Courts and Populist Electoral Politics – the Case of Hungary

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Hague Journal on the Rule of Law Pub Date : 2024-05-06 DOI:10.1007/s40803-024-00218-3
János Mécs
{"title":"Courts and Populist Electoral Politics – the Case of Hungary","authors":"János Mécs","doi":"10.1007/s40803-024-00218-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Elections are devices, through which the abstract concept of representation gains its specified institutional form, therefore they are highly relevant for populists. The paper examines the illiberal-populist project of redesigning the legal framework of elections in Hungary after 2010, focusing on the role of the Hungarian Constitutional Court (HCC) in reviewing electoral law as well as interacting with the ordinary courts through electoral adjudication. It is argued that although a distinct ‘populist imagination’ (Müller) of elections is discernible, there is no special populist electoral politics, rather the ‘inherent authoritarianism of democracy’ (Pildes) is exacerbated. In Hungary the electoral legislation was shrewdly tailored to the governmental parties’ needs, and electoral politics is constantly subjected to instrumental changes. It is argued that although apex courts could be key players in checking electoral manipulation, the HCC did not protect effectively the integrity of electoral law, and at a later stage it even intervened in an arbitrary and arguably politically biased manner. The paper argues that the Hungarian example underscores the need for enhanced court activism in terms of electoral law, especially when populists already came to power.</p>","PeriodicalId":45733,"journal":{"name":"Hague Journal on the Rule of Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hague Journal on the Rule of Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-024-00218-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Elections are devices, through which the abstract concept of representation gains its specified institutional form, therefore they are highly relevant for populists. The paper examines the illiberal-populist project of redesigning the legal framework of elections in Hungary after 2010, focusing on the role of the Hungarian Constitutional Court (HCC) in reviewing electoral law as well as interacting with the ordinary courts through electoral adjudication. It is argued that although a distinct ‘populist imagination’ (Müller) of elections is discernible, there is no special populist electoral politics, rather the ‘inherent authoritarianism of democracy’ (Pildes) is exacerbated. In Hungary the electoral legislation was shrewdly tailored to the governmental parties’ needs, and electoral politics is constantly subjected to instrumental changes. It is argued that although apex courts could be key players in checking electoral manipulation, the HCC did not protect effectively the integrity of electoral law, and at a later stage it even intervened in an arbitrary and arguably politically biased manner. The paper argues that the Hungarian example underscores the need for enhanced court activism in terms of electoral law, especially when populists already came to power.

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
法院与民粹主义选举政治--匈牙利案例
选举是一种手段,抽象的代表权概念通过选举获得了具体的制度形式,因此选举与民粹主义者密切相关。本文探讨了 2010 年后匈牙利重新设计选举法律框架的非自由主义-民粹主义项目,重点关注匈牙利宪法法院(HCC)在审查选举法以及通过选举裁决与普通法院互动方面的作用。文章认为,虽然选举中明显存在 "民粹主义想象"(Müller),但并不存在特殊的民粹主义选举政治,相反,"民主固有的威权主义"(Pildes)被加剧了。在匈牙利,选举立法是根据政府政党的需要精明定制的,选举政治不断受到工具性变化的影响。本文认为,虽然最高法院可以成为遏制选举操纵的关键角色,但匈牙利中央法院并没有有效保护选举法的完整性,甚至在后期以一种武断和带有政治偏见的方式进行干预。本文认为,匈牙利的例子强调了加强法院在选举法方面的积极性的必要性,尤其是在民粹主义者已经上台执政的情况下。
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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
18.20%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: The Hague Journal on the Rule of Law (HJRL) is a multidisciplinary journal that aims to deepen and broaden our knowledge and understanding about the rule of law. Its main areas of interest are: current developments in rule of law in domestic, transnational and international contextstheoretical issues related to the conceptualization and implementation of the rule of law in domestic and international contexts;the relation between the rule of law and economic development, democratization and human rights protection;historical analysis of rule of law;significant trends and initiatives in rule of law promotion (practitioner notes).The HJRL is supported by HiiL Innovating Justice, The Hague, the Netherlands and the Paul Scholten Center for Jurisprudence at the Law School of the University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Editorial PolicyThe HJRL welcomes contributions from academics and practitioners with expertise in any relevant field, including law, anthropology, economics, history, philosophy, political science and sociology. It publishes two categories of articles: papers (appr. 6,000-10,000 words) and notes (appr. 2500 words). Papers are accepted on the basis of double blind peer-review. Notes are accepted on the basis of review by two or more editors of the journal. Manuscripts submitted to the HJRL must not be under consideration for publication elsewhere. Acceptance of the Editorial Board’s offer to publish, implies that the author agrees to an embargo on publication elsewhere for a period of two years following the date of publication in the HJRL.
期刊最新文献
How to Assess Rule-of-Law Violations in a State of Emergency? Towards a General Analytical Framework The Shifting Landscape of Judicial Independence Criteria Under the Preliminary Reference Procedure: A Comment on the CJEU’s Recent Case Law and the Trajectory of Article 267 TFEU The Rule of Law and Corporate Actors: Measuring Influence Rebuilding the Rule of Law in the Era of Democratic Backsliding EU Lawlessness Law at the EU-Belarusian Border: Torture and Dehumanisation Excused by ‘Instrumentalisation’
×
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