Is the Commonwealth's Approach to Rights Constitutionalism Exportable?

(2019) 17 International Journal of Constitutional Law 884–903.

U of Melbourne Legal Studies Research Paper No. 771

18 Pages Posted: 12 Feb 2018 Last revised: 15 Sep 2020

See all articles by Scott Stephenson

Scott Stephenson

University of Melbourne - Law School

Date Written: February 2, 2018

Abstract

This paper considers whether the Commonwealth’s approach to rights constitutionalism, associated with the bills of rights adopted in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK, might be suitable for other jurisdictions around the world. It argues that three questions are particularly relevant to evaluating the strength of the normative case for the Commonwealth’s approach. First, what is the nature of the disagreements about rights in a jurisdiction? Second, what options do institutions have to challenge the determinations on rights of other institutions? Third, what are the other objectives of the constitutional system? The paper considers how the answers to these questions yield insights into the circumstances in which the Commonwealth’s approach may prove to be more attractive or unattractive. In particular, it suggests that the normative case for the Commonwealth’s approach may be weaker in dominant party systems.

Keywords: comparative constitutional law, bills of rights, judicial review, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom

Suggested Citation

Stephenson, Scott, Is the Commonwealth's Approach to Rights Constitutionalism Exportable? (February 2, 2018). (2019) 17 International Journal of Constitutional Law 884–903., U of Melbourne Legal Studies Research Paper No. 771, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3122412

Scott Stephenson (Contact Author)

University of Melbourne - Law School ( email )

University Square
185 Pelham Street, Carlton
Victoria, Victoria 3010
Australia

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
57
Abstract Views
438
Rank
780,630
PlumX Metrics