Are the courts our friend or our foe? This book has three parts: Part I considers the case for judicial independence Part II looks at the question 'Is judicial independence under threat?' Part III reflects on whether judicial independence be defended and protected. Prompted by the constitutional crisis following the referendum of 2016, the Foundation for Law Justice and Society convened the second Putney Debates. Now convened on an annual basis, they provide a forum each year for the discussion of matters of constitutional importance. The original Putney Debates were held in St Mary's Church, Putney in 1647. The Civil War had been won, the King was held prisoner, the New Model Army was in control. In late October of that year, the weekly meeting of the High Council of the New Model Army, under the chairmanship of Oliver Cromwell, together with several civilians, turned into a debate about the constitution. This is perhaps the only occasion in modern history that a constitutional convention has been held on the English constitution.

Are the courts our friend or our foe? This book has three parts: Part I considers the case for judicial independence Part II looks at the question 'Is judicial independence under threat?' Part III reflects on whether judicial independence be defended and protected. Prompted by the constitutional crisis following the referendum of 2016, the Foundation for Law Justice and Society convened the second Putney Debates. Now convened on an annual basis, they provide a forum each year for the discussion of matters of constitutional importance. The original Putney Debates were held in St Mary's Church, Putney in 1647. The Civil War had been won, the King was held prisoner, the New Model Army was in control. In late October of that year, the weekly meeting of the High Council of the New Model Army, under the chairmanship of Oliver Cromwell, together with several civilians, turned into a debate about the constitution. This is perhaps the only occasion in modern history that a constitutional convention has been held on the English constitution.

Drawing upon David Hume's observation that, on the one hand people readily submit to authority, while on the other hand, authority depends on their opinion, Keepers of the Common Good examines the intricate interplay between opinion and submission to authority. The author proposes and develops a novel social understanding of constitutional authority and the place of the people. Analysing selected episodes of rebellion throughout history, the book traces the relationship between the people and the officials who govern. From the peasants of Gagliano who rejected the Italian state as illegitimate, to a wealth of rebellions in English history, the book builds on the social foundation earlier eloquently expressed as 'peoples precede nations'. In developing this idea, the author identifies, first, a lower register of constitutional discourse and ideas that emerge naturally within communities, and then, secondly, an upper register that gives meaning and justification to the prevailing constitutional order. By examining both registers, the book reveals their foundations, upon which an illuminating account of social relations between rulers and the ruled, officials, and the people is constructed. The book then identifies three distinct forms of rule: princely rule, people ruling themselves, and rule by representatives. After evaluating each model's explanatory power in explaining how people experience and influence the constitutional field, a fourth model of rule is proposed: the keeper's model. This model is used to explain the place and practice of the people in modern constitutional systems, broadly considered democratic. Although the book is not a study of democracy, a fresh and realistic understanding emerges from the keeper's model of the place of the people within the constitutional field.

This is the first part of a 2-volume set that presents an in-depth investigation into the canon of constitutionally conforming interpretation. These volumes address the fundamental issues the canon raises in the national, supranational and international contexts. In volume 1, experts from 19 jurisdictions, including Brazil, Canada, India, the UK, and the USA, present reports which give concise overviews of the approaches and debates on constitutionally conforming interpretation. These reports cover the structural background, the conditions of application, as well as issues of competence. Further aspects discussed are its perceived normativity and popularity in everyday legal practice. Together with volume 2, which explores the canon's use and theoretical impact beyond the national context in a comparative and critical manner, this book fills an important gap in legal scholarship and sets the stage for cross-national discourse.