W2 R2

A Theory of Constitutional Change

I. Introduction

  • Purpose: Elaborate a theory of constitutional change to interpret 20 years of constitutional development in New Zealand.

  • Context: Traditional constitutional theory is perceived to have limits; existing scholarship did not address certain evolving constitutional issues adequately.

  • Thesis: Constitutional theory must draw on extra-legal sources while maintaining methodological rigor.

  • Key Starting Point: Interpretation begins with the judicial views of Cooke J., a senior New Zealand judge, who questioned the absolute sovereignty of New Zealand Parliament.

II. Legal Basis of New Zealand Sovereignty

  • Historical Context:

    • The earliest constitutions were established in 1840 with temporary structures evolving over time.

    • The Constitution Act, 1852, is notable for granting the General Assembly power to legislate for the "peace, order and good government".

  • Key Legal Provisions:

    • Section 53 of the Constitution Act, 1852:

    • Granted legislative power to "General Assembly" with restrictions to not legislate against English law determining repugnancy.

    • Colonial Laws Validity Act, 1865: Clarified that only colonial acts passed in sync with Imperial statute would be valid.

    • Constitution Amendment Powers:

    • Initially limited in capacity which was progressively amended through subsequent Acts, leading to significant alterations in 1947 that facilitated a path to complete sovereign legislative power.

III. Foundations of Constitutional Change in New Zealand

A. Towards Sovereignty

  • 1973 Amendment Act: Pivotal in affirming parliamentary sovereignty, allowing Parliament plenary powers.

    • Stressed that the validity of Acts cannot be challenged based on retrospective authority.

    • Further emphasized self-defined legislative competence without external constraints.

  • Parliamentary Sovereignty:

    • Acclaimed as the core of the legal and political identity, making the Parliament effectively self-governing.

    • Discussions revolved around limits of legislative power and accountability, underscoring the role of historical context and constitutional design.

B. The Retreat from Sovereignty

  • Societal Changes and Challenges:

    • The economic pressures of the 1970s led to increased governmental regulation and diminished public trust in traditional parliamentary structures.

    • Example Case: Fitzgerald v. Muldoon illustrated executive overreach leading to a judicial ruling against the unlawful actions of parliament.

  • Criticism of Executive Power:

    • Noted increase in government’s regressive legislative actions leading to questions about individual rights and freedoms undermining the legislative ideal.

C. The New Discourse

  • Emerging Discourses:

    • A significant discourse appears critical of the expansion of executive powers, advocating for the establishment of definitive constitutional limits.

  • Judicial Reactions:

    • Cooke J. articulated concerns over the potential for parliamentary overreach, advocating for rights which may be protected from legislative alteration.

    • Discussion of Common Law Rights: Not an absolute check but highlighted the underlying need for constitutional safeguards against legislative encroachment.

IV. The Hermeneutics of Constitutional Change

A. Methodology

  • Emphasizes the importance of understanding legal institutions, including the roles of courts, legislation, and interpretive communities in shaping constitutional discourse.

  • Institutional Framework and Interpretive Community:

    • Outlines how authoritative statements about the constitution emerge from these institutions.

B. Implications of Change

  • Legislation must be viewed against a backdrop of evolving socio-political context rather than a one-size-fits-all legal framework.

  • Impact of Legal Positivism: A dominant perspective that narrows alternative discursive spaces, limiting critical inquiry into governmental powers.

C. Suggested Approaches to Change

  • Proposes an interpretative framework capable of integrating emerging discourses while maintaining relevance to material and historical contexts.

  • Change as Evolutionary: Advocates for an understanding of constitutional change as responsive to societal needs rather than strictly textual interpretations.

Conclusion

  • Comprehensive Understanding: Acknowledges the critical need for a theory that comprehensively addresses constitutional change within the evolving New Zealand context.

  • Call for Judicial Review: Advocates a Bill of Rights as essential for the protection of fundamental rights against potential legislative overreach.

  • Recognition of ongoing political debates around rights and freedoms, underscoring the dynamic nature of constitutional discourse.