How Latin America's Judges are Defending Democracy

IF 4.3 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Journal of Democracy Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1353/jod.2024.a915353
Diego A. Zambrano, Ludmilla Martins da Silva, Rolando Garcia Miron, Santiago P. Rodríguez
{"title":"How Latin America's Judges are Defending Democracy","authors":"Diego A. Zambrano, Ludmilla Martins da Silva, Rolando Garcia Miron, Santiago P. Rodríguez","doi":"10.1353/jod.2024.a915353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Ten years of debates over democratic backsliding have failed to produce many examples of independent institutions thwarting authoritarian attempts on democracy. Yet Latin American courts seem to be countering this larger trend. The three largest countries in the region—Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia—have produced robust institutions able to check leaders with authoritarian tendencies, with high courts playing a fundamental role. In a dramatic succession of recent cases, courts in these three countries have been innovative, acted with a high degree of independence, and appear legitimately interested in defending democratic norms. All of this is profoundly surprising. There is little to no track record of independent Latin American judiciaries that stand in the way of authoritarian governments. Closer study of these three countries is therefore critical for scholars and practitioners, who are otherwise locked in debates over the importance of judicial review in preserving democracy. After dozens of judicial reform failures since the 1990s, we may be observing some overdue success. It appears that 1990s judicial reforms are making a comeback in Latin America.","PeriodicalId":48227,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Democracy","volume":"48 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Democracy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2024.a915353","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Ten years of debates over democratic backsliding have failed to produce many examples of independent institutions thwarting authoritarian attempts on democracy. Yet Latin American courts seem to be countering this larger trend. The three largest countries in the region—Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia—have produced robust institutions able to check leaders with authoritarian tendencies, with high courts playing a fundamental role. In a dramatic succession of recent cases, courts in these three countries have been innovative, acted with a high degree of independence, and appear legitimately interested in defending democratic norms. All of this is profoundly surprising. There is little to no track record of independent Latin American judiciaries that stand in the way of authoritarian governments. Closer study of these three countries is therefore critical for scholars and practitioners, who are otherwise locked in debates over the importance of judicial review in preserving democracy. After dozens of judicial reform failures since the 1990s, we may be observing some overdue success. It appears that 1990s judicial reforms are making a comeback in Latin America.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
拉丁美洲法官如何捍卫民主
摘要:十年来,关于民主倒退的辩论未能产生许多独立机构挫败专制民主企图的实例。然而,拉丁美洲的法院似乎正在抵制这一更大的趋势。该地区最大的三个国家--巴西、墨西哥和哥伦比亚--都建立了强有力的机构,能够制衡具有专制倾向的领导人,其中高等法院发挥了根本性的作用。在最近一系列引人注目的案件中,这三个国家的法院勇于创新、高度独立,而且似乎对捍卫民主准则有着正当的兴趣。所有这些都令人深感意外。在拉丁美洲,几乎没有独立的司法机构阻碍专制政府的记录。因此,对这三个国家进行更深入的研究对学者和实践者来说至关重要,否则他们就会陷入司法审查对维护民主的重要性的争论之中。在经历了 20 世纪 90 年代以来数十次司法改革失败之后,我们可能会看到一些早该取得的成功。1990 年代的司法改革似乎正在拉丁美洲卷土重来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Democracy
Journal of Democracy POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
60
期刊介绍: Since its inception in 1990, the Journal of Democracy has become an influential international forum for scholarly analysis and competing democratic viewpoints. Its articles have been cited in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal and widely reprinted in many languages. Focusing exclusively on democracy, the Journal monitors and analyzes democratic regimes and movements in scores of countries around the world. Each issue features a unique blend of scholarly analysis, reports from democratic activists, updates on news and elections, and reviews of important recent books.
期刊最新文献
The Autocrat-in-Training: The Sisi Regime at 10 Gulf States and Sharp Power: Allies to Adversaries The Global Resistance to LGBTIQ Rights Why Separatism Is No Match for Democracy Does Democracy Have a Future in Pakistan?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1