Judicial Review as Dialogical Accountability: Aotearoa New Zealand’s Supervisory Jurisdiction

Abstract

Abstract This article explores the way judicial review of administrative action in Aotearoa New Zealand engenders a form of dialogical accountability; that is, a relational form of accountability as conceptualised by Bovens. In particular, the article explains the current practice and experience in a way attentive to its expressive character, highlighting the features of judicial review – both procedural infrastructure and substantive doctrinal norms – that foster and support this dynamic relationship of dialogue between actor and forum. The articular concludes with some reflections on the virtue of viewing judicial review in dialogical terms and implications for its place within the myriad of other accountability conversations operating within modern government in New Zealand.