Full Text Available
Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.
Does the watchdog bite: a comparative study of the judiciary as an accountability mechanism on high executive power in Malawi, Namibia and Seychelles
This thesis examines the evolution of constitutional review powers in Malawi, Namibia, and Seychelles following the adoption of rights-based democratic constitutions in the 1990s. It investigates whether the courts in these jurisdictions have developed a coherent set of norms and principles to hold...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English English |
| Published: |
Department of Public Law
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1869483641707429888 |
|---|---|
| access_status_str | Open Access |
| author | Barnes, Joelle Sarah |
| author2 | Corder, Hugh |
| author_browse | Barnes, Joelle Sarah Corder, Hugh |
| author_facet | Corder, Hugh Barnes, Joelle Sarah |
| author_sort | Barnes, Joelle Sarah |
| collection | Thesis |
| description | This thesis examines the evolution of constitutional review powers in Malawi, Namibia, and Seychelles following the adoption of rights-based democratic constitutions in the 1990s. It investigates whether the courts in these jurisdictions have developed a coherent set of norms and principles to hold the President and Cabinet accountable for their use of high executive power. Despite their similar constitutional frameworks, significant differences emerge in how these courts have navigated their expanded roles. The study highlights that while the courts have established standards for reviewing executive conduct, there is variability in the predictability and clarity of their jurisprudence. A comparative analysis, including a case study on judicial responses during the COVID-19 pandemic, reveals that Malawi exhibits a robust but unpredictable jurisprudence, Namibia demonstrates emerging standards with largely predictable outcomes, and Seychelles faces systemic challenges that hinder effective judicial review. The findings underscore the necessity of contextual factors—such as judicial independence and public faith in the legal system—in embedding these powers effectively. This research contributes to the understanding of how legal frameworks can promote accountability and supports ongoing academic inquiry into the evolving relationship between the judiciary and executive power in modern African democracies. |
| format | Thesis |
| id | oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/43320 |
| institution | University of Cape Town (South Africa) |
| language | English eng |
| last_indexed | 2026-07-01T04:02:14.038Z |
| license_str | Not specified — see source repository |
| provenance_str_mv | Harvested via OAI-PMH from UCTD — University of Cape Town Open Access Repository |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| publishDateRange | 2026 |
| publishDateSort | 2026 |
| publisher | Department of Public Law |
| publisherStr | Department of Public Law |
| record_format | dspace |
| source_str | UCTD — University of Cape Town Open Access Repository |
| spelling | oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/43320 Does the watchdog bite: a comparative study of the judiciary as an accountability mechanism on high executive power in Malawi, Namibia and Seychelles Barnes, Joelle Sarah Corder, Hugh De Vos, Pierre law This thesis examines the evolution of constitutional review powers in Malawi, Namibia, and Seychelles following the adoption of rights-based democratic constitutions in the 1990s. It investigates whether the courts in these jurisdictions have developed a coherent set of norms and principles to hold the President and Cabinet accountable for their use of high executive power. Despite their similar constitutional frameworks, significant differences emerge in how these courts have navigated their expanded roles. The study highlights that while the courts have established standards for reviewing executive conduct, there is variability in the predictability and clarity of their jurisprudence. A comparative analysis, including a case study on judicial responses during the COVID-19 pandemic, reveals that Malawi exhibits a robust but unpredictable jurisprudence, Namibia demonstrates emerging standards with largely predictable outcomes, and Seychelles faces systemic challenges that hinder effective judicial review. The findings underscore the necessity of contextual factors—such as judicial independence and public faith in the legal system—in embedding these powers effectively. This research contributes to the understanding of how legal frameworks can promote accountability and supports ongoing academic inquiry into the evolving relationship between the judiciary and executive power in modern African democracies. 2026-06-17T07:55:53Z 2026-06-17T07:55:53Z 2026 2026-06-17T07:53:37Z Thesis / Dissertation Doctoral PhD http://hdl.handle.net/11427/43320 en eng application/pdf Department of Public Law Faculty of Law University of Cape Town |
| spellingShingle | law Barnes, Joelle Sarah Does the watchdog bite: a comparative study of the judiciary as an accountability mechanism on high executive power in Malawi, Namibia and Seychelles |
| thesis_degree_str | Doctoral |
| title | Does the watchdog bite: a comparative study of the judiciary as an accountability mechanism on high executive power in Malawi, Namibia and Seychelles |
| title_full | Does the watchdog bite: a comparative study of the judiciary as an accountability mechanism on high executive power in Malawi, Namibia and Seychelles |
| title_fullStr | Does the watchdog bite: a comparative study of the judiciary as an accountability mechanism on high executive power in Malawi, Namibia and Seychelles |
| title_full_unstemmed | Does the watchdog bite: a comparative study of the judiciary as an accountability mechanism on high executive power in Malawi, Namibia and Seychelles |
| title_short | Does the watchdog bite: a comparative study of the judiciary as an accountability mechanism on high executive power in Malawi, Namibia and Seychelles |
| title_sort | does the watchdog bite a comparative study of the judiciary as an accountability mechanism on high executive power in malawi namibia and seychelles |
| topic | law |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/11427/43320 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT barnesjoellesarah doesthewatchdogbiteacomparativestudyofthejudiciaryasanaccountabilitymechanismonhighexecutivepowerinmalawinamibiaandseychelles |