Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights

This book, which originated from the broadly held view that there is a lack of Rule-of-law in Mexico, and from the emphasis of traditional academia on cultural elements as the main explanation, explores the question of whether there is any relationship between the system of constitutional review and thus the 'law' as such and the level of Rule-of-law in a given state. To do so, it elaborates a theoretical model for achieving Rule-of-law and compares it to the constitutional review systems of the United States, the Federal Republic of Germany, and Mexico. The study concludes that the two former states correspond to the model, while the latter does not. This is fundamentally due to the role each legal system assigns to ordinary jurisdiction in carrying out constitutional review. Whereas the US and Germany have fostered the policy that constitutional review regarding the enforcement of basic rights is the responsibility of ordinary courts, Mexico has relied too heavily on the specialized constitutional jurisdiction.

Carries out critical analysis, as opposed to mere descriptive analysis of valid law Includes the latest jurisprudential developments on each of the legal systems analysed Relies on original sources and not on translations Includes supplementary material: sn.pub/extras

Inhalt

1. General Introduction.- 2. Rule-of-law and Judicial Federalism: The Role of Ordinary Courts in the Enforcement of Constitutional Rights.- 3. Constitutional Review in the United States of America: Does Diffused mean Complete Decentralization?.- 4. The German System of Constitutional Review: Prototype of a Concentrated Model?.- 5. Constitutional Review in Mexico: A Best of All Worlds Solution?.- 6. General Conclusions.