Attacks on the judiciary: Undercurrents of a political versus legal constitutionalism dilemma?

6Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

A number of landmark judicial review decisions and the resultant political backlash are arguably to supportive of the claim that political and legal constitutionalism are entrenched in South Africa. The common thread in the legislature and executive's reaction to judicial review decisions is that government supremacy is under threat from legal constitutionalism. More specifically, there is a perception that courts are meddling in the political space through judgments that are aimed at weakening the government's authority and power. Nonetheless, such decisions have had an effect of reinforcing the judiciary's legal constitutional role of reviewing the lawfulness of the other branches' activities. There is need for strategies to minimize this tension as the continued antagonism can have unintended consequences such as the delegitimisation of the judiciary.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kawadza, H. (2018). Attacks on the judiciary: Undercurrents of a political versus legal constitutionalism dilemma? Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, 21, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2018/v21i0a1696

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free