Search
Generic filters
03 March 2021

A Paean to Judicial (Self) Restraint

The UK Supreme Court Shamima Begum decision is widely reported to be a win for former home secretary Sajid Javid who had stripped Begum of her citizenship. Yet, is it really a vindication of this action? The decision of the Supreme Court is not based on a factual assessment of Begum’s case but only on whether she has to be given permission to return to the UK to participate in an effective and fair manner in the immigration appeal. A limited decision, and by no means a final adjudication on Begum’s deprivation of citizenship case. Continue reading >>
0
08 April 2020
,

Constitutional Crisis in Israel: Coronavirus, Interbranch Conflict, and Dynamic Judicial Review

The Covid-19 pandemic hit Israel in fragile political and constitutional times. After three consecutive national elections and during unprecedented and continuous constitutional crisis, it has deepened an interbranch conflict that has led to the High Court of Justice (HCJ) taking part, in real time, in a dynamic judicial review. The HCJ not only facilitated the functioning of the parliament but also expedited its oversight on the government’s use of emergency powers. Continue reading >>
0
23 November 2019

The Battle for Jurisdiction over Hong Kong

Beijing's reaction to the Hong Kong High Court's judgment regarding the constitutionality of the face-mask ban is eerily similar of the approach taken by the German Reichskommissar against the Norwegian Supreme Court during the German occupation of Norway in 1940. Continue reading >>
15 November 2019

Right-Wing Crits

In which I take issue with the Judicial Power Project. Continue reading >>
24 October 2019

Between Legislative Defiance and Legal Security

In Portugal, a recent decision of the Constitutional Court rejected another legislative attempt to implement a successful system of surrogacy. For the first time in its 26-year history, the Court faced legislative defiance of its previous case law, but asserted its role as the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution with arguments of “legal security” which provided the formal ground to escape the conflict between branches. Continue reading >>
0
11 October 2019

Creating a Safe Venue of Judicial Review

On 24 September 2019, Advocate General Tanchev delivered his opinion in joined cases C-558/18 and C-563/18. It is his latest involvement in a series of cases which concern the rule of law in Poland and which is questionable from a legal as well as factual standpoint. Continue reading >>
0
04 March 2019

Crossing the Baltic Rubicon

Last week, a constitutional moment took place in the European Union. In a rather technical area of law, the Statute of the European System of Central Banks, the Court of Justice ruled for the first time in a case that ensued in the annulment of a decision of a Member State. The Court did not declare that a Member State had failed to fulfill its obligations under EU Law. What the Court did was much more ambitious. Continue reading >>
0
24 April 2018

Gerrymandering and Judicial Review in Malaysia

On 28 March, the Malaysian Parliament passed new electoral maps. The re-delineated boundaries create an imbalance in constituencies, prompting allegations of mal-apportionment and gerrymandering. They remain largely unchallenged, not only through ouster clauses in particularized elections legislation, but also through the unwillingness of the judiciary to recognize the importance of the constitutional question relating to fair and equitable electoral management. Continue reading >>
24 April 2017

The Spanish Constitutional Court on the Path of Self-Destruction

Recently, the Spanish Constitutional Court has published one more decision in application of the new reform of the Law on Constitutional Court which increased its powers for the execution of its own decisions. It is clear that Catalonian sovereignist politicians are acting irresponsibly and provoking the Spanish powers. The only good way to answer to this challenge is a balanced and neutral response of the Constitutional Court every time they adopt an illegal act. Instead, the Court assumed a political role. He tries to stop even any talk about independence. By doing so, it fails to respect its own role as keeper of a Constitutional framework where very diverse ideologies can be discussed. Continue reading >>
03 January 2017

Living under the unconstitutional capture and hoping for the constitutional recapture

After the unconstitutional capture of the Constitutional Tribunal in Poland, ordinary courts will have to step in to provide constitutional review. Polish judges are faced with the most fundamental challenge since 1989. Are they ready to be constitutional judges in times of constitutional emergency? Continue reading >>
0
Go to Top