The effective division of powers is critical to ensuring the promotion of good governance, democracy, and the rule of law in Africa. This book examines key issues arising during reforms of African constitutions, and focuses on the emergence of independent constitutional institutions providing checks against future abuses of powers.
The new series Stellenbosch Handbooks in African Constitutional Law will engage with contemporary issues of constitutionalism in Africa, filling a notable gap in African comparative constitutional law. Separation of Powers in African Constitutionalism is the first in the series, examining one of the critical measures introduced by African constitutional designers in their attempts to entrench an ethos of constitutionalism on the continent. Taking a critical look at the different ways in which attempts have been made to separate the different branches of government, the Handbook examines the impact this is having on transparent and accountable governance. Beginning with an overview of constitutionalism in Africa and the different influences on modern African constitutional developments, it looks at the relationship between the legislature and the executive as well as the relationship between the judiciary and the political branches. Despite differences in approaches between the different constitutional cultures that have influenced developments in Africa, there remain common problems. One of these problems is the constant friction in the relationship between the three branches and the resurgent threats of authoritarianism which clearly suggest that there remain serious problems in both constitutional design and implementation. The book also studies the increasing role being played by independent constitutional institutions and how they complement the checks and balances associated with the traditional three branches of government.
Presenting the first database of constitutional design in all African countries, and seven original case studies, Constitutions and Conflict Management in Africa explores the types of domestic political institutions that can buffer societies from destabilizing changes that otherwise increase the risk of violence.
The Stellenbosch Handbooks in African Constitutional Law series engages with contemporary issues of constitutionalism in Africa. The first experiments in democratic and constitutional governance in Africa that started after independence were soon overtaken by dictatorships, and arbitrary and repressive rule. The pulling down of the Berlin Wall followed by the collapse of the Soviet Union unleashed new forces of democratization and new hopes for the establishment and entrenchment of constitutional governance and constitutionalism in Africa. This series is designed to identify, analyse, and promote serious discussion of the critical issues that can shape, refine, and deepen the consolidation of constitutionalism in Africa. Although comparative constitutional law has become a major field of legal scholarship, most of the extensive research that has been carried out has focused on long-established democracies. The only African country that has attracted sustained research interest from a comparative law perspective is South Africa. The few books that present perspectives on African comparative constitutional law focus narrowly and exclusively on developments in either Anglophone, Francophone, or Arabophone Africa without cutting across these divides. Yet, since 1990, Africa has been at the centre of profound and far-reaching constitutional developments. Little comparative research has been carried out to understand the nature of these constitutional changes, to review their impact on the ethos of constitutionalism on the continent, and to explore prospects for the future. The series aims to stimulate interest in comparative constitutional research and the different constitutional traditions operating in Africa by presenting a comprehensive analysis of the latest thinking, research, and practice. In this way, the series intends to fill the huge gap in the existing literature on comparative African constitutional law as well as point out to directions for future research. Book jacket.
Providing the first comparative analysis of African attempts to promote respect for rule of law and constitutional justice, this book examines the diverse and distinctive approaches to constitutional adjudication taken. It captures positive and negative developments, and future prospects for the different models of constitutional review.
This collection of essays assesses the efforts of African governments to constitutionalise decentralisation, be it in the form of federalism, local government or traditional authorities. Since the end of the Cold War jurisdictions across Africa have witnessed an ostensible return to multi-party democracy within the paradigm of constitutionalism and the rule of law. Linked to the democratisation process, many countries took steps to decentralize power by departing from the heavily centralized systems inherited from colonial regimes. The centralization of power, typically characterized by the personalization and concentration of power in the hands of leaders and privileged elites in capital cities, mostly resulted in repressive regimes and fragile states. As decentralisation is a response to these challenges, this volume analyses the dynamic relationship between the efforts to implement decentralization and presence or absence of constitutionalism. This volume examines a variety of forms and degrees of decentralization found across Africa. It advances a new understanding of trends and patterns and facilitates the exchange of ideas among African governments and scholars about the critical role that decentralisation may play in democratization of and constitutionalism in Africa.
Chief Justice John Marshall argued that a constitution "requires that only its great outlines should be marked [and] its important objects designated." Ours is "intended to endure for ages to come, and consequently, to be adapted to the various crises of human affairs." In recent years, Marshall's great truths have been challenged by proponents of originalism and strict construction. Such legal thinkers as Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia argue that the Constitution must be construed and applied as it was when the Framers wrote it. In Keeping Faith with the Constitution, three legal authorities make the case for Marshall's vision. They describe their approach as "constitutional fidelity"--not to how the Framers would have applied the Constitution, but to the text and principles of the Constitution itself. The original understanding of the text is one source of interpretation, but not the only one; to preserve the meaning and authority of the document, to keep it vital, applications of the Constitution must be shaped by precedent, historical experience, practical consequence, and societal change. The authors range across the history of constitutional interpretation to show how this approach has been the source of our greatest advances, from Brown v. Board of Education to the New Deal, from the Miranda decision to the expansion of women's rights. They delve into the complexities of voting rights, the malapportionment of legislative districts, speech freedoms, civil liberties and the War on Terror, and the evolution of checks and balances. The Constitution's framers could never have imagined DNA, global warming, or even women's equality. Yet these and many more realities shape our lives and outlook. Our Constitution will remain vital into our changing future, the authors write, if judges remain true to this rich tradition of adaptation and fidelity.
