Through the lens of five institutional functions - quasi-legislative, quasi-judicial, recommendatory, empowering and sanctioning - this important book assesses the practice and legal foundations of the United Nations General Assembly in advancing international justice, an increasing priority of the international community. Challenging the assumption that the General Assembly is merely a weak deliberative assembly, Michael Ramsden shows that its pioneering resolutions on international justice have become an invaluable tool in the fight against impunity. As concerns remain over the aptness of international institutions in responding to atrocities, particularly the Security Council, this book establishes the legal foundation for the General Assembly to step into the breach. Chapters also offer innovative arguments on the General Assembly's institutional powers to end impunity as well as a detailed examination on the influence of General Assembly resolutions in judicial decision-making. International Justice in the United Nations General Assembly will be a key resource for scholars and students in the fields of international law and international institutional law, as well as UN and international institutional practitioners who are involved in policy development.

Research on comparative administrative law, in contrast to comparative constitutional law, remains largely underdeveloped. This book plugs that gap. It considers how a wide range of common law systems have received and adapted English common law to the needs of their own socio-political context. Readers will be given complex insights into a wide range of common law systems of administrative law, which they may not otherwise have access to given how difficult it would be to research all of the systems covered in the volume single-handedly. The book covers Scotland, Ireland, the USA, Canada, Israel, South Africa, Kenya, Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong SAR, India, Bangladesh, Australia and New Zealand. Comparative public lawyers will have a much greater range of common law models of administrative law - either to pursue conversations about their own common law system or to sophisticate their comparison of their system (civil law or otherwise) with common law systems.

Research on comparative administrative law, in contrast to comparative constitutional law, remains largely underdeveloped. This book plugs that gap. It considers how a wide range of common law systems have received and adapted English common law to the needs of their own socio-political context. Readers will be given complex insights into a wide range of common law systems of administrative law, which they may not otherwise have access to given how difficult it would be to research all of the systems covered in the volume single-handedly. The book covers Scotland, Ireland, the USA, Canada, Israel, South Africa, Kenya, Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong SAR, India, Bangladesh, Australia and New Zealand. Comparative public lawyers will have a much greater range of common law models of administrative law - either to pursue conversations about their own common law system or to sophisticate their comparison of their system (civil law or otherwise) with common law systems.

The use and scope of judicial review of government action has transformed across the common law world over the last forty years. This volume takes stock of the transformation, bringing together over 30 leading figures from academia and practice to analyze the major issues surrounding the legal reforms from theoretical and comparative perspectives.
Coverage in the book spans the theoretical foundations of judicial review; the scope and functions of administrative justice; the conditions of judicial independence; recurring problems in legal doctrine; and issues in legal procedure. A final set of essays presents case studies of the experiences of reforming judicial review in different countries, including an extended section on judicial review in China.