Whereas most scholars approach precedent as an issue of compliance, the author argues that judges rely on precedent because of its utility in cutting information costs, decreasing uncertainty, and providing justification. This article explores the utility that foreign precedent had for high court judges in South Africa and Canada in the periods directly following the adoption of new constitutional protections for civil liberties. The analysis reveals that judges in these countries made significant use of both foreign and domestic precedent when dealing with new and/or highly contentious issues and that reliance on foreign precedent declined over time as judges developed an increasing number of indigenous precedents. This consideration of foreign precedent suggests that judges can be important contributors to the process of globalization in the area of human rights law.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Journal of Political Science. (1996, November). 40, 971-1082.
2.
Bale, Gordon . (1978). Stare decisis, the Supreme Court and law reform. Chitty's Law Journal, 26, 337-340.
3.
Brenner, Saul , & Stier, Marc. (1996). Retesting Segal and Spaeth's stare decisis model. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 1036-1048.
4.
Bushnell, S. I. (1986). The use of American cases. University of New Brunswick Law Journal, 35, 157-181.
5.
Caldeira, Gregory A. (1985). Transmission of legal precedent: A study of state supreme courts. American Political Science Review, 80, 178-193.
6.
Caldeira, Gregory A. (1988). Legal precedent: Structures of communication between state supreme courts. Social Networks, 10, 29-55.
7.
Callins v. Collins, 114 S.Ct. 1127 (1994).
8.
Cardozo, Benjamin . (1921). The nature of the judicial process. New Haven: Yale University Press.
9.
Ducat, Craig , Ostberg, Cynthia, & Wetstein, Matthew. (1998, September 5). Imitation and less sincere forms of flattery: The use of foreign precedent by the Canadian Supreme Court. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston.
10.
Ellmann, Stephen . (1995). Law and legitimacy in South Africa. Law and Social Inquiry, 20, 407.
11.
Epp, Charles R. (1998). The rights revolution: Lawyers, activists and supreme courts in comparative perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12.
Eyestone, Robert . (1977). Diffusion and innovation. American Political Science Review, 71, 441-447.
13.
Foltz, William . (1993). Democracy in post-apartheid South Africa: External influences. In J. Chipasula & A. Chilivumbo (Eds.), South Africa's dilemmas in the post apartheid era (pp. 127-137). New York: University Press of America.
14.
Friedman, Lawrence , Kagan, Robert, Cartwright, Bliss, & Wheeler, Stanton. (1981). State supreme courts: A century of style and citation. Stanford Law Review, 33, 773-818.
15.
Gessner, Volkmar . (1998). Globalization and legal certainty. In V. Gessner & A. Budak (Eds.), Emerging legal certainty: Empirical studies on the globalization of law (pp. 427-450). Brookfield, VT: Ashgate.
16.
Gessner, Volkmar , & Budak, Ali Cem (Eds.). (1998). Emerging legal certainty: Empirical studies on the globalization of law. Brookfield, VT: Ashgate.
17.
Gibson, James L. , Caldeira, Gregory A., & Baird, Vanessa. (1998). On the legitimacy of high courts. American Political Science Review, 92, 343-358.
18.
Gibson, James L. , & Gouws, Amanda. (1997). Support for the rule of law in the emerging South African democracy. International Social Science Journal, 49, 173-191.
19.
Glendon, Mary Ann . (1991). Rights talk: The impoverishment of political discourse. New York: Free Press.
20.
Gray, Virginia . (1973). Innovations in the states: A diffusion study. American Political Science Review, 67, 1174-1185.
21.
Hall, Melinda Gann , & Brace, Paul. (1999). State supreme courts and their environments: Avenues to general theories of judicial choice. In C. Clayton & H. Gillman (Eds.), Supreme Court decision-making: New institutional approaches (pp. 281-300). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22.
Harkins, S. G. , & Petty, R. E. (1981). The effects of source magnification on cognitive effort or attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 401-413.
23.
Harris, Peter . (1985). Ecology and culture in the communication of precedent among state courts, 1870-1970. Law and Society Review, 19, 449-486.
24.
Harvie, Robert , & Foster, Hamar. (1990). Ties that bind? The Supreme Court of Canada, American jurisprudence, and the revision of Canadian criminal law under the Charter. Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 28, 731-787.
25.
Klingman, David . (1980). Temporal and spatial diffusion in comparative analysis of social change. American Political Science Review, 74, 123-137.
26.
