A Constitutional Court, in federal or quasi-federal countries, defines the degree of centralization or political decentralization. Therefore, this research seeks to identify whether the opening of the Court’s decision-making process for the participation of state or subnational entities (such as State Government and Legislative Assembly) can attenuate centralization (these state level actors are heard by...
Judges as Administrators (Defining Institutional Judicial Accountability)
Contemporary discussions on judicial independence and judicial accountability focus on liability of judges for decision-making, and disciplinary mechanisms ensuring the integrity of the judicial process. However, they overlook the fact that specific judges perform administrative duties distinct from their judicial functions, which were transferred from the executive to the judiciary in an effort to promote...
Overlapping Oversight and Arrested Accountability: Coordination among Adversaries through Judicial Reviews of Administrative Police Oversight
The simultaneous existence of judicial and non-judicial, internal and external, as well as preventative and reactive mechanisms is a common reality in today‘s police oversight. Conducting a sociolegal analysis of judicial reviews of the Ontario police complaints system, I explain why the staggering degree of public dissatisfaction and perception of police impunity persist despite constant...
The Algorithmic Governance of Administrative Decision-Making: Towards an Integrated European Framework for Public Accountability
The emergence of networks made up by both public and private entities governing sensitive decisions about the allocation of public services requires a deep rethinking of the traditional notions of public accountability. This study‘s assumption is that in the era of algorithmic administrative decision-making governments‘ accountability is intrinsically connected to the transparency of companies‘ processing...
Unreasonableness and the Shifting Language of Judicial Review
Unreasonableness is one of the three primary grounds of challenge in judicial review. In New Zealand, unreasonableness is now acquiring new purpose as a conclusory rather than primary ground of review. The finding that a decision is unreasonable is legal language to say that it is materially flawed and reviewable. It is by nature an...