Unelected Bodies Research Articles

Lessons for Left-Wing Populism from the 2010s Austerity Wave in Europe

Lessons for Left-Wing Populism from the 2010s Austerity Wave in Europe

Adjudicating electoral disputes or judicialising politics? The Supreme Court of Ghana and the disputed 2012 presidential election in perspective

ABSTRACT The constitutional role of Supreme Courts to adjudicate disputed electoral outcomes is well-accepted within contemporary democracies. How a Supreme Court’s judicial reasoning is portrayed in the popular press will impact on citizens’ understanding of and commitment to democratic processes. In the protracted litigation in the aftermath of Ghana’s disputed 2012 election, its Supreme Court found its judgements and management of proceedings represented as partial, in terms of an unelected body determining political outcomes. This article explores two key questions: what was the nature of the coverage of the Court’s reasoning, and to what extent did this coverage fortify or threaten the legitimacy of the Supreme Court within the political system? It concludes that the specialist politics and law journalists failed to demystify the constitutional reasoning of the Court in such a way that ordinary citizens were able to gain an understanding of the judicial reasoning being applied. There is, the authors believe, some value in examining this issue despite the passage of time since the delivery of the court’s verdict.

The Legislature, the Executive, and the Courts: The Delicate Balance of Power or Who is Running this Country Anyway?

The expanding role of Canadian courts since the introduction of the Charter has prompted critics to decry what they see as excessive and anti-democratic judicial activism. The author addresses such criticisms, responding, in particular, to the arguments of Ted Morton and Rainer Knopff. The article critiques the basic elements of Morton/Knopf's thesis: that courts are anti-democratic, excessively political, and engaging in illegitimate law-making. Rejecting the claim that Canada's judiciary is a less democratic state institution, the author notes the powerful law and policy-making role performed by the federal cabinet-for practical purposes, an unelected body. The author endorses the dialogue in which courts and legislators have engaged since 1982. This dialogue, he argues, is not only democratic, but also ensures accountability for the judiciary, the legislature, and the executive. Referring to recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions, the author suggests that critics of interventionist courts harbor a narrow and simplistic majoritarian view of democracy, rather than a more nuanced and rights-sensitive concept of enhanced democracy. Such critics also seem more displeased with the substance of activist decisions than with the legitimacy of the courts in rendering them. The author concludes that Canadian courts are performing their appropriate constitutional role, and are generally doing so effectively.

Reign-seeking and the Rise of the Unelected in Thailand

ABSTRACTThis article develops the concept of “reign-seeking” to capture the unprecedented collective action of the Thai professional and official elite prior to the 2014 military coup and the establishment of a military regime. It argues that this phenomenon reflects broad and deep political dynamics, for which the dominant scholarship on authoritarianism and Thai politics cannot adequately explain. The changing incentives of these supposedly non-partisan actors are interwoven with neo-liberal governance reform driven by a desire for depoliticisation and the minimisation of rent-seeking. This idea has been rationalised in Thailand since the promulgation of the 1997 Constitution resulting in the rise of technocratic and judicial bodies designed to discipline elected politicians and political parties. However, such institutional reconfigurations have consolidated the incentive for people considering themselves to be prospective candidates to “reign” in these organisations. As evident in the 2014 coup, these unconventional political actors – academics, doctors and civil society leaders – made collective efforts to topple the elected government in exchange for gaining selection into the wide range of unelected bodies. Governance reform in Thailand has hitherto reinforced the status quo, although the article further argues that reign-seekers should be seen as contingent, rather than consistent, authoritarians.

BEYOND ACCOUNTABILITY: POLITICAL LEGITIMACY AND DELEGATED WATER GOVERNANCE IN AUSTRALIA

Studies of delegated agencies commonly emphasize the importance of accountability for these unelected bodies to secure authority to govern. This article argues that beyond formal accountability measures, developing legitimacy through interaction with external stakeholders is critical to agency authority. In doing so, the article makes a distinctive contribution by applying a new conceptual model based on organizational sociology and identifying multiple dimensions along which legitimacy is lost and won, and hence authority secured. The article presents original findings from a case study of how the Murray–Darling Basin Authority, an Australian water agency established in 2007, attempted to achieve ‘political legitimacy’. Findings show that the Agency achieved legitimacy via appeals to common normative/ethical values and developing commonly used information and news outlets, despite facing opposition from stakeholders on the socioeconomic impact of its policies. The conclusion argues that the framework can usefully be applied to other agencies in ‘wicked problem’ policy areas.

