From refuge to trap: formalist misadventures of Poland’s postsocialist legal profession

Maciej Kisilowski
{"title":"From refuge to trap: formalist misadventures of Poland’s postsocialist legal profession","authors":"Maciej Kisilowski","doi":"10.1080/09695958.2019.1646654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Since 2015 the populist government of the Law and Justice Party in Poland has spearheaded a highly effective campaign against the country’s lawyers, encountering relatively muted social opposition. Using Bourdieuan lenses, the article traces the roots of that remarkable institutional weakness of the Polish legal profession to the highly formalist approach to law and legal thinking that Poland’s lawyers espoused. Prior to the fall of communism, and in democratic Poland, the role of lawyers in society was to act as guardians of “neatness” of the legal system – or that system’s internal clarity, cohesion, and completeness. Such a sterile approach to legal practice was initially attractive, among other reasons, because it protected the legal profession from difficult legitimacy challenges stemming from that profession’s pre-1989 coexistence with the communist regime. With time, however, the refuge that formalism offered became a trap that undermined lawyers’ political and economic power.","PeriodicalId":43893,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of the Legal Profession","volume":"26 1","pages":"321 - 334"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09695958.2019.1646654","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of the Legal Profession","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09695958.2019.1646654","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Since 2015 the populist government of the Law and Justice Party in Poland has spearheaded a highly effective campaign against the country’s lawyers, encountering relatively muted social opposition. Using Bourdieuan lenses, the article traces the roots of that remarkable institutional weakness of the Polish legal profession to the highly formalist approach to law and legal thinking that Poland’s lawyers espoused. Prior to the fall of communism, and in democratic Poland, the role of lawyers in society was to act as guardians of “neatness” of the legal system – or that system’s internal clarity, cohesion, and completeness. Such a sterile approach to legal practice was initially attractive, among other reasons, because it protected the legal profession from difficult legitimacy challenges stemming from that profession’s pre-1989 coexistence with the communist regime. With time, however, the refuge that formalism offered became a trap that undermined lawyers’ political and economic 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
从避难所到陷阱:波兰后社会主义法律职业的形式主义灾难
摘要自2015年以来,波兰法律与公正党的民粹主义政府发起了一场针对该国律师的高效运动,遭遇了相对温和的社会反对。文章运用布迪厄的视角,将波兰法律界显著的制度弱点的根源追溯到波兰律师所信奉的高度形式主义的法律方法和法律思想。在共产主义垮台之前,在民主的波兰,律师在社会中的角色是充当法律体系“整洁”的守护者,或该体系内部的清晰性、凝聚力和完整性。这种毫无成效的法律实践方法最初很有吸引力,原因之一是它保护了法律职业,使其免受1989年前法律职业与共产主义政权共存所带来的艰难合法性挑战。然而,随着时间的推移,形式主义提供的庇护变成了一个陷阱,削弱了律师的政治和经济权力。
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
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊最新文献
Silent boundaries: exploring the limits of legal confidentiality in Poland New professional spaces and trajectories: tracing the evolution of legal professionals – introduction to special issue The authority of the elders or the colonisers? Customary law and culture – which legal skills? Assessing law students in a GenAI world to create knowledgeable future lawyers Navigating the legal landscape: large language models and the hesitancy of legal professionals
×
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