial Review by
That non-statutory executive powers are subject to judicial review is beyond doubt. But current judicial practice challenges prevailing theories of judicial review and raises a host of questions about the nature of official power and action. This is particularly the case for official powers not associated with the Royal Prerogative, which have been argued to comprise a "third source" of governmental authority. Looking at non-statutory powers directly, rather than incidentally, stirs up the intense but ultimately inconclusive debate about the conceptual basis of judicial review in English law. This provocative book argues that modern judges and scholars have neglected the very concepts necessary to understand the supervisory jurisdiction and that the law has become more complex than it needs to be. If we start from the concept of office and official action, rather than grand ideas about parliamentary sovereignty and the courts, the central questions answer themselves.
Legal Culture, Legality and the Determination of the Grounds of Judicial Review of Administrative Action in England and Australia by
This book presents a navigating framework of legal culture and legality to facilitate a comprehensive understanding of the English and Australian determination of the grounds of judicial review. This book facilitates tangible process of how and why jurisdictional error, jurisdictional fact, proportionality and substantive legitimate expectations are debatable in English law, while they are either completely rejected or firmly entrenched in Australian law. This book argues that these differences are not just random. Legality is not just a fig-leaf, but is profoundly rooted in legal systems' legal culture; hence, it dictates the way in which courts empower, justify, constrain or limit the scope of judicial review. This book presents evidence that courts differ in legal systems and apply diverse ways to determine the scope of judicial review based on their deep understanding of legality, which is embedded in the legal culture of their legal system. This book uses comparative methodology and develops this framework between English and Australian law. Although obvious and important, this book presents a kind of examination that has never been undertaken in this depth and detail before.
Judicial Law-Making in European Constitutional Courts by
This book analyses the specificity of the law-making activity of European constitutional courts. The main hypothesis is that currently constitutional courts are positive legislators whose position in the system of State organs needs to be redefined. The book covers the analysis of the law-making activity of four constitutional courts in Western countries: Germany, Italy, Spain, and France; and six constitutional courts in Central-East European countries: Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovak Republic, Latvia, and Bulgaria; as well as two international courts: the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The work thus identifies the mutual interactions between national constitutional courts and international tribunals in terms of their law-making activity. The chosen countries include constitutional courts which have been recently captured by populist governments and subordinated to political powers. Therefore, one of the purposes of the book is to identify the change in the law-making activity of those courts and to compare it with the activity of constitutional courts from countries in which democracy is not viewed as being under threat. Written by national experts, each chapter addresses a series of set questions allowing accessible and meaningful comparison. The book will be a valuable resource for students, academics, and policy-makers working in the areas of constitutional law and politics.
EU Constitutional Law by
This title is a comprehensive textbook of EU constitutional law, setting out the structure, values, procedures, and policies of the European Union. It is a first point of reference for issues of EU constitutional law. The book encompasses six major parts. The first part addresses the formation history of the European Union, the treaties, the accessions, and the withdrawal of the United Kingdom. The second part covers the competences of the European Union. It contains an extensive analysis of the key constitutional principles governing the exercise of competences by the Union and the balance of power between the Union and its Member States, followed by an in-depth anaylsis of EU citizenship and the four freedoms, followed by an overview of the main internal and external policy domains. The third part addresses the role and workings of the various institutions (European Council, Council, European Parliament, Commission, European Court of Justice, and European Central Bank), the position of the Member States of the Union, and various other institutional matters. Part four explores the various decision-making processes, addressing not only the legislative and executive decision-making, but also the budget, CFSP, and external action. The fifth part looks at the legal instruments and the position of EU law in the EU and national legal orders, with an attention to the key principles of primary and direct effect, and the role of fundamental rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The final part sets out the complete and coherent system of judicial protection in the European Union, offering an overview of the various courses of action before the EU courts and in the national legal orders to enforce EU law or to obtain judicial protection.
