Recent Limitations to the Theory of Acts of Sovereignty and What They Mean for Judicial Independence in Egypt
A Study of Two Cases and Their Distinct Implications
In: Arab Law QuarterlySearch for other papers by Arig M. Eweida in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
The theory of acts of sovereignty is a serious limitation on the scope of judicial review. This paper examines the recent applications of the theory by the Egyptian State Council and the Supreme Constitutional Court which aim to widen the scope of judicial review by limiting the applications of the theory of acts of sovereignty. The two cases studied were decided amid political tensions. These cases cannot be understood separately from the political environment in which they were decided and the status of guarantees made for the impartiality of judges within this context. This paper argues that although both cases are important steps forward, they fail to establish a lasting limitation on the theory.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 189 | 101 | 12 |
| Full Text Views | 10 | 7 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 591 | 562 | 1 |
Recent Limitations to the Theory of Acts of Sovereignty and What They Mean for Judicial Independence in Egypt
A Study of Two Cases and Their Distinct Implications
In: Arab Law QuarterlySearch for other papers by Arig M. Eweida in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
The theory of acts of sovereignty is a serious limitation on the scope of judicial review. This paper examines the recent applications of the theory by the Egyptian State Council and the Supreme Constitutional Court which aim to widen the scope of judicial review by limiting the applications of the theory of acts of sovereignty. The two cases studied were decided amid political tensions. These cases cannot be understood separately from the political environment in which they were decided and the status of guarantees made for the impartiality of judges within this context. This paper argues that although both cases are important steps forward, they fail to establish a lasting limitation on the theory.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 189 | 101 | 12 |
| Full Text Views | 10 | 7 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 591 | 562 | 1 |