European Integration or Democracy Disintegration in Measures concerning Police and Judicial Cooperation?

In recent cases on the European Arrest Warrant, the Court of Justice of the European Union has made decisions which are incompatible with the requirements of national Constitutions on the protection of fundamental rights such as the right to freedom from imprisonment. National Constitutions are acts of national Parliaments which often require the completion of a very difficult procedure in order to be amended. Unfortunately, the Court of Justice has not taken these procedures into consideration when it has ruled that, in order to enhance mutual trust between national judicial authorities, the European Arrest Warrant can be issued even at the sacrifice of freedoms of individuals protected by national Constitutions. Similar judgements are incompatible with decisions made by Constitutional Courts such as the Italian Constitutional Court which states that the Union's supremacy and the application of the European Arrest Warrant cannot encroach upon the fundamental principles of Constitutions. Elected bodies such as the European Parliament and national Parliaments should decide whether fundamental principles protected by national Constitutions should be set aside. The entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty could have made the difference as it increased the respective powers of national Parliaments and the European Parliament in the EU decision making procedure. Unfortunately, these changes have not led to more democracy in the criminal area. The result is that the Court of Justice case-law on the European Arrest Warrant is incompatible with the judgments of national Constitutional Courts. This article will show how incompatibility between the different courts and lack of democracy in the criminal area could lead to the failure of police and judicial cooperation between Member States. In order to avoid this failure, it is imperative that measures in the criminal area are adopted by the democratic institutions: the European Parliament and national Parliaments in cooperation with each other. Indeed, these institutions alone, not unelected bodies such as the Court of Justice, should evaluate whether national Constitutions should be set aside in order to fight against criminal organisations.

Public-Sector Unionism: A Review

In the larger policy debate over the role of public sector unions, there is a tendency to blur the lines between the history and goals of the private sector union movement and those of the public sector union movement, and thereby misunderstand their unique effects. The public sector union movement shares a link to the history and institutional structure of private sector unionism, yet they are also distinct movements, differing in origins, goals, approaches to bargaining, philosophies, and effects. These two unionisms operate in different spheres. Private unionism operates as a labor cartel within the market economy and thus affects the profitability of firms, economic growth, the demand for labor, and consumer prices. Public sector unions function as a monopoly provider of labor within a bureaucratic-political realm. Public sector unionism introduces an unelected body into policy-making, thereby undermining the sovereignty of the state. Public sector employees are able to influence through political lobbying their ―employer-sponsors‖ or politicians, who may seek to enhance union employment as a means of expanding their constituency. This study reviews the origins, goals, and fiscal effects of public sector unionism.

The Judiciary in South Africa: Independence or Illusion?

In this chapter I explore judicial independence and legal transformation in South Africa. My central thesis is that judicial independence is one of the key ingredients to ensuring that the transformative possibilities embodied in the Constitution become a reality for the majority of South Africans. Despite widespread approval of the principle of judicial review amongst legal scholars, many have warned that an unelected body sitting in judgment of the powers and functions of elected representatives may erode the basic tenets of democracy. This is particularly so in the case of economic or social policy where courts in their judgments may be at odds with the executive, the legislature and popular sentiment on these matters. Two issues that come to mind are the death penalty and procedural rights for the criminally accused, where evidence suggests that the Court's judgments are not viewed favorably by significant sections of the population. I argue that because of the lingering effects of authoritarianism, racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice - cultural by-products of colonialism and apartheid - an independent judiciary may rise above these sentiments and ensure that South Africa remains committed to the promises of rights embodied in the Constitution. But my thesis also considers judicial independence in light of the racial and gender transformation of the judiciary. I argue that although thus far the courts, and particularly the Constitutional Court, has demonstrated an impressive independence, the political and racial loyalties of some sectors of the public to the governing party may pose a threat to judicial independence.

