The idea of the rule of law, more ubiquitous globally today than ever before, owes a lasting debt to the work of Victorian legal theorist A. V. Dicey. But for all of Dicey's influence, little attention has been paid to the imperial entanglements of his thought, including on the rule of law. This article seeks to bring the imperial dimensions of Dicey's thinking about the rule of law into view. On Dicey's account, the rule of law represented a distinctive English civilisational achievement, one that furnished a liberal justification for British imperialism. And yet Dicey was forced to acknowledge that imperial rule at times required arbitrariness and formal inequality at odds with the rule of law. At a moment when the rule of law has once more come to license all sorts of transnational interventions by globally powerful political actors, Dicey's preoccupations and ambivalences are in many ways our own.

No abstract

No abstract

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have long called for structural reform to Australia’s institutional framework to protect and promote their rights. In recent years, however, state and territory governments have proven more receptive to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ advocacy than the Commonwealth. In this article, we identify and map the return of the states and territories — and the retreat of the Commonwealth — in Indigenous law reform. While substantial progress has been made, significant risks are involved in the pursuit of subnational reform. It remains imperative that the Commonwealth government meaningfully engage with the aspirations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as recorded in the Uluru Statement from the Heart.

No abstract