Comparative Administrative Law
Show Less

Comparative Administrative Law

  • Research Handbooks in Comparative Law series

Edited by Susan Rose-Ackerman and Peter L. Lindseth

This research handbook is a comprehensive overview of the field of comparative administrative law. The specially commissioned chapters in this landmark volume represent a broad, multi-method approach combining perspectives from history and social science with more strictly legal analyses. Comparisons of the United States, continental Europe, and the British Commonwealth are complemented by contributions that focus on Latin America, Africa, and Asia. The work aims to stimulate comparative research on public law, reaching across countries and scholarly disciplines.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details

Chapter 8: Good-bye Montesquieu

Bruce Ackerman

Extract

8 Good-bye, Montesquieu Bruce Ackerman If the field of comparative administrative law is to have a future, we must build a new framework for analysis. The traditional contrast between common and civil law systems is a non-starter: Whatever its value in the private sector, it was never built to highlight the distinctive characteristics of administrative law. The same holds true for familiar models focusing on comparative criminal procedure (Damaska 1986). Models built on particular national experiences have their uses. The French Conseil d’Etat has had an influence in some other nations; as has the German system of administrative courts. But in the twenty-first century, we need a much broader framework that invites disciplined comparisons on a world-wide basis, and informed normative reflection on the evolving lessons of experience. This requires us to move decisively beyond Montesquieu’s reflections on the separation of powers (Montesquieu 1989). No other field of academic inquiry is so dominated by a single thinker, let alone an eighteenth-century thinker. However great he may have been, Montesquieu did not have the slightest inkling of political parties, democratic politics, modern constitutional designs, contemporary bureaucratic techniques, and the distinctive ambitions of the modern regulatory state. And yet we mindlessly follow him in supposing that all this complexity is best captured by a trinitarian separation of power into the legislative, judicial, and executive – with comparative administrative law somehow captured in the last branch of the trinity. Give Montesquieu his due. His theory represented a fundamental advance over traditional Aristotelian understandings of...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.


Further information

or login to access all content.