Adopting a comparative perspective, this book offers a comprehensive study of the institution of constitutional review in 11 European countries (Belgium, the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Hungary, the Netherlands, Spain, Poland and the United Kingdom) as well as a critical appraisal of the EU legal order in light of these national experiences.
Where possible, the book endeavours to identify Europe's common and diverse constitutional traditions of constitutional review.
More particularly, the raison d'etre, jurisdiction and composition of constitutional courts are explored and so too are core features of the constitutional adjudicatory process.
Yet, this book also deliberately draws attention to the role of non-judicial actors in upholding the Constitution, as well as the complex interplay amongst constitutional courts and other actors at the national and European level. ` ... a highly welcome contribution as a well-researched handbook for all those interested in comparative constitutional legal studies in the Member States and the EU constitutional legal order'.
Benedikt Pirker, European Law Blog` ... this book is a veritable tour de force as it is a tour d'Europe.
Comparative analysis of constitutional review from a neutral perspective encompassing eleven states and the EU, is a highly ambitious project, one that de Visser has achieved in accomplishing with great skill and eloquence'.
Joelle Grogan, EUtopia Law Blog`Ultimately, Maartje de Visser's comparative contribution to the exploration of the constitutional review issue should be warmly welcomed as an even-handed, lucidly written and insightful addition to the ever-swelling body of scholarship in this area ... the author has managed to construct, without superficiality and with well-paced order, a comprehensive and credible survey of constitutional review practices across Europe - a survey that is at once a heavy-duty piece of scholarship and a generally fascinating book'. Joseph Tomlinson, Cambridge Law Journal`[T]his book should be considered the new compulsory starting point for anyone interested in any key aspect of the constitutional adjudicatory process, and wishing to be quickly able to rely on authoritative points of comparison ... [I]t is difficult not to be struck by the quality of the research undertaken and the subtle nature of the analysis ...
Written in an engaging style, which constantly holds the reader's attention, de Visser's monograph makes a decisive contribution to our understanding of the institution of constitutional review in Europe.
There is little doubt that it will become a classic reference for the practitioners, academics and students of comparative constitutional law'. Laurent Pech, International Journal of Constitutional Law Blog (ICON-NECT)