Download Free The Doctrine Of Conventionality Control Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online The Doctrine Of Conventionality Control and write the review.

This book studies the doctrine of conventionality control in the Inter-American Human Rights System. It appeals to the principle of subsidiarity as a theoretical key to solve some of the inherent tensions of a doctrine that aims to increase the effectiveness of the American Convention on Human Rights and the decisions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in a plurality of constitutional systems and traditions in the region.
This ground-breaking collection of essays outlines and explains the unique development of Latin American jurisprudence. It introduces the idea of the Ius Constitutionale Commune en América Latina (ICCAL), an original Latin American path of transformative constitutionalism, to an Anglophone audience for the first time. It charts the key developments that have transformed the region and assesses the success of the constitutional projects that followed a period of authoritarian regimes in Latin America. Coined by scholars who have been documenting, conceptualizing, and comparing the development of Latin American public law for more than a decade, the term ICCAL encompasses themes that cross national borders and legal fields, taking in constitutional law, administrative law, general public international law, regional integration law, human rights, and investment law. Not only does this volume map the legal landscape, it also suggests measures to improve society via due legal process and a rights-based, supranational and regionally rooted constitutionalism. The editors contend that with the strengthening of democracy, the rule of law, and human rights, common problems such as the exclusion of wide sectors of the population from having a say in government, as well as corruption, hyper-presidentialism, and the weak normativity of the law can be combatted more effectively in future.
Drawing on the case law of the Court, this volume analyses crucial developments over the years on both procedural and substantive issues before the Inter-American Court.
At the time of the adoption of the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man in 1948, there was little indication that the Declaration would ultimately yield a highly institutionalized system comprised of a quasi-judicial Inter-American Commission and an authoritative Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Today, however, the Inter-American Human Rights System (IAHRS) has emerged as a central actor in the global human rights regime. This comprehensive volume explores the institutional changes and transformations that the IAHRS has undergone since its creation, offering contributions and insights from a variety of disciplines including history, law, and political science. The book shows how institutional change has affected and been affected by the System’s normative leanings, rules of procedure and institutional design, as well as by the position of the IAHRS within the broader landscape of the Americas. The authors examine institutional change from a variety of angles, including the process of change in historical context, normative and legal developments, and the dynamic relationship between the IAHRS and other regional and international human rights institutions. This book was originally published as a special issue of The International Journal of Human Rights.
The margin of appreciation is a judicial doctrine whereby international courts allow states to have a measure of diversity in their interpretation of human rights treaty obligations. The doctrine is at the heart of some of the most important international human rights decisions. Does it undermine the universality of human rights? How should judges decide whether to give this margin of appreciation to states? How can lawyers make best use of arguments for or against the margin of appreciation? This book answers these questions, and broadens the discussion on the margin of appreciation by including material beyond the ECHR system. It provides a comprehensive justification of the doctrine, and ALLFSCA14I the key cases affecting the doctrine in practice. Part One provides a systematic defence of the margin of appreciation doctrine in international human rights law. Drawing on the philosophy of practical reasoning the book argues that the margin of appreciation is a doctrine of judicial deference and is a common and appropriate feature of adjudication. The book argues that the margin of appreciation doctrine prevents courts from imposing unhelpful uniformity, whilst allowing decisions to be consistent with the universality of human rights. Part Two considers the key case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the UN Human Rights Committee, documenting the margin of appreciation in practice. The analysis uniquely takes a broad look at the factors affecting the margin of appreciation. Part Three explores how the margin of appreciation operates in the judicial decision-making process, reconceptualising the proportionality assessment and explaining how the nature of the right and the type of case affect the courts' reasoning.
The book proposes an informational theory of constitutional review highlighting the mediator role of constitutional courts in democratic conflict solving.
This book presents a searching critique of excessive reliance on courts as 'democracy-builders' in states emerging from authoritarian rule.
This book is a compilation of twenty essays prepared for the occasion of the XIII Academic Conference of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Colombia, held in Bogota in January 2019. Gathering some of the most prominent authors in constitutionalism and legal theory, the chapters critically examine classical debates, such as the role of judicial review in a democracy, the enforcement of socio-economic rights, the doctrine of unconstitutional amendments, the use of international and foreign precedents by national Courts, and the theory of transitional justice. The book opens a dialogue between philosophers and empirical researchers, building bridges between 'Global North' and 'Global South' approaches to constitutionalism. As such, it is an invitation to reengage with the classical debates on constitutionalism whilst also providing fresh insights into the future of this discipline.
This book describes and analyzes the structure, procedure, practice and emerging jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The form and functions of the Court are considered in the context of the Inter-American system as a whole, and the development of its contentious and advisory jurisdictions is discussed in detail. Particular attention is devoted to the Court's present contribution to the corpus of international human rights law, in which parallels are drawn with other analogous institutions where appropriate. Finally, an attempt is made to identify the ideological assumptions which influence the Court's emerging jurisprudence and an assessment is made of the Court's future prospects. While the structure of the court and its jurisprudence lie broadly within traditional concepts of international human rights law, there are certain distinctive features which emanate from the geo-political and socio-economic context within which the Court functions. These factors are considered as an integral part of the work.
Lawmaking is – paradigmatically – a type of speech act: people make law by saying things. It is natural to think, therefore, that the content of the law is determined by what lawmakers communicate. However, what they communicate is sometimes vague and, even when it is clear, the content itself is sometimes vague. This monograph examines the nature and consequences of these two linguistic sources of indeterminacy in the law. The aim is to give plausible answers to three related questions: In virtue of what is the law vague? What might be good about vague law? How should courts resolve cases of vagueness? It argues that vagueness in the law is sometimes a good thing, although its value should not be overestimated. It also proposes a strategy for resolving borderline cases, arguing that textualism and intentionalism – two leading theories of legal interpretation – often complement rather than compete with each other.