Public Law Discussion Group – Report on Activities Michaelmas

Term 2008 – Hilary Term 2009

Thank you for your interest in the Oxford Public Law Discussion Group.
Across nine sessions in 2008/09, we explored a number of fascinating
contemporary issues in the field of public law. We have travelled from
domestic issues surrounding the rule of law, devolution, and freedom of
information in the “Surveillance State”, to considering the Australian Bill
of Rights debate and judicial recusal in the common law world. We also
explored the theory of common law constitutionalism, the idea of a
European Res Publica, challenges for public lawyers in the “War on
Terror”, and the divide between process and merits review across
jurisdictions. Over the course of such a diverse termcard we have
welcomed both academics and practitioners from the United Kingdom,
Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States of America.

We look forward to planning an even more intellectually engaging

termcard in 2009/10.

My thanks to Julia Powles BCL(Oxon.) – who was co-convenor in session

2008/08 – for her generous contributions in compiling this summary.
Errors remain my own.

Hayley J. Hooper, January 2010

Last Year’s Events

22nd October 2008 The Rule of Law and Corner House Research Prof.
John Gardner, Oxford University

Prof. Gardner lent his analytic jurisprudence led

perspective on the rule of law to inform discussion on
two landmark House of Lords decisions Corner House
Research (July 2008), and Bancoult (October 2008).

12th November 2008 The Crime of Terrorism: What is it and do we need

it? Mr Michel Paradis, Defence Counsel, United States
Dept of Defence

Mr Paradis shared his insights into past and current legal

proceedings at Guantanamo Bay. He also discussed the
historical and legal context of terrorism across
jurisdictions. He suggested that modern formulations of
terrorism offences reflect the interests of a nearly

-1-
 unfettered security State in preventing, rather than
punishing, crimes as traditionally understood.

26th November 2008 Judicial Recusal in the Common Law World, Justice
Grant Hammond , New Zealand Court of Appeal and
Visiting Fellow, University of Oxford

Mr Justice Hammond discussed his current comparative

research on the various tests for judicial recusal. He
elaborated in particular upon the developments in the
Australian law of bias and endorsed a standard of
objectivity, whilst noting the challenge in allowing
judges to make determinations in their own cause.

28th November 2008 Common Law Constitutionalism, Dr Margaret

Kelly, Macquarie University

Dr Kelly suggested that the ‘common law’ should not be

limited to judicially made law and that all law gains its
legitimacy from Monarchical oaths of governance.
Professor Paul Craig and Dr Alison Young (both from
University of Oxford) responded in defence of more
orthodox views of ‘common law constitutionalism’.
Discussion was lively, and informative.

4th February 2009 A European Res Publica, Assistant Professor Ola

Zetterquist, Gotherburg University, Sweden

Dr. Zetterquist argued that the constitutional order of

the European Union does not follow the traditional
Hobbesian idea of a singular, unlimited sovereign state.
Rather, he argued for an understanding of the EU as a
constitutional entity from the neo-Roman republican
perspective.

18th February 2009 Imperfect Union or Imperfect Federalism? Or

Something Perfect in the Middle, Mr John Guess
(Attorney-General’s Department)

An overview of current United Kingdom Devolution

issues, including challenges to immigration policy
caused by devolved powers in the areas of health care,
housing and education, the Scottish proposal for
separation; and the expansion in Welsh devolved
powers.

-2-
4th March 2009 How Good is a Bill of Rights: The Australian Debate,
Professor Tom Campbell, Charles Sturt University,
Australia

Professor Campbell suggested that Australia should

maintain a ‘democratic approach’, essentially leaving
social reform in the hands of politicians, not courts. He
promoted the idea of a non-justiciable statement of
values. Both propositions contributed to a lively debate.

27th May 2009 Citizens, Information, and the States, Emeritus Professor
Carol Harlow, London School of Economics and Political
Science

Professor Harlow spoke on the historical aspects of

freedom of information in the United Kingdom, the rapid
expansion of privacy concepts, and some of the pressing
issues facing the “Surveillance State”.

11th June 2009 Judicial Review and Merits Review: Comparing

Administrative Adjudication by Courts and Tribunals,
Professor Peter Cane, Australian National University,
Visiting Fellow, University of Oxford

Professor Cane offered comparative insights into the

highly developed and conceptually distinct approach of
Australian tribunals towards administrative adjudication.
He compared this with the evolving approach of United
Kingdom Tribunals.

-3-