Judicial diplomacy of the German Federal Constitutional Court: bilateral court meetings as a novel data source to assess transnational communication of constitutional courts.

IF 0.7 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Zeitschrift fur Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-12-20 DOI:10.1007/s12286-021-00499-0
Philipp Meyer
{"title":"Judicial diplomacy of the German Federal Constitutional Court: bilateral court meetings as a novel data source to assess transnational communication of constitutional courts.","authors":"Philipp Meyer","doi":"10.1007/s12286-021-00499-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Judicial diplomacy describes the courts' efforts to promote liberal democracy and protect their institutional authority. Bilateral court meetings are essential for judicial diplomacy, encompassing jurisprudential (e.g., discussion of case law) and aims of strategic (e.g., maximising influence). This study presents a novel approach to assess such meetings. It analyses the German Federal Constitutional Court meeting reports between 1998-2019, using content and semantic network analysis. The content analysis shows that court meetings focus on jurisprudential aspects; however, strategic considerations also play a role in discussions with interlocutors from emerging democracies. These findings are substantiated by the semantic network analysis, which discloses that recent case law, Europeanisation, and globalisation are the main issues discussed. Hence, this study presents an analysis of a novel data source. Further, it contributes to judicial politics research as transnational court meetings could be a missing link to understand legal citation networks.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version of this article (10.1007/s12286-021-00499-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.</p>","PeriodicalId":44200,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft","volume":"15 1","pages":"295-323"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8686088/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift fur Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12286-021-00499-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/12/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Judicial diplomacy describes the courts' efforts to promote liberal democracy and protect their institutional authority. Bilateral court meetings are essential for judicial diplomacy, encompassing jurisprudential (e.g., discussion of case law) and aims of strategic (e.g., maximising influence). This study presents a novel approach to assess such meetings. It analyses the German Federal Constitutional Court meeting reports between 1998-2019, using content and semantic network analysis. The content analysis shows that court meetings focus on jurisprudential aspects; however, strategic considerations also play a role in discussions with interlocutors from emerging democracies. These findings are substantiated by the semantic network analysis, which discloses that recent case law, Europeanisation, and globalisation are the main issues discussed. Hence, this study presents an analysis of a novel data source. Further, it contributes to judicial politics research as transnational court meetings could be a missing link to understand legal citation networks.

Supplementary information: The online version of this article (10.1007/s12286-021-00499-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
德国联邦宪法法院的司法外交:双边法院会议作为评估宪法法院跨国交流的新数据来源
司法外交描述了法院促进自由民主和保护其制度权威的努力。双边法院会议对司法外交至关重要,包括法理(例如,讨论判例法)和战略目标(例如,最大限度地扩大影响力)。本研究提出了一种评估此类会议的新方法。它使用内容和语义网络分析分析了1998年至2019年期间德国联邦宪法法院的会议报告。内容分析表明,法院会议侧重于法理方面;然而,战略考虑也在与新兴民主国家对话者的讨论中发挥作用。语义网络分析证实了这些发现,揭示了最近的判例法、欧洲化和全球化是讨论的主要问题。因此,本研究提出了一个新的数据源的分析。此外,它有助于司法政治研究,因为跨国法院会议可能是理解法律引文网络的缺失环节。补充信息:本文的在线版本(10.1007/s12286-021-00499-0)包含补充信息,授权用户可使用。
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
1.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: Comparative Governance and Politics – Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft (ZfVP) was founded in 2007. It is an internationally renowned journal that adheres to the highest standards of quality (double-blind peer review). The journal is published quarterly, and it is the first bilingual (German and English) journal that focuses on innovative research results in the area of comparative politics. The journal is a central academic forum for outstanding research achievements in the field of comparative politics, and covers the entire range of comparative research within the field. The journal publishes conceptual, methodological, and empirical studies from all the various research areas within the discipline of political science. Special Issues and Special Sections Special Issues and Special Sections offer the opportunity to present focal topics of comparative research. All submissions undergo a double-blind peer review procedure, which is conducted within the scope of a consultation between the author and the editors through our online submission system. The editors will also initiate the creation of potential special issues through open calls for papers. At the same time, the editors always appreciate suggestions and initiatives from the comparative studies community. Proposals for Special Issues and Special Sections are also subjected to an internal evaluation process. Our Special Issues are published as one of the four quarterly issues and usually consist of six to ten articles, accompanied by an introduction written by the guest editor(s). Special Sections, on the other hand, are a topical focus in one of the four quarterly issues, consisting of three to five articles, which are supplemented by a guest editor’s preface.
期刊最新文献
Polarization and rule of law crisis-insights from Poland. Managing courts in competitive authoritarian regimes: Co-optation, repression and resistance in Hungary. Student-led replication studies in comparative politics: new findings by fresh eyes? Karlo Basta. 2021. The Symbolic State. Minority Recognition, Majority Backlash, and Secession in Multinational Countries. The majority-runoff as integral element of a parallel electoral system. Results of simulations with regard to the German federal elections in 2017 and 2021
×
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:604180095
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