This book sheds light on the under-examined theme of the drafting of
equality rights in constitutional bills of rights. It focuses on three
jurisdictions where equality has been central to constitutional debate:
South Africa, Canada, Northern Ireland. Avoiding the tendency in much of
comparative constitutional law literature to focus on the work of
courts, this work draws on empirical research to provide a comprehensive
account of the different aspects of the drafting process and
difficulties societies face when designing equality rights in bills of
rights. The book does this by providing the first systematic analysis of
three jurisdictions (South Africa, Canada and Northern Ireland) which
have adopted, or debated the adoption of, bills of rights.
This is a timely and fascinating book which will help shape and share
comparative constitutional scholarship. The book demonstrates how the
drafting of an equality provision in bills of rights must be understood
against the local background political context in which it is immersed.
As the book contains a structured comparison of three countries, it has
a wide reach: it provides an essential guide for human rights
campaigners, the community and voluntary sector, constitutional law
practitioners, the international community, politicians and government,
academics and students who wish to know more about the importance of the
drafting process and, in particular, the choices raised in drafting
equality rights provisions. It is in this context that the comparative
experience of the three chosen jurisdictions is indispensable and
relevant.
