Offers a detailed account of all the most important aspects of the judiciary in South Africa, both now and in the past. Provides a general survey of the judiciary as an institution.

An independent and impartial judiciary is fundamental to the existence and operation of a liberal democracy. Focussing on Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, the United Kingdom and the United States, this comparative 2011 study explores four major issues affecting the judicial institution. These issues relate to the appointment and discipline of judges; judges and freedom of speech; the performance of non-judicial functions by judges; and judicial bias and recusal, and each is set within the context of the importance of maintaining public confidence in the judiciary. The essays highlight important episodes or controversies affecting members of the judiciary to illustrate relevant principles.

Constitutional Options for a Democratic South Africa describes the unjust South African political and judicial apartheid system that exploited black South Africans. Ziyad Motala emphasizes the importance of a constitution and state system that would not only ameliorate the enormous inequalities generated by colonialism and apartheid but also ensure equal democratic rights and protection to all citizens in the post-apartheid South Africa. He carefully examines and compares the political outcomes of post-independent African states adopting (1) the Western liberal federal state, (2) the Soviet-inspired Marxist unitary state, or (3) the locally inspired one-party African socialist state. Motala weighs the relative merits of these state structures for dealing with the complex of democracy, socioeconomic development, and national unity in multiethnic states. He contends that the constitutions and state practices employed thus far by African states have not facilitated political and socioeconomic development, and recommends different constitutional and state options for South Africa.

This examination of the mixed jurisdiction experience makes use of an innovative cross-comparative methodology to provide a wealth of detail on each of the nine countries studied. It identifies the deep resemblances and salient traits of this legal family and the broad analytical overview highlights the family links while providing a detailed individual treatment of each country which reveals their individual personalities. This updated second edition includes two new countries (Botswana and Malta) and the appendices explore all other mixed jurisdictions and contain a special report on Cameroon.

This book deals with what the author considers a sorely neglected question, namely the role of the judiciary in states’ foreign policy processes. Eksteen argues that the impact of the judiciary on foreign affairs is understudied and that recognition of its role in foreign affairs is now due. This makes it a ground-breaking scholarly contribution that should first of all prove of value to students, scholars, researchers and practitioners in the two broad fields of politics and law for the wide scope of issues it covers and the very comprehensive reference lists it contains. Secondly, professionals working within politics, including members of the legislatures of the United States, the European Union and South Africa, as well as members of the judiciaries there, should find this book of benefit. A detailed examination has been undertaken of the role of the United States Supreme Court, the two high courts in South Africa, namely the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal, and the European Court of Justice of the European Union, in foreign affairs. The author substantiates the unmistakable fact that these Courts have become involved in and influence foreign affairs. Furthermore, that they have not shied away from using their judicial authority when dealing with cases touching on foreign affairs and especially presidential overreach. The lack of recognition of the judiciary’s role in foreign affairs is still noticeable in Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA) literature. This book concludes that FPA has to accept and give proper recognition to the judiciary and its increasing relevance in foreign affairs. Dr. Riaan Eksteen is a Former South African Ambassador residing in Namibia; from 1968-1973 he served at the South African Embassy in Washington D.C.; between 1976-1994, he subsequently served as Ambassador and Head of Mission at the U.N. in New York (1976-81), in Namibia (1990-91), at the U.N. in Geneva (1992-94), and in Turkey, with accreditation also to Azerbaijan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan (1995-97). He obtained his Ph.D. from the University of Johannesburg in October 2018.

To what extent is the language of judicial opinions responsive to the political and social context in which constitutional courts operate? Courts are reason-giving institutions, with argumentation playing a central role in constitutional adjudication. However, a cursory look at just a handful of constitutional systems suggests important differences in the practices of constitutional judges, whether in matters of form, style, or language. Focusing on independently-verified leading cases globally, a combination of qualitative and quantitative analysis offers the most comprehensive and systematic account of constitutional reasoning to date. This analysis is supported by the examination of eighteen legal systems around the world including the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice. Universally common aspects of constitutional reasoning are identified in this book, and contributors also examine whether common law countries differ to civil law countries in this respect.

A revisionary account of the South African Constitutional Court, its working method and the neglected political underpinnings of its success.