Proportionality in Action: Comparative and Empirical Perspectives on the Judicial Practice PDF
Preview Proportionality in Action: Comparative and Empirical Perspectives on the Judicial Practice
PROPORTIONALITY IN ACTION ProportionalityinActionpresentsanempiricalandcomparativeexploration oftheproportionalitydoctrine,basedondetailedaccountsoftheapplication oftheframeworkbyapexcourtsinsixjurisdictions:Germany,Canada,South Africa,Israel,Poland,andIndia.Theanalysisofeachcountryiswrittenand contextualizedbyaconstitutionalscholarfromtherelevantjurisdiction.Each countryanalysisdrawsuponalargesampleofcaselawandemploysamixed methodologicalapproach:anexpansivecodingschemeallowsforquantita- tiveanalysisprovidingcomparableandquantifiablemeasurements,whichis enrichedbyqualitativeanalysisthatengageswiththesubstanceofthedeci- sionsand capturesnuance, contextualizing the data and providing it with meaning.Thebookconcludeswithacomparativechapterthatsynthesizes someofthemostinterestingfindings.Focusingondeviationsofthepractice of proportionality from theory, the authors conclude their argument in supportofanintegratedapproachtotheapplicationofproportionality. isProfessorEmeritusoftheFacultyofLawat theHebrewUniversityofJerusalemandseniorfellowattheIsraelDemocracy Institute.HewasformerlyDeanoftheLawSchool,VicePresidentforResearch attheIsraelDemocracyInstituteandPresidentoftheIsraeliPressCouncil.He isaleadingIsraeliexpertoncriminalandconstitutionallaw,havingheaded severalgovernmentalcommittees,includingexaminationoftheuseofforceby thepolice,civiceducation,andreformoftheIsraeliCriminalCode. is a PhD candidate at the Hebrew University Law School. She holds an LLM from Harvard Law School and an LLB from theHebrewUniversityofJerusalemandisadmittedtotheIsraeliBar.She clerkedattheIsraeliSupremeCourt,andhasmanagedthe‘Proportion- alityinPublicPolicyProject'attheIsraelDemocracyInstitute,asix-year ERC-fundedprojectfocusingonthebalancingbetweenrightsandpublic interestsinthepolicyprocessfromacomparativeandempiricalperspec- tive.Shehaspreviously publishedonthetopicofnon-discriminationin employmentandequalitycommissions. isaSeniorResearcherattheChairforPublicLaw,Euro- peanLawandInternationalEconomicLawoftheMartin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg,Germany,andformerresearchfellowattheIsraelDem- ocracyInstitute.HeholdsaPhDfromFreieUniversitätBerlin,anLLMfrom NewYorkUniversitySchoolofLaw,andisadmittedtotheBarinBerlinand inNewYork.HewasavisitingscholaratYaleLawSchoolandatHarvard LawSchoolandhasauthoredanumberofarticlesonconstitutionallaw. CAMBRIDGE STUDIES IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Theaimofthisseriesistoproduceleadingmonographsinconstitutional law.Allareasofconstitutionallawandpubliclawfallwithintheambitof the series, including human rights and civil liberties law, administrative law,aswellasconstitutionaltheoryandthehistoryofconstitutionallaw. Awidevarietyofscholarlyapproachesisencouraged,withthegoverning criterion being simply that the work is of interest to an international audience. Thus, works concerned with only one jurisdiction will be included in the series as appropriate, while, at the same time, the series will include works which are explicitly comparative or theoretical – or both. The series editor likewise welcomes proposals that work at the intersectionofconstitutionalandinternationallaw,orthatseektobridge thegapsbetweencivillawsystems,theUS,andthecommonlawjurisdic- tionsoftheCommonwealth. SeriesEditors DavidDyzenhaus ProfessorofLawandPhilosophy,UniversityofToronto,Canada ThomasPoole ProfessorofLaw,LondonSchoolofEconomicsandPoliticalScience EditorialAdvisoryBoard T.R.S.Allan,Cambridge,UK DamianChalmers,LSE,UK SujitChoudhry,Berkeley,USA MonicaClaes,Maastricht,Netherlands DavidCole,Georgetown,USA K.D.Ewing,King’sCollegeLondon,UK DavidFeldman,Cambridge,UK CoraHoexter,Witwatersrand,SouthAfrica ChristophMoellers,Humboldt,GermanyAdrienneStone, Melbourne,Australia AdamTomkins,Glasgow,UK AdrianVermeule,Harvard,USA BooksintheSeries ProportionalityinAction:ComparativeandEmpiricalPerspectivesonthe JudicialPracticeEditedbyMordechaiKremnitzer,TalyaSteinerand AndrejLang ConstitutionalDialogue:Democracy,Rights,InstitutionsEditedby GeoffreySigalet,GrégoireWebberandRosalindDixon TheVeiledSceptre:ReservePowersofHeadsofStateinWestminster SystemsAnneTwomey VigilanceandRestraintintheCommonLawofJudicialReviewDean Knight TheAlchemists:QuestioningOurFaithinCourtsasDemocracy-Builders TomGeraldDaly Australia’sConstitutionafterWhitlamBrendanLim BuildingtheConstitution:ThePracticeofConstitutionalInterpretationin post-apartheidSouthAfricaJamesFowkes DimensionsofDignity:TheTheoryandPracticeofModernConstitutional LawJacobWeinrib ReasonofState:Law,Prerogative,EmpireThomasPoole BillsofRightsintheCommonLawRobertLeckey TheGuardianoftheConstitution:HansKelsenandCarlSchmittonthe LimitsofConstitutionalLawTranslatedbyLarsVinx,withan introductionandnotesbyLarsVinx ParliamentaryBillsofRights:TheExperiencesofNewZealandandthe