Critical Debates on Counter-Terrorism Judicial Review

Cambridge University Press, 10/2/2014
EAN 9781107053618, ISBN10: 1107053617

Hardcover, 384 pages, 22.8 x 15.2 x 2.5 cm
Language: English

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.

List of contributors
Acknowledgements
Introduction. Counter-terrorism judicial review
beyond dichotomies Fergal F. Davis and Fiona de Londras
Part I. Judging Counter-Terrorism Judicial Review
1. Counter-terrorism judicial review as regulatory constitutionalism Fiona de Londras
2. Counter-terrorism judicial review by a traditionally weak judiciary Jens Elo Rytter
3. When good cases go bad
unintended consequences of rights-friendly judgments David Jenkins
4. The rhetoric and reality of judicial review of counter-terrorism actions
the United States experience Jules Lobel
Part II. Beyond Counter-Terrorism Judicial Review
5. Emergency law as administrative law Mark Tushnet
6. The politics of counter-terrorism judicial review
creating effective parliamentary scrutiny Fergal F. Davis
7. Independent reviewers as alternative
an empirical study from Australia and the United Kingdom Jessie Blackbourn
8. Public inquiries as an attempt to fill accountability gaps left by judicial and legislative review Kent Roach
Part III. Counter-Terrorism Judicial Review in the Political Constitution
9. Rebalancing the unbalanced constitution
juridification and national security in the United Kingdom Roger Masterman
10. Business as usual
deference in counter-terrorism rights review Cora Chan
11. Deference and dialogue in the real-world counter-terrorism context Gavin Phillipson
Part IV. Internationalised Counter-Terrorism Judicial Review
12. Counter-terrorism law and judicial review
the challenge for the Court of Justice of the European Union Cian C. Murphy
13. Post 9/11 UK counter-terrorism cases in the European Court of Human Rights
a 'dialogic' approach to rights' protection or appeasement of national authorities? Helen Fenwick
14. Accountability for counter-terrorism
challenges and potential in the role of the courts Helen Duffy
Index.