Judging Under a Bill of Rights
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2009/v12i3a2732Abstract
We are pleased to publish here, as an oratio, the Ebsworth Memorial Lecture delivered by Mr Justice Louis Harms in February 2007. In his lecture he addressed a range of contentious issues regarding the challenges of judging under a (new) Bill of Rights and he inter alia raises, "without answering, the question of whether a bill of rights should reflect existing societal values or whether it should create them." He also spoke candidly of judicial activism, verbosity emanating from the bench, the judiciary and the separation of powers and (in-)consistency in constitutional adjudication. Among his conclusions he states that a Bill of Rights "is supposed to remove arbitrariness, not only of legislation but also of adjudication."
Downloads
References
Bibliography
Barker 2005 ALJ
Barker I "Judicial Activism in Australia: A perspective" 2005 79 Australian Law Journal 783-794
Grayling The Heart of Things
Grayling AC The Heart of Things (Orion London 2006)
Hayek The Road to Serfdom
FA Hayek The Road to Serfdom (Routledge London 1944)
Megarry 1980 Austr LJ
Megarry R "Temptations of the Bench" 1980 Australian Law Journal 61-67
Orwell Politics and the English Language
Orwell G Politics and the English Language (Horizon London 1946)
Posner 2005 Harv LR
Posner R "A Political Court" 2005 (119) Harvard Law Review 31-102
Venter 2005 ZaöRV
Venter F "The Politics of Constitutional Adjudication" 2005 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 129-166
Vila-Matas Bartleby & Co
Vila-Matas E Bartleby & Co (New Directions Barcelona 2004)
Register of legislation
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 200 of 1993
Register of court cases
A v Home Secretary [2005] 2 AC 68 par [41]
Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl [2006] UKHL 44
K v Minister of Safety and Security 2005 (3) SA 179 (SCA); 2005 (9) BCLR 835 (CC)
Merck & Co Inc v Generics (UK) Ltd [2003] EWHC 2842 (Pat)
Phoebus Apollo Aviation CC v Minister of Safety and Security 2002 (5) SA 475 (SCA); 2003 (2) SA 34 (CC)
Rail Commuters Action Group v Transnet t/a Metrorail 2005 (2) SA 359 (CC) Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd [1999] UKHL 45
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 Louis TC Harms
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.