Judicial Review of Administrative Action Across the Common Law World: Origins and Adaptation by
Research on comparative administrative law, in contrast to comparative constitutional law, remains largely underdeveloped. This book plugs that gap. It considers how a wide range of common law systems have received and adapted English common law to the needs of their own socio-political context. Readers will be given complex insights into a wide range of common law systems of administrative law, which they may not otherwise have access to given how difficult it would be to research all of the systems covered in the volume single-handedly. The book covers Scotland, Ireland, the USA, Canada, Israel, South Africa, Kenya, Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong SAR, India, Bangladesh, Australia and New Zealand. Comparative public lawyers will have a much greater range of common law models of administrative law - either to pursue conversations about their own common law system or to sophisticate their comparison of their system (civil law or otherwise) with common law systems.
Comparative Judicial Review by
Constitutional courts around the world play an increasingly central role in day-to-day democratic governance. Yet scholars have only recently begun to develop the interdisciplinary analysis needed to understand this shift in the relationship of constitutional law to politics. This edited volume brings together leading scholars of constitutional law and politics to provide a comprehensive overview of judicial review, covering theories of its creation, mechanisms of its constraint, and its comparative applications, including theories of interpretation and doctrinal developments. This book serves as a single point of entry for legal scholars and practitioners interested in understanding the field of comparative judicial review in its broader political and social context. This book's comparative and interdisciplinary accounts of a phenomenon of worldwide significance and its advanced introduction to the origins, functions, and contours of judicial review make it both accessible and indispensable. Comparative Judicial Reviewshould be considered essential reading for every graduate student, early career scholar, and constitutional law professor seeking to become more comparative in their approach. Contributors include: K.J. Alter, S.G. Calabresi, W.-C. Chang, E.F. Delaney, R. Dixon, L, Esptein, T. Ginsburg, J. Greene, A. Harel, R. Hirschl, S. Issacharoff, V. Jackson, T. Jacobi, R.A. Kagan, D. Kapiszewski, J. Knight, D. Landau, Y.-L. Lee, H. Lerner, S. Mittal, T. Roux, W. Sadurski, A. Shinar, G. Silverstein, K. Stilt, Y. Tew, M. Versteeg, S. Waheedi, B.R. Weingast, E. Zackin
Proportionality and Judicial Activism: Fundamental Rights Adjudication in Canada, Germany and South Africa by
The principle of proportionality is currently one of the most discussed topics in the field of comparative constitutional law. Many critics claim that courts use the proportionality test as an instrument of judicial self-empowerment. Proportionality and Judicial Activism tests this hypothesis empirically; it systematically and comparatively analyses the fundamental rights jurisprudence of the Canadian Supreme Court, the German Federal Constitutional Court and the South African Constitutional Court. The book shows that the proportionality test does give judges a considerable amount of discretion. However, this analytical openness does not necessarily lead to judicial activism. Instead, judges are faced with significant institutional constraints, as a result of which all three examined courts refrain from using proportionality for purposes of judicial activism.
Judicial Independence: Cornerstone of Democracy by
This book is an academic continuation of the previous five volumes on judicial independence edited by Shimon Shetreet, with others: Jules Deschenes, Christopher Forsyth, Wayne McCormack, Hiram E. Chodosh and Eric Helland, all books were published by Brill Nijhoff: Judicial Independence: The Contemporary Debate (1985), The Culture of Judicial Independence: Conceptual Foundations and Practical Challenges (2012), The Culture of Judicial Independence: Rule of Law and World Peace (2014), The Culture of Judicial Independence in a Globalised World (2016), Challenged Justice: In Pursuit of Judicial Independence (2021). This volume offers studies by distinguished scholars and judges from different jurisdictions on numerous dimensions regarding the essential role of judicial independence in democracy. It includes analyses of basic constitutional principles and contemporary issues of judicial independence and judicial process in many jurisdictions and analyses of international standards of judicial independence and judicial ethics.
נתן פערלמאן סעיף ההתגברות בחוקה הקנדית והכרזה על "אי-התאמה" של חוקים בבריטניה (כנסת, מרכז מחקר ומידע 2019).
עדי כהן אהרונוב ביקורת שיפוטית על חוקתיות החוק (כנסת, מרכז מחקר ומידע 2023).
מעודכן ל: 11.12.2024
כל האזכורים של מקורות יש לאזכר לפי כללי האזכור האחיד והבלובוק. סרטוני הדרכה על אזכור חקיקה ופסיקה.
|
