Perils Of Judicial Self Government In Transitional Societies

This book investigates the mechanisms of judicial control to determine an efficient methodology for independence and accountability. Using over 800 case studies from the Czech and Slovak disciplinary courts, the author creates a theoretical framework that can be applied to future case studies and decrease the frequency of accountability perversions.

This book investigates the causes and consequences of congressional attacks on the US Supreme Court, arguing that the extent of public support for judicial independence constitutes the practical limit of judicial independence. First, the book presents a historical overview of Court-curbing proposals in Congress. Then, building on interviews with Supreme Court justices, members of Congress, and judicial and legislative staffers, the book theorizes that congressional attacks are driven by public discontent with the Court. From this theoretical model, predictions are derived about the decision to engage in Court-curbing and judicial responsiveness to Court-curbing activity in Congress. The Limits of Judicial Independence draws on illustrative archival evidence, systematic analysis of an original dataset of Court-curbing proposals introduced in Congress from 1877 onward and judicial decisions.

The European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”) suffers from the burgeoning caseload and challenges to its authority. This two-pronged crisis undermines the ECtHR’s legitimacy and consequently the functioning of the whole European human rights regime. Domestic courts can serve as welcome allies of the Strasbourg Court. They have a potential to diffuse Convention norms domestically, and therefore prevent and filter many potential human rights violations. Yet, we know very little about how domestic courts actually treat the Strasbourg Court’s rulings. This book brings unique empirical findings on how often, how and with what consequences domestic judges work with the ECtHR’s case law. It moves beyond the narrow concept of compliance and develops a new three-level methodology for analysing the role played by domestic courts in the implementation of ECtHR case law. Moreover, using the example of Czechia, it shifts the attention from Western countries to a more volatile Central and Eastern European region, which has recently witnessed democratic backsliding and backlash against international checks on human rights and the rule of law standards. Looking at a wider social and legal context, this book identifies factors helping transitional countries to adapt to regional human rights regimes. The work will be an essential resource for students, academics and policy-makers working in the areas of Constitutional law, Politics and Human Rights law. Its global appeal is enhanced by the methodological framework which is applicable in other international systems.

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.

Recent confrontations between constitutional courts and parliamentary majorities, for example in Poland and Hungary, have attracted international interest in the relationship between the judiciary and the legislature in Central and Eastern European countries. Several political actors have argued that courts have assumed too much power after the democratic transformation process in 1989/1990. These claims are explicitly or implicitly connected to the charge that courts have constrained the room for manoeuvre of the legislatures too heavily and that they have entered the field of politics. Nevertheless, the question to what extent has this aggregation of power constrained the dominant political actors has never been examined accurately and systematically in the literature. The present volume fills this gap by applying an innovative research methodology to quantify the impact and effect of court’s decisions on legislation and legislators, and measure the strength of judicial decisions in six CEE countries.

This book explains how the idea and practice of UCA are shaped by, and inform, constitutional politics through various social and political actors, and in both formal and informal amendment processes, across Asia. This is the first book-length study of the law and politics of unconstitutional constitutional amendments in Asia. Comprising ten case studies from across the continent, and four broader, theoretical chapters, the volume provides an interdisciplinary, comparative perspective on the rising phenomenon of unconstitutional constitutional amendments (UCA) across a range of political, legal, and institutional contexts. The volume breaks new ground by venturing beyond the courts to consider UCA not only as a judicial doctrine, but also as a significant feature of political and intellectual discourse. The book will be a valuable reference for law and political science researchers, as well as for policymakers and NGOs working in related fields. Offering broad coverage of jurisdictions in East Asia, Southeast Asia and South Asia, it will be useful to scholars and practitioners within Asia as well as to those seeking to better understand the law and politics of the region.

This second edition examines judicial independence as an aspect of democratization based on the premise that democracy cannot be consolidated without the rule of law of which judicial independence is an indispensable part. It pays particular attention to the restraints placed upon judicial independence and examines the reforms which are being applied, or remain to be adopted, in order to guard against the different kinds of interference which prevent judicial decisions being taken in a wholly impartial way. Focusing on the growing authoritarianism in the new democracies of Eastern Europe, Latin America, Asia and Africa, the book analyses the paradox of judicial activism arising from the independence endowed upon the judiciary and the rights bestowed on citizens by post-authoritarian constitutions. Finally, it asks how judicial accountability can be made compatible with the preservation of judicial independence when the concept of an accountable, independent judiciary appears to be a contradiction in terms. This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of judicial studies, democratization and autocratization studies, constitutionalism, global governance, and more broadly comparative government/politics, human rights and comparative public law.