Constitutional Cafe

Chile recently saw the defeat at a national referendum of a proposed new democratic constitution. What should we make of this result, and what does it mean for the future of democratic constitutional reform in Chile and globally? Did Chilean constitution-makers try to achieve too much, too fast? Was the vote the product of opposition disinformation, or popular misunderstanding? Or was the defeat a product of deeper forces pushing against the chances of successful democratic constitutional transformation? In this podcast, Rosalind Dixon explores these questions with an expert Chilean and comparative constitutional panel, including Professor Veronica Undagarra, Javier Cuoso and David Landau. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This podcast discusses the notion of ‘post-juristocracy’ – whether we're seeing the end of the broad global shift toward more powerful courts worldwide, which has been an ongoing trend for the almost 80 years post-World War II. These developments include the declining legitimacy of apex courts in states like the USA and India, preventive actions against the expansion of judicial power in states like the UK, capture of previously powerful courts in countries like Hungary, as well as trends such as the increasing scholarly and policy focus on fourth branch institutions such as electoral commissions and the 'deliberative wave' that mark a shift in focus on rights protection and achieving constitutional change from courts to bodies like citizens’ assemblies. While it’s not a monolithic phenomenon, these disparate but interacting political and scholarly trends raise a host of questions for constitutional lawyers about comparative methodology, constitutional design, and constitutional resilience. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The conceptualisation of landmark judgment and constitutional revolution is a topic that is new and to a certain extent quite original. While broadly used by scholars, lawmakers and the judiciary, until recently these two concepts have never received adequate theorisation in comparative constitutional law. In this episode, our guests, Eleonora Bottini and Yaniv Roznai, share their insights on their recent work in this area, from how they got interested in the subject, to the points of connection between the two concepts, including the challenges they have encountered when engaging in such definitional endeavour. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Associate Professor William Partlett speaks with Marina Agaltsova about her work at Memorial Human Rights Centre in Moscow and why that organisation is now facing liquidation. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Constitutional Café returns for a second season with an interview on a bold new book. Zaid Al Ali, Senior Programme Officer for International IDEA, joins Adrienne Stone to discuss his book, (2021) that examines the 2011 uprisings that swept across the Arab world in 2011. The conversation ranges widely over the nature of constitutional making, the idea of constitutional revolution and delves into the particular challenges of the Arab region.Arab Constitutionalism: the Coming Revolution See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Constitutional Cafe comes to you from the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at the Melbourne Law School. It is a place for scholarly but informal and fun conversations about constitutions and constitutional law with a global focus. If COVID has kept you from academic travel and you have been missing informal academic conversations, join us. We will bring those conversations to you. For more information, visit www.constitutional-cafe.org See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Why talk about the ‘global south’ in comparative constitutional law? In what ways does it matter and to whom? In this podcast episode Dinesha Samararatne, Senior Research Associate of the Laureate Program explores these and related questions, in conversation with Prof Cheryl Saunders,Laureate Professor Emeritus, Melbourne Law School. For more information on the topics discussed in this episode visit www.constitutional-cafe.org See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This episode of the podcast focuses on an underexplored theme in comparative constitutional law methodology: how languages shape the legal research in the field. The point of departure of the conversation is whether being proficient in a foreign language is required to engage in comparative constitutional law. The four speakers (Rosalind Dixon, Berihun Gebeye, Melissa Crouch and Francesco Palermo) are all established or emerging constitutional law scholars who have extensively worked and researched comparatively. They share their wide expertise and insights on the issue, and suggest that languages are not necessarily a barrier, as there are strategies that can be employed to overcome the lack of knowledge of a foreign language. The episode also touches upon related issues such as legal translations and foreign legal cultures. For more information on the topics discussed in this episode visit www.constitutional-cafe.org See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This podcast explores constitutional law in the understudied world of post-Soviet Eurasia. The discussion between the three guests – who are themselves both scholars and advocates based in three different countries in the region— demonstrates both the diversity of the region and the critical importance of constitutional law in the region for democratic development. The podcast also demonstrates the important theoretical lessons that Eurasia holds for better understanding the relationship between constitutional law and democratic governance. In particular, Eurasia helps us understand the impact of post-colonialism, history, and populism on the success of the project of constitutionalism. For more information on the topics discussed in this episode visit www.constitutional-cafe.org See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

‘Academic freedom’ is an idea close to the hearts of all constitutional scholars. But what are the constitutional dimensions of the principle? Given recent attacks on academic freedom in democracies as well authoritarian regimes, a better understanding is urgently required. In this episode, we discuss the protection of academic freedom as a principle of constitutional law, its relationship to other constitutional rights and consider what it requires of us as constitutional scholars. We are joined by three distinguished scholars: Ann-Katrin Kaufhold, Renata Uitz and Liora Lazarus. For more information on the topics discussed in this episode visit www.constitutional-cafe.org See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Comparative constitutional law scholars often find themselves working for a period of time, or even their entire career, in a legal system that is different from the one in which they were first educated and with which they are most familiar. Moving jurisdictions presents a range of opportunities, such as the ability to develop a deep familiarity with more than one constitutional system, and challenges, such as the difficulty of adjusting to a new scholarly culture. To discuss this topic, we are joined by Professor James Fowkes, Chair of Foreign and International Law at the University of Munster in Germany. For more information on the topics discussed in this episode visit www.constitutional-cafe.org See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Constitutional Cafe brings together constitutionalists the world over for informal but scholarly conversations about important issues in constitutional law and politics. It is brought to you by a team of comparative constitutional law scholars at the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at Melbourne Law School. Each episode one of our team assembles a group of experts to discuss recent developments, new ideas or enduring themes in constitutional studies. We are especially interested in emerging and overlooked issues and in places and institutions that are not often discussed It is produced by a team of comparative constitutional law scholars at the Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies at Melbourne Law School and funded by The Australian Research Council. For more information and to continue the conversation, visit www.constitutional-cafe.org See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.