Models of Judicial Review - Assignment Example

Models of Judicial Review Models of Judicial Review Judicial review is integral for any nation that believes in the fidelity of law. This means that such nations must identify with a suitable of model of judicial review to assist them test the constitutionality of statutes or treaties as demonstrated in this paper (Forsyth, 2000). Integration of a diffuse model of judicial review has been critical in the US for several reasons worth noting. However, it is first essential to define judicial review and its applications in the justice system.

Judicial review, therefore, encompasses the authority of a court to evaluate the constitutionality of a treaty or statute. Additionally, it also involves reviewing an administrative regulation to attain consistency for measuring the effectiveness of a Constitution, statute, or a treaty. Consequently, under the US Constitution, the judicial review lacks explicit powers of reviewing any of the above provisions. Instead, in the US, the judicial review operates through making of inferences of provisions, structure, and history guiding the Constitution.

It implies that in a diffuse model, common procedural rules evaluate the constitutionality guiding administrative measures and statutes (Elliot, 2001). Likewise, decisions are mainly within inter parties from the highest to the lowest courts. In other words, most court decisions are deemed retroactive as a rule if there is an unconstitutionality of statutes and this is accompanied with consequences. According to legal experts, the diffuse model of judicial review finds applicability in most countries because of its flexibility and fluidity when approaching sensitive matters touching on the Constitution.

Diffuse model of judicial review differs with the concentrated model of review in varying patterns as interpreted by the law. For example, while diffuse model originates from America, its counterpart is largely Austrian or Europeans (Forsyth, 2000). Similarly, while the concentrated model reviews the constitutionality of statues mostly found in special proceedings, diffuse model is general and is specifically concerned with administrative measures. Contrastingly, unlike the concentrated model that is less widespread because of its limited review functions, the diffuse model is more widespread because it tackles several reviews of the constitutionality.

However, both explore the constitutionality of treaties and laws in their respective countries of application. Constitutional review falls into four broad categories of systems. There is the American or diffuse model that uses common procedural rules to review the constitutionality supporting administrative measures and statutes. It centrally used in countries that include Guatemala, Venezuela, and Brazil. Next is the European/Austrian or concentrated model that is specialized under the jurisdiction of Constitutional Courts and deals with special proceedings.

This system has usage in Chile, Ecuador, and Argentina. Mixed judicial review, on other hand, comprises of diffuse and concentrated models and are found in Mexico and Colombia (Elliot, 2001). Finally, there are other systems of constitutional review such that used in Cuba under the authority of its National Assembly. It, therefore, is essential for countries adopting models of judicial review to establish one in tandem with their aspirations and values (Forsyth, 2000). This prevents contravention of statutes or treaties between countries or within the country themselves that often harms gains of nationhood.

ReferencesElliot, M. (2001). The Constitutional Foundations of Judicial Review. Mason, OH: Hart Publishing. Forsyth, C. (2000). Judicial Review and the Constitution. New York, NY: Hart Publishing.