The Collaborative Constitution

Argues that protecting rights in a democracy is a collaborative constitutional enterprise between all three branches of government.

This book departs from the 'statist' imagination by suggesting the EU is a federal union of states, or a federation. Dedicated to the constitutional theory of federalism, this book gives the strengths and weaknesses of a federation as a political form, its histories, and current perils for the EU.

Using a theoretical and comparative perspective, Aileen Kavanagh argues that protecting rights in a constitutional democracy is a collaborative enterprise between all three branches of government: the Executive, legislature, and courts. With examples from multiple jurisdictions, this book documents the dynamics of collaborative constitutionalism.

This book develops an analytical legal framework for determining the substantive fundamental rights obligations of corporations.

Policy Change, Courts, and the Canadian Constitution aims to further our understanding of judicial policy impact and the role of the courts in shaping policy change. Bringing together a group of political scientists and legal scholars, this volume delves into a diverse set of policy areas, including health care issues, the regulation of elections, criminal justice policy, minority language education, citizenship, refugee policy, human rights legislation, and Indigenous policy. While much of the public law and judicial politics literatures focus on the impact of the constitution and the judicial role, scholarship on courts that makes policy change its central lens of analysis is surprisingly rare. Multidisciplinary in its approach to examining policy issues, this book focuses on specific cases or policy issues through a wide-ranging set of approaches, including the use of interview data, policy analysis, historical and interpretive analysis, and jurisprudential analysis.

Prompted by the events following the 2016 referendum on EU membership and written during the COVID-19 pandemic by one of the leading public lawyers of our day, this book considers two key constitutional principles, the rule of law and separation of powers, by examining the generality, certainty and predictability of law, relations between the different branches of the state, and the mechanisms of accountability within our democracy. Since the referendum and in the light of the restrictions imposed to deal with the pandemic, and the use of guidelines presented as rules to do so, attention has refocused on the relationship and respective powers and competences of the three branches of the state, the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. They have also placed strains on our unwritten constitution that have been unknown in modern times. The role of the courts and of the rule of law, has been dramatically illustrated by recent litigation, most notably the decisions on whether legislation was needed to serve notice of the UK's intention to leave the EU and whether the prorogation of the Westminster Parliament in 2019 was a matter for the courts as opposed to a political question for government. Set against this backdrop, the book answers the following questions: - How accessible is the law and how does it avoid arbitrariness? - How is access to justice protected? - How does our constitution reflect the separation of powers and the balance of responsibilities between law and politics? - How does our democracy enable majorities and protect minorities?

This collection of essays analyses how diversity in human identity and disadvantage affects the articulation, realisation, violation and enforcement of human rights. The question arises from the realisation that people, who are severally and severely disadvantaged because of their race, religion, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation, class etc, often find themselves at the margins of human rights; their condition seldom improved and sometimes even worsened by the rights discourse. How does one make sense of this relationship between the complexity of people's disadvantage and violation of their human rights? Does the human rights discourse, based on its universal and common values, have tools, methods or theories to capture and respond to the difference in people's lived experience of rights? Can intersectionality help in that quest? This book seeks to inaugurate this line of inquiry.

The Daily Plebiscite offers a multi-faceted analysis of Canada's national unity crisis from the perspective of someone who lived through it all.