ABSTRACT
The rules of interpretation appropriate for a Bill of Rights in a common law jurisdiction have their origin in the common law rules of statutory interpretation. They take their special flavour from rules of constitutional interpretation first developed in the United States of America. Bills of Rights are invariably modelled on international and regional human rights declarations and conventions, and, for that reason, interpretation of such international instruments naturally influences domestic courts. The result of this rich diversity of sources is that courts have a spectrum of choices ranging from solemn deference to legislative intention1 to adventurous judicial activism reaffirming that the judiciary is after all not the ‘least dangerous branch’ of government.2
