| Description |
1 online resource |
| Physical Medium |
polychrome |
| Description |
text file |
| Note |
"This collection emerged from a workshop held in Durham Human Rights Centre in June 2013, which was supported by a small grant from the British Academy and Leverhulme and by the Laureate Fellowship: Anti-Terror Laws and the Democratic Challenge Project in the Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law, UNSW. There was a follow up symposium hosted by the NSW Bar Association in Sydney in November 2013"--CIP galley |
| Summary |
"Is judicial review an effective and appropriate way to regulate counter-terrorism measures? Some argue that the judiciary is ill-equipped to examine such measures, for instance because they lack the expertise of the institutions which bring them about under exigent conditions. Others claim that subjecting counter-terrorism measures to judicial review is crucial for maintaining a jurisdiction's principles of constitutionalism. This volume brings together voices from all sides of the debate from a broad range of jurisdictions, from North America, Europe and Australasia. It does not attempt to 'resolve' the argument but rather to explore it in all its dimensions. The debates are essentially concerned with fundamental questions of organising and making accountable the exercise of power in a particularly challenging environment. The book is necessary reading for all those concerned with counter-terrorism, but also with broader public law, constitutional law and administrative law principles"-- Provided by publisher |
| Contents |
Cover; Half-title; Title page; Copyright information; Table of contents; Contributors; Acknowledgements; Introduction: Counter-terrorism judicial review: beyond dichotomies; Part I Judging counter-terrorism judicial review; 1 Counter-terrorism judicial review as regulatory constitutionalism; I The cases; (a) Khadr; (b) Munaf; (c) Rahmatullah; II Judicial Technique of Internal/External Construction; III Regulatory constitutionalism and the apparent self-imposed limitation on judicial muscularity; Conclusion; 2 Counter-terrorism judicial review by a traditionally weak judiciary; Introduction. |
|
I Background: role of the judiciary in Danish constitutional traditionII When the stakes get high: judicial review in counter-terrorism cases; III Recent Danish counter-terrorism case law: measured not deferential review; (a) Lawfulness of detention of alien terrorist suspects subject to expulsion orders; (b) Due process and the expulsion of alien terrorist suspects; (c) Non-refoulement and the extradition of terrorist suspects; (d) Nulla poena and the definition of terrorism in controversial circumstances; Conclusion. |
|
3 When good cases go bad: unintended consequences of rights-friendly judgmentsIntroduction; I Cases gone bad; (a) Group I: rights trade-offs; ''Belmarsh''; Hamdi; (b) Group II: political blowback; Charkaoui; Rasul, Hamdan and Boumediene; II Good intentions, bad results; (a) What went wrong?; (b) Status distinctions; (c) Procedural rules; (d) Dysfunctional dialogue; Conclusion; 4 The rhetoric and reality of judicial review of counter-terrorism actions: the United States experience; Introduction; I Boumediene and its negation; II Refusing to extend habeas corpus to detainees held in Afghanistan. |
|
III Failure of judiciary to provide accountability for tortureIV Explaining the disconnect between the Supreme Court''s assertive judicial review of detention decisions and the judiciary''spassivity; Conclusion; Part II Beyond counter-terrorism judicial review; 5 Emergency law as administrative law; Introduction; I Dimensions of War; II Administrative law as an alternative to ''emergency''law; II Accountability and administrative law; Conclusion; 6 The politics of counter-terrorism judicial review: creating effective parliamentary scrutiny; I The basis of (my) judicial review scepticism. |
|
II Australia''sparliamentary scrutiny modelIII Models of dialogic review; Conclusion; 7 Independent reviewers as alternative: an empirical study from Australia and the United Kingdom; I Path to independent anti-terrorism review; II Official mandate; III Independence; IV Influence; Conclusion; Postscript; 8 Public inquiries as an attempt to fill accountability gaps left by judicial and legislative review; Introduction; I Canada''sArar inquiry; II United Kingdom''sDetainee Inquiry; Conclusions; (a) Persistent transnational accountability gaps; (b) Plugging domestic accountability gaps. |
| Bibliography |
Includes bibliographical references and index. |
| Local Note |
eBooks on EBSCOhost EBSCO eBook Subscription Academic Collection - North America |
| Subject |
Terrorism -- Prevention -- Law and legislation -- Congresses.
|
|
Terrorism -- Prevention -- Law and legislation. |
|
Judicial review -- Congresses.
|
|
Judicial review. |
|
Political questions and judicial power -- Congresses.
|
|
POLITICAL SCIENCE -- Political Freedom & Security -- Human Rights. |
|
Political questions and judicial power. |
|
LAW -- Administrative Law & Regulatory Practice. |
| Genre/Form |
Electronic books.
|
|
Conference papers and proceedings.
|
|
Conference papers and proceedings.
|
| Added Author |
Davis, Fergal Francis, editor.
|
|
De Londras, Fiona, editor.
|
| Other Form: |
Print version: Critical debates on counter-terrorist judicial review 9781107053618 (DLC) 2014007627 (OCoLC)870896410 |
| ISBN |
9781316073353 (electronic book) |
|
1316073351 (electronic book) |
|
9781107282124 (electronic book) |
|
1107282128 (electronic book) |
|
9781107662964 (paperback) |
|
1107662966 |
|
9781316075715 (eBook) |
|
1316075710 |
|
9781316056813 (eBook) |
|
1316056813 |
|
9781316070994 (eBook) |
|
1316070999 |
|
9781322176932 (MyiLibrary) |
|
1322176930 |
|
9781107053618 |
|
1107053617 |
|
9781316078099 |
|
1316078094 |
