Publications – Page 7 – Professor Fiona de Londras

New article on Irish abortion law (Enright & de Londras)

Update I have now attached pre-print version of the article to this post.

My latest article, co-authored with Màiréad Enright (Kent), has just been published. Part of a special issue of the Medico-Legal Journal of Ireland to reflect on the first year of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, the conclusion of the paper presents a summarised version of the argument thus:

The cases of Miss Y and Savita Halappanavar demonstrate that the Eighth Amendment has been reduced, over the years, to a catalogue of anomalies, unexplained readings, missed opportunities and speculative silences. Although the constitutional text might be applied in a manner that more appropriately recognises women’s autonomy as well as their rights to health, bodily integrity and privacy, this would require a fundamental shift in the interpretation of Art.40.3.3°, led either by the judiciary or the Oireachtas. This is a highly unlikely prospect owing to a likely reluctance by the judiciary to engage in such activism in the field of abortion jurisprudence, given the political fallout from the X case, probable political resistance to grasping the nettle of abortion law reform and cross-party disagreement on the appropriate legal regime in Ireland. In this sort of instance, constitutional reform by means of a referendum is clearly required. The shape of such reform might be decided following a period of consultation, perhaps by means of a specially-convened constitutional convention. However, before that can happen, we must agree, in principle, that the status quo is unsustainable. The cases of Miss Y and Savita Halappanavar, which frame this article, bring the hardship caused by the Eighth Amendment into stark relief.

The full citation is Mairead Enright & Fiona de Londras, “‘Empty Without and Empty Within’: the Unworkability of the Eighth Amendment after Savita Halappanavar & Miss Y” (2014) 20 Medico-Legal Journal of Ireland 85

New Book: Critical Debates on Counter-Terrorism Judicial Review

I am delighted that my new book, co-edited with Fergal F. Davis (UNSW), has now been published by Cambridge University Press. The book, entitled Critical Debates on Counter-Terrorism Judicial Review, features an excellent collection of international scholars who bring their own unique perspectives to the debates about the role and nature of judicial review of counter-terrorist measures, as well as alternatives to judicial oversight (such as enhanced political oversight, enquiries and independent reviewers). This is reflected in the table of contents:

Introduction

Counter-terrorist judicial review: beyond dichotomies, Fergal F. Davis and Fiona de Londras

Part I. Judging Counter-Terrorist Judicial Review
1. Counter-terrorist judicial review as regulatory constitutionalism, Fiona de Londras
2. Counter-terrorism judicial review by a traditionally weak judiciary, Jens Elo Rytter
3. When good cases go bad: unintended consequences of rights-friendly judgments, David Jenkins
4. The rhetoric and reality of judicial review of counter-terrorism actions: the United States experience, Jules Lobel
Part II. Beyond Counter-Terrorist Judicial Review
5. Emergency law as administrative law, Mark Tushnet
6. The politics of counter-terrorism judicial review: creating effective parliamentary scrutiny, Fergal F. Davis
7. Independent reviewers as alternative: an empirical study from Australia and the UK, Jessie Blackbourn
8. Public inquiries as an attempt to fill accountability gaps left by judicial and legislative review, Kent Roach
Part III. Counter-Terrorist Judicial Review in the Political Constitution
9. Rebalancing the unbalanced constitution: juridification and national security in the United Kingdom, Roger Masterman
10. Running business as usual: deference in counter-terrorist rights review, Cora Chan
10. Deference and dialogue in the real-world counter-terror context, Gavin Phillipson
Part IV. Internationalised Counter-Terrorist Judicial Review
11. Counter-terrorism law and judicial review: the challenge for the Court of Justice of the European Union, Cian C. Murphy
12. Post 9/11 UK counter-terrorism cases in the European Court of Human Rights: a ‘dialogic’ approach to rights’ protection or appeasement of national authorities?, Helen Fenwick
13. Accountability for counter-terrorism: challenges and potential in the role of the courts, Helen Duffy.

The book emerged from a workshop generously funded by the British Academy/Leverhulme Trust small grants scheme, and can now be ordered directly from CUP. You can also read the substantive introductory chapter written by myself and Fergal for free through my SSRN page, and my chapter on the Durham repository.

New Report: de Londras & Grozdanova on Victims’ Rights in Ireland

Some time ago I was invited to act as a country expert in the IALS/CECL led project on the implementation of the EU Victims’ Rights Directive in Ireland. Together with Rumyana Grozdanova, a PhD student in Durham, I undertook both desk research and a series of interviews with key stakeholders in the Irish criminal justice system in the summer of 2013, which resulted in the preparation of a report on the challenges for implementation in Ireland. The report is available here.

Latest Publication: “Counter-Terrorist Detention and International Human Rights Law”

I am delighted to see that Ben Saul (ed), Research Handbook on Terrorism and International Law (Edward Elgar) has now been published. This impressive collection covers the widest imaginable range of topics within its broad scope, and includes a chapter by me on counter-terrorist detention and human rights law. A pre-print of the chapter is available on SSRN, and the abstract is below.

In this chapter I consider the compatibility of counter-terrorist detention with international human rights law from the starting point that what is protected in international law is not a right to be free from detention per se but rather a right to be free from the arbitrary deprivation of one’s liberty. This is clearly rooted in international human rights law, which is the main focus of this chapter (acknowledging that it interacts with international humanitarian law in situations of armed conflict).

The chapter demonstrates that counter-terrorist detention can be compatible with the standards of international human rights law as they have been interpreted and applied in the past decade, but that in the process of such interpretation and application those standards have at times been diluted to a worrying extent.