UnitedKingdomExperiencesJanetL.HiebertandJamesB.Kelly LawyeringfortheRuleofLaw:GovernmentLawyersandtheRiseof JudicialPowerinIsraelYoavDotan BalancingConstitutionalRights:TheOriginsandMeaningsofPostwar LegalDiscourseJaccoBomhoff JudgesonTrial:TheIndependenceandAccountabilityoftheEnglish JudiciaryShimonShetreetandSophieTurenne ProportionalityandConstitutionalCultureMosheCohen-EliyaandIddo Porat ThePoliticsofPrinciple:TheFirstSouthAfricanConstitutionalCourt, 1995–2005TheunisRoux TheNewCommonwealthModelofConstitutionalism:TheoryandPractice StephenGardbaum SearchingfortheStateinBritishLegalThought:CompetingConceptionsof thePublicSphereJanetMcLean JudgingSocialRightsJeffKing Proportionality:ConstitutionalRightsandtheirLimitationsAharonBarak ParliamentarySovereignty:ContemporaryDebatesJeffreyGoldsworthy PROPORTIONALITY IN ACTION Comparative and Empirical Perspectives on the Judicial Practice Edited by MORDECHAI KREMNITZER TheIsraelDemocracyInstitute TALYA STEINER HebrewUniversityofJerusalemandTheIsraelDemocracyInstitute ANDREJ LANG Martin-Luther-UniversityHalle-WittenbergandTheIsraelDemocracyInstitute UniversityPrintingHouse,CambridgeCB28BS,UnitedKingdom OneLibertyPlaza,20thFloor,NewYork,NY10006,USA 477WilliamstownRoad,PortMelbourne,VIC3207,Australia 314–321,3rdFloor,Plot3,SplendorForum,JasolaDistrictCentre,NewDelhi–110025,India 79AnsonRoad,#06–04/06,Singapore079906 CambridgeUniversityPressispartoftheUniversityofCambridge. ItfurtherstheUniversity’smissionbydisseminatingknowledgeinthepursuitof education,learning,andresearchatthehighestinternationallevelsofexcellence. www.cambridge.org Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9781108497589 DOI:10.1017/9781108596268 ©CambridgeUniversityPress2020 Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements, noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress. Firstpublished2020 PrintedintheUnitedKingdombyTJInternationalLtd,PadstowCornwall AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary. LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData Names:Kremnitzer,M.,editor.|Steiner,Talya,editor.|Lang,Andrej,editor. Title:Proportionalityinaction:comparativeandempiricalperspectivesonthejudicial practice/[editedby]MordechaiKremnitzer,TalyaSteiner,AndrejLang. Description:1.|NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,2020.|Includesbibliographical referencesandindex. Identifiers:LCCN2019038868(print)|LCCN2019038869(ebook)|ISBN9781108497589 (hardback)|ISBN9781108740166(paperback)|ISBN9781108596268(epub) Subjects:LCSH:Proportionalityinlaw. Classification:LCCK247.P76252020(print)|LCCK247(ebook)|DDC342/.0011–dc23 LCrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2019038868 LCebookrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2019038869 ISBN978-1-108-49758-9Hardback CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceoraccuracy ofURLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredtointhispublication anddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuchwebsitesis,orwillremain, accurateorappropriate. CONTENTS List of Figures x List of Tables xii List of Contributors xiii Preface xv Table of Cases xvii Introduction: Analysing Proportionality Comparatively and Empirically 1 , , I ScholarshiponProportionality:StrandsandDevelopment 4 II TheGoalsofThisBook 12 III MethodologyandResearchDesign 14 1 Proportionality Analysis by the German Federal Constitutional Court 22 I Introduction 22 II LegalandInstitutionalContext 26 III StructureofLimitationAnalysis 35 IV LimitationofaFundamentalRight 48 V WorthyPurpose 60 VI Suitability 77 VII Necessity 89 VIII StrictProportionality 103 IX OverviewoftheMeansStruckDown 129 2 Proportionality Analysis by the Canadian Supreme Court 134 I Introduction 134 II LegalandInstitutionalContext 136 III StructureofLimitationAnalysis 143 vii viii IV LimitationofaConstitutionalRight 157 V WorthyPurpose 162 VI SuitabilityorRationalConnection 172 VII NecessityorMinimalImpairment 177 VIII Balancing 185 3 Proportionality Analysis by the South African Constitutional Court 193 I Introduction 193 II LegalandInstitutionalContext 197 III StructureofLimitationAnalysis 206 IV LimitationofaConstitutionalRight 231 V WorthyPurpose 240 VI SuitabilityorRationalConnection 252 VII NecessityorLessRestrictingMeans 261 VIII BalancingorStrictProportionality 268 IX OverviewoftheMeansStruckDown 280 4 ProportionalityAnalysisbytheIsraeliSupremeCourt 285 I Introduction 285 II LegalandInstitutionalContext 289 III StructureofLimitationAnalysisinIsrael 294 IV LimitationofaConstitutionalRight 311 V WorthyPurpose 318 VI SuitabilityorRationalConnection 337 VII NecessityorLess-RestrictingMeans 347 VIII ProportionalityintheStrictSense 365 IX OverviewoftheMeansStruckDown 382 5 Proportionality Analysis by the Polish Constitutional Tribunal 385 śŃ- I Introduction 385 II LegalandInstitutionalContext 387 III StructureofLimitationAnalysis 397 IV LimitationofaConstitutionalRightorFreedom 408 V StatutoryReservationRequirement 414 VI LegitimateAim 419
The list of books you might like
