Sato Junichi

What does comparative constitutional law mean? A very large number of scholars write and talk about comparative constitutional law. However, how is it best to compare constitutions? A constitution embodies a constitutional code (the constitution in its formal sense) and substantive protection of human rights and separation of powers within the system of government as found in Article 16 of France's Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, for example. To compare constitutional codes, for whatever results you would like to achieve and compare constitutions in any substantive way, is in reality very difficult to write or talk about. This article tries to demonstrate that comparative constitutional law is possible. To demonstrate this, we will start with the conception of the "incommensurability" of a constitution.

Title:Rethinking Comparative Constitutional Law. What does comparative constitutional law mean? A very large number of scholars write and talk about comparative constitutional law. However, how is it best to compare constitutions? A constitution embodies a constitutional code (the constitution in its formal sense) and substantive protection of human rights and separation of powers within the system of a government as found in Article 16 of France's Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, for example. To compare constitutional codes, for whatever results you would like to achieve and compare constitutions in any substantive way, is in reality very difficult to write or talk about. This article tries to demonstrate that comparative constitutional law is possible. To demonstrate this, we will start with the conception of the "incommensurability" of a constitution.

オーストラリアにおける差別表現規制について，国際人権法学会から依頼された報告に基づき執筆した。報告においては時間の関係もあり判例はあまり詳細に紹介できなかったが，本論文では紙幅の許す限り詳細に紹介したうえで，特徴と問題点について論じた。国際人権条約実施という観点からは優れた点もあるが，オーストラリアは成文憲法を有するにも関わらず憲法に人権規定がほとんどなく，表現の自由保障との関係で重大な問題があることを具体的に論じた。

This is an introductory study concerning the implications of the human rights 'entrenchment' in a written constitution. In Japan, almost all constitutional scholars argue that the provisions of a bill of rights in a written constitution is necessary for the protection of human rights. However, a court's power to declare the statute's constitutionality sometimes does not work even if the legislative branch of government infringes on human rights. In contrast, the Commonwealth of the Australia Constitution Act [the Constitution] has no bill of rights. But various indices, e.g., Andrew Fagan, "The Atlas of HUMAN RIGHTS", sometimes indicate that human rights protection in Japan and Australia is equal. In the first section of this article I discuss some reasons. The second section discusses the meanings of "entrenchment" in constitutional context. To discuss this theme, this article compares the human rights protection in Australia and in Japan. This article does not argue whether or not the Commonwealth of Australia or States of Australia should have a bill of rights. In Australia, the Federal Government has no bill of rights in its written constitution, and did not enact

In almost all modern states, anti-terror legislation was concerned with domestic public order except for police action by the armed forces. However, after the September 11 terrorist attacks in 2001, the United States and United Kingdom created a permanent anti-terrorist legislation. The UK has had a long history of temporary anti-terror legislation, e.g., the Prevention of Violence (Temporary Provisions) Act 1939, and the Civil Authorities (Special Powers) Act 1922 (Northern Ireland). However the UK recently created permanent legislation. Especially from 2000 to 2008, the UK has created considerable amount of legislation, e.g., the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (c.2), the Terrorism Act 2006 (c.11), and the Counter Terrorism Act 2008. International security experts have pointed out repeatedly in anti-terror legislation that military power is not appropriate. In light of this problem, we must consider that UK has used the derogation clause, Article 15 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, usually called the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). I discuss Article 15 case laws of the ECHR, and of the UK domestic courts. From this