Beyond Constitutionalism: The Search for a European Political Imagination

Two recent books, Joseph Weiler's The Constitution of Europe and Larry Siedentop's Democracy in Europe, seek to address one of the defining issues in contemporary European legal studies; the search for a European public philosophy. Both site their critiques within a particular jurisprudential tradition, the modernist; one that is bound up with anxieties about legitimacy and constitutionalism. This review article suggests that the ‘new’ Europe has been too easily distracted by the lures of constitutionalism, and more particularly by the temptations of Treaties. Public philosophies are not found in Treaty articles. Rather, a public philosophy is a state of mind, a product of the political imagination. And it is the absence of such an imagination which lies at the root of contemporary concerns regarding constitutionalism and legitimacy; the concerns which underpin Weiler's and Siedentop's books. A discussion of these books, in the first two parts of this article, is followed by a discussion of Godfried Wilhelm Leibniz's ‘universal’ jurisprudence. It is suggested that such a jurisprudence is better able to furnish a public philosophy for the ‘new’ Europe; just as, indeed, it was for the ‘old’ Europe. Moreover, such a jurisprudence is far more than a mere theory of laws and constitutions. Leibniz's jurisprudence requires that we think, not merely ‘beyond’ sovereignty, or even beyond democracy, but beyond constitutionalism.     

The Lockhart Committee: developing policy through commitment to moral values, community and democratic processes

The Lockhart Committee was appointed by the federal government in 2005 to review the Prohibition of Human Cloning Act 2002 (Cth) and the Research Involving Human Embryos Act 2002 (Cth). The issues in the review are ones on which community views differ widely and many people hold strong and diverging opinions. Yet all members of the committee were able to agree on their recommendations when the committee reported to Parliament in December 2005 and since that time, most of its recommendations have been implemented in amendments to federal and State legislation. This article describes the committee's process in considering the issues in the review, in consulting stakeholders and the broader community and in formulating its recommendations.     

THE INTER-STATE COMMISSION*

Abstract: The Inter-State Commission (ISC), although required by Australia's Constitution, has been in existence from 1913 to 1920 only. In 1975 the Labor government introduced a bill to set up the Commission. The bill was passed in a heavily amended form, but the legislation was not proclaimed by the incoming coalition government. A brief history of the "first" ISC raises the question of whether the High Court would ever have accepted the regulatory powers that the Labor government wished to invest in the late Commission. The ISC envisaged by the Labor government's bill would have had strong powers of regulation, arbitration and investigation over interstate and overseas transport. The Senate left it with weakened investigative powers only. Our Federal system encourages many government practices which are not in the interests of the community as a whole. However, while the ISC's role in curbing these practices would have been beneficial, the States have shown themselves too powerful politically to accept such policing, even if the High Court had allowed the ISC to do so. The ISC as conceived by Labor's bill would not have been politically viable, but the ISC as provided for in the Act would be worth setting up, as it would have several advantages over existing investigative mechanisms. It would have more experience and competence than ad hoc inquiries, and its continued existence would make it difficult to shelve its reports. Its statutory basis, broader terms of reference and its ability to force organizations to divulge information would all serve to make it a better investigative body than the Bureau of Transport Economics.