IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/pscirm/v3y2015i03p473-492_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On Judicial Review in a Separation of Powers System

Author

Listed:
  • Dragu, Tiberiu
  • Board, Oliver

Abstract

The institution of judicial review is an important mechanism of holding the government legally accountable, nevertheless questions remain about its proper role in a separation of powers system. This article analyzes the effect of judicial review on the policy-making process from an expertise perspective. It shows that the exercise of non-expert judicial review can induce more informed policies and that non-expert courts have incentives to exercise judicial review in a manner consistent with institutional concerns for expertise. In addition to its importance as a mechanism of legal accountability, our analysis underscores another virtue of judicial review: legal review of governmental policy by non-expert courts can improve the amount of information available for policy making. The article contributes to a literature on the scope and legitimacy of judicial review and has broader implications for understanding the effect of institutional checks and balances on the quality of policy making.

Suggested Citation

  • Dragu, Tiberiu & Board, Oliver, 2015. "On Judicial Review in a Separation of Powers System," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(3), pages 473-492, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:3:y:2015:i:03:p:473-492_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2049847014000442/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ian R Turner, 2017. "Working smart and hard? Agency effort, judicial review, and policy precision," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(1), pages 69-96, January.
    2. Robert Siuciński, 2020. "Between Judicial Review And The Executive - The Problem Of The Separation Of Powers In Comparative Perspective," Perspectives of Law and Public Administration, Societatea de Stiinte Juridice si Administrative (Society of Juridical and Administrative Sciences), vol. 9(2), pages 137-146, December.
    3. Silva, Jeovan Assis & Guimaraes, Tomas Aquino, 2021. "Factors affecting judicial review of regulatory appeals," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:pscirm:v:3:y:2015:i:03:p:473-492_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ram .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.