 Denouncing the ‘One Voice’ DoctrineMarcus Teo Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 2025, vol. 45, issue 1, 26-54 Abstract: The ‘one voice’ doctrine holds that the executive’s recognition of foreign states and governments is conclusive evidence of their status as such in English proceedings. However, the doctrine—properly understood as an irrebuttable presumption of status—is beset with theoretical and practical problems. Here, I argue that courts should abandon it, for three reasons: first, the doctrine is motivated by overbroad accounts of the executive’s foreign affairs prerogative; second, it suffers from inconsistencies on matters of scope, which its underlying justifications cannot resolve; and third, the doctrine creates conceptual incoherence, undermining the purpose of other doctrines which operate contingently upon it. In its place, courts should adopt an alternative rule, triggering a rebuttable presumption of status and attributing evidential weight to executive certificates, which avoids these problems while still serving the ‘one voice’ doctrine’s only legitimate purpose: helping courts reliably answer questions of status. Keywords: recognition; prerogative; one voice; foreign relations; constitutional law; conflict of laws (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:oxjlsj:v:45:y:2025:i:1:p:26-54. Access Statistics for this article Oxford Journal of Legal Studies is currently edited by Liz Fisher, Stefan Enchelmaier, Andreas Televantos, Liora Lazarus and Jennifer Payne More articles in Oxford Journal of Legal Studies from Oxford University Press |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.