Knight, Jack , & Epstein, Lee. (1996). The norm of stare decisis. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 1018-1035.
27.
Lindblom, Charles . (1959). The science of “muddling through.”Public Administration Review, 19, 79-88.
28.
Macklem, Patrick . (1984). Freedom of conscience and religion in Canada. University of Toronto Faculty Law Review, 42, 50-81.
29.
Mandel, Michael . (1989). The Charter of Rights and the legalization of politics in Canada. Toronto: Wall and Thompson.
30.
Manfredi, Christopher . (1990). Use of United States decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 23, 499-518.
31.
McGrew, Anthony . (1998). Global legal interaction and present-day patterns of globalization. In V. Gessner & A. Budak (Eds.), Emerging legal certainty: Empirical studies on the globalization of law (pp. 326-345). Brookfield, VT: Ashgate.
32.
McLachlin, Beverly . (1989). The Charter of Rights and Freedoms: A judicial perspective. University of British Columbia Law Review, 23, 579-590.
33.
McLachlin, Beverly . (1991). The Charter: A new role for the judiciary?Alberta Law Review, 29, 540-559.
34.
McWhinney, Edward . (1983). The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: The lessons of comparative jurisprudence. Canadian Bar Review, 1983, 55-68.
35.
Menzel, David , & Feller, Irwin. (1977). Leadership and interaction patterns in the diffusion of innovations among the American states. Western Political Quarterly, 30, 528-536.
36.
Merryman, John . (1954). The authority of authority: What the California Supreme Court cited in 1950. Stanford Law Review, 26, 613-673.
37.
Merryman, John . (1977). Toward a theory of citations: An empirical study of the citation practices of the California Supreme Court in 1950, 1960, and 1970. Stanford Law Review, 50, 381-428.
38.
Mohr, Lawrence . (1967). Determinants of innovation in organizations. American Political Science Review, 63, 111-126.
39.
Moore, D. L. , & Reardon, R. (1987). Source magnification: The role of multiple sources in the processing of advertising appeals. Journal of Marketing Research, 24, 412-417.
40.
Morton, F. L. (1984). Law, politics, and the judicial system in Canada. Calgary: University of Calgary.
41.
Morton, F. L. (1987). The political impact of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 20, 31-55.
42.
Pacelle, Richard , & Baum, Lawrence. (1992). Supreme Court authority in the judiciary: A study of remands. American Politics Quarterly, 20, 169.
43.
President of the Republic of South Africa v. Hugo. (1997). CCT 11/96.
44.
Rahey v. R. (1987). 1 SCR 588.
45.
Russell, Peter . (1983). The political purposes of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Canadian Bar Review, 61, 30-54.
46.
S. v. Makwanyane. (1995). CCT 3/94.
47.
S. v. Williams. (1995). CCT 20/94.
48.
Saumur v. City of Quebec. (1953). 2 SCR 299.
49.
Segal, Jeffrey , & Spaeth, Harold. (1996). The influence of stare decisis on the votes of United States Supreme Court justices. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 971-1003.
50.
Shapiro, Martin . (1965). Stability and change in judicial decision making: Incrementalism or stare decisis?Law in Transition Quarterly, 2, 134-157.
51.
Shapiro, Martin . (1972). Toward a theory of stare decisis. Journal of Legal Studies, 1, 134-157.
52.
Sikkink, Kathryn . (1998). Transnational politics, international relations theory, and human rights. PS: Political Science and Politics, 31, 517-521.
53.
Silbey, Susan . (1997). Let them eat cake: Globalization, postmodern colonialism and the possibilities of justice. Law and Society Review, 31, 207-235.
54.
Snell, James , & Vaughan, Frederick. (1985). The Supreme Court of Canada: History of the institution. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
55.
Songer, Donald , & Lindquist, Stefanie. (1996). Not the whole story: Justices' values and Supreme Court decision making. American Journal of Political Science, 40, 1049-1063.
56.
Spaeth, Harold , & Segal, Jeffrey. (1999). Majority rule or minority will? Adherence to precedent on the U.S. Supreme Court. New York: Cambridge University Press.
57.
Walker, Jack . (1969). The diffusion of innovations among the American states. American Political Science Review, 63, 880-889.
58.
Walsh, David J. (1997). On the meaning and pattern of legal citations: Evidence from state wrongful discharge precedent cases. Law and Society Review, 31, 337-360.
59.
Weiler, Paul . (1984). Rights and judges in a democracy: A new Canadian version. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 18, 51-92.