The rise of the unelected: democracy and the new separation of powers

Unelected bodies, such as independent central banks, economic regulators, risk managers and auditors have become a worldwide phenomenon. Democracies are increasingly turning to them to demarcate boundaries between the market and the state, to resolve conflicts of interest and to allocate resources, even in sensitive ethical areas such as those involving privacy or biotechnology. This book examines the challenge that unelected bodies present to democracy and argues that, taken together, such bodies should be viewed as a new branch of government with their own sources of legitimacy and held to account through a new separation of powers. Vibert suggests that such bodies help promote a more informed citizenry because they provide a more trustworthy and reliable source of information for decisions. This book will be of interest to specialists and general readers with an interest in modern democracy as well as policy makers, think tanks and journalists.

Governing a Region: Structures and Processes of Governance in North East England

Public services in the North East of England are managed and provided by the traditional institutions of government and, now, by a large number of unelected bodies. The growth of these unelected bodies has led to increasingly fragmented governance, a lack of local accountability and lack of transparency.Almost all the institutions of governance in the region, both elected and unelected, are run by, predominantly, middle-aged (or older) middle-class men. Accountability needs to be restored and developed, building on a reinvigorated local government. In addition, to help ensure public services are sensitive and responsive to local needs, they should be run by people who are representative of the diversity of the community.

Governing a Region: Structures and Processes of Governance in North East England

Public services in the North East of England are managed and provided by the traditional institutions of government and, now, by a large number of unelected bodies. The growth of these unelected bodies has led to increasingly fragmented governance, a lack of local accountability and lack of transparency.Almost all the institutions of governance in the region, both elected and unelected, are run by, predominantly, middle-aged (or older) middle-class men. Accountability needs to be restored and developed, building on a reinvigorated local government. In addition, to help ensure public services are sensitive and responsive to local needs, they should be run by people who are representative of the diversity of the community.

The London Experience of Regional Government 1938–1945

To overcome London's gross unpreparedness for war seen during the September 1938 Munich crisis, a regional organisation was inserted between Whitehall and the Town Halls to co-ordinate the work of the local authorities responsible for taking Air Raid Precautions. Co-ordinated by this unelected body, London was reasonably prepared when the blitz opened in September 1940. However, severe problems were exposed and these were successfully tackled on a regional basis. So well did most London local authorities cope with their unprecedented wartime responsibilities that, although executive action was necessary in Stepney and West Ham, the national government declined to consider the reform of London government on regional lines for two decades. Although W.A. Robson argued stridently for an elected regional authority, the status quo ante was restored in 1945 since when the valuable experience of London's wartime regional government has been effectively ignored.

The London Experience of Regional Government 1938–1945

To overcome London's gross unpreparedness for war seen during the September 1938 Munich crisis, a regional organisation was inserted between Whitehall and the Town Halls to co-ordinate the work of the local authorities responsible for taking Air Raid Precautions. Co-ordinated by this unelected body, London was reasonably prepared when the blitz opened in September 1940. However, severe problems were exposed and these were successfully tackled on a regional basis. So well did most London local authorities cope with their unprecedented wartime responsibilities that, although executive action was necessary in Stepney and West Ham, the national government declined to consider the reform of London government on regional lines for two decades. Although W.A. Robson argued stridently for an elected regional authority, the status quo ante was restored in 1945 since when the valuable experience of London's wartime regional government has been effectively ignored.

The Return of the Manchester Men: Men's Words and Men's Deeds in the Remaking of the Local State

The contemporary transformation of local politics in Britain whereby power is being transferred from elected local authorities to business-led appointed bodies is being characterized increasingly as a shift from government to governance. But a crucial component in this transformation has been neglected: local governance is being 'regendered' in complex and contradictory ways. Drawing upon recent feminist theories of the state, it is argued that, along with business power, male power is being naturalized as the legitimate conduit for effective local governance. The political process in unelected bodies privileges pre-existing male networks while their modus operandi marginalizes and excludes women and women's interests.