Judicial Review,Irrationality, and the Legitimacy of Merits-Review

The definition of the irrationality ground of judicial review recognises the constitutional principle of the separation of powers, in allowing for judicial control of the executive only very rarely. The author in a previous article in this study found that the courts, on occasions, had intervened in circumstances where administrative decisions arguably were not irrational. To this end, the purpose of this article is to assess the constitutionality of these seemingly low standards of irrationality. The author does so by reference either to the manner of review employed—the use of the proportionality principle, for example—or the context of the administrative decision under scrutiny, such as the infringement of the applicant’s fundamental rights. The author finds that the cases from the previous article where low standards of irrationality were arguably adopted were, in fact, legitimate according to these chosen methods of evaluation. However, this is an interim conclusion because, for reasons of word length, the author is unable to complete a full assessment here. It is therefore proposed that a subsequent article will continue to examine the constitutionality of these cases. Furthermore, the author will also try and establish a zone of executive decision-making, for reasons of democracy, where the courts are excluded from irrationality review. If the author is unsuccessful in this regard, the final conclusion of this study will inevitably be that low standards of judicial intervention exist without limit—a clear assault on the constitutional principle stated above.

Health and human rights: challenges of implementation and cultural change

The author identifies the evolution of discourse about human rights to health in medical law, health law and public health law, as well as in major international instruments. He emphasises the importance of General Comment No 14 on Art 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. He argues that its breadth but also its specificity in terms of accountable benchmarks and measures of health service provision are likely to frame discourse on "rights to health" in the succeeding years. He identifies the need for translation of the rhetoric in such instruments into meaningful and patient-informed data so that it becomes possible to compare and contrast advances (or otherwise) in rights to health within and among different countries.     

Context and innovation in traditional bureaucracies: A Hong Kong study

Traditional bureaucracies, defined in Weberian terms, are almost invariably seen as antithetical to innovation. Yet, although the academic literature presents an array of formidable structural barriers to the emergence and implementation of new ideas, innovation does occur in traditional bureaucracies. How can the structural impediments be overcome? What are the processes that enable innovation to take place? Based on a longitudinal study of the Hong Kong government's innovation policies and practices, it is argued that political context is a critical variable explaining how, even in rigid traditional bureaucracies, barriers may be avoided or temporarily suspended. Two contrasting case studies are used to illustrate, first, the importance of political commitment in gaining acceptance for new ideas and, second, the failure of agencies dedicated to innovation to achieve their objectives. It is postulated that circumventing structural barriers or working through political channels to reduce their impact may be a more constructive strategy than creating dedicated agencies to develop innovative measures. The study is grounded in a literature review, documentary evidence from the Hong Kong government's innovative agencies, and interviews with senior staff from those agencies.     

Can decision transparency increase citizen trust in regulatory agencies? Evidence from a representative survey experiment

Decision transparency is often proposed as a way to maintain or even increase citizen trust, yet this assumption is still untested in the context of regulatory agencies. We test the effect of transparency of a typical decision tradeoff in regulatory enforcement: granting forbearance or imposing a sanction. We employed a representative survey experiment (n = 1,546) in which we test the effect of transparency in general (providing information about a decision or not) and the effect of specific types of transparency (process or rationale transparency). We do this for agencies supervising financial markets, education, and health care. We find that overall decision transparency significantly increases citizen trust in only two of the three agencies. Rationale transparency has a more pronounced positive effect only for the Education Inspectorate. We conclude that the overall effect of decision transparency is positive but that the nature of the regulatory domain may weaken or strengthen this effect.     

Coronial law reform: the new wave

The 2006 Report of the Law Reform Committee of the Victorian Parliament into the Coroners Act 1985 (Vic) is a substantial and visionary document which has the potential to take coronial law reform in important new directions. It draws upon a range of reforms trialled in other jurisdictions, but proposes to consolidate a new role for the coroner as a public health official with a formally acknowledged focus on facilitating avoidance of avoidable deaths. Some of its Shipman-inspired proposals require further consideration but the general tenor of the Report - to recognise the distinctive functions of inquests and their potential to alleviate community concerns, respond to family members' needs and reduce the potential for dangerous conduct--deserves support.     

The Economics of the Grounds for Divorce in Great Britain

Despite similarities in their socio-economic environments and the provision of identical legal grounds for divorce, England & Wales is dominated by fault divorce decrees whereas no-fault divorce dominates in Scotland. Indeed, during the past fifteen years, the shares of fault and no-fault divorce have increasingly diverged across these two regions. The paper proposes an explanation for this remarkable contrast based on cost incentives generated by procedural and legal interventions within the respective legal systems. In particular, the introduction of the Simplified Procedure in Scotland and the reduction in the time bar to divorce in England & Wales are key causal factors.