We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In this chapter, I examine what I take to be the most interesting recent development in constitutionalism, namely the emergence of “dialogic constitutionalism” -a practice that seems to be in line with the regulatory ideal defended in the book as a “conversation between equals.” The starting point of the chapter is the idea is that the system of ”checks and balances” pits the branches of government against each other, and that, in recent years, alternative practices began to develop that, in one way or another, “lubricate” the gears linking the different branches of government and favoring a more cooperative attitude between them. I exemplify these changes from two cases, one “judicial” and the other “political.” As an example of the first, I refer to the well-known decision by the new Constitutional Court of South Africa: Grootboom. As an example of the second, I refer to the now famous “nevertheless clause,” a political reform adopted in Canada. These cases allow me to describe in greater specificity what a “dialogical” approach to constitutionalism imply.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.