{"title":"Institutional law reform in New Zealand: the importance of independence","authors":"G. McLay","doi":"10.1080/20508840.2018.1475900","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this article, Geoff McLay, a former New Zealand Law Commissioner, asks what distinguishes Law Commissions from government agencies through which Governments might seek to reform the law. He does this by examining the work of the New Zealand Law Commission within the context of reform generally within New Zealand in order to establish what the Law Commission adds to the general policy and law-making machinery. Professor McLay argues that the work of the Commission, and its success (and failures), can be usefully viewed through two lenses of identity and process. The identity lens points to the aspects of the Commission’s work that come from it being a ‘Law Commission’ and explains much of its work in the area of ‘lawyers’ law reform'. The process lens which focuses on the Commission’s independence from Government policy control explains the Commission’s ability to take on non traditional projects. He argues that it is this independence, albeit imperfect, that makes the Law Commission a valuable part of the law-making scene that should not be necessarily restricted to ‘lawyers’ law reform'.","PeriodicalId":42455,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Legislation","volume":"1994 1","pages":"167 - 191"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2018-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20508840.2018.1475900","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Practice of Legislation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2018.1475900","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT In this article, Geoff McLay, a former New Zealand Law Commissioner, asks what distinguishes Law Commissions from government agencies through which Governments might seek to reform the law. He does this by examining the work of the New Zealand Law Commission within the context of reform generally within New Zealand in order to establish what the Law Commission adds to the general policy and law-making machinery. Professor McLay argues that the work of the Commission, and its success (and failures), can be usefully viewed through two lenses of identity and process. The identity lens points to the aspects of the Commission’s work that come from it being a ‘Law Commission’ and explains much of its work in the area of ‘lawyers’ law reform'. The process lens which focuses on the Commission’s independence from Government policy control explains the Commission’s ability to take on non traditional projects. He argues that it is this independence, albeit imperfect, that makes the Law Commission a valuable part of the law-making scene that should not be necessarily restricted to ‘lawyers’ law reform'.
期刊介绍:
The Theory and Practice of Legislation aims to offer an international and interdisciplinary forum for the examination of legislation. The focus of the journal, which succeeds the former title Legisprudence, remains with legislation in its broadest sense. Legislation is seen as both process and product, reflection of theoretical assumptions and a skill. The journal addresses formal legislation, and its alternatives (such as covenants, regulation by non-state actors etc.). The editors welcome articles on systematic (as opposed to historical) issues, including drafting techniques, the introduction of open standards, evidence-based drafting, pre- and post-legislative scrutiny for effectiveness and efficiency, the utility and necessity of codification, IT in legislation, the legitimacy of legislation in view of fundamental principles and rights, law and language, and the link between legislator and judge. Comparative and interdisciplinary approaches are encouraged. But dogmatic descriptions of positive law are outside the scope of the journal. The journal offers a combination of themed issues and general issues. All articles are submitted to double blind review.