The Role of Civil Society in Protecting Judicial Independence in Times of Rule of Law Backsliding in Poland

IF 0.6 Q2 Social Sciences Utrecht Law Review Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.36633/ulr.673
Barbara Grabowska-Moroz, Olga Śniadach
{"title":"The Role of Civil Society in Protecting Judicial Independence in Times of Rule of Law Backsliding in Poland","authors":"Barbara Grabowska-Moroz, Olga Śniadach","doi":"10.36633/ulr.673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article discusses approaches to defending the independence of the judiciary – one of the main institutional requirements of the rule of law – adopted by civil society organisations (CSOs) in Poland since 2015. Beginning by describing the rule of law backsliding in context, this article shows how civil society organisations reacted to the orchestrated threats to judicial independence in Poland. The article highlights the negative consequences of rule of law backsliding for the civic space, proving that the role of CSOs was not only to protect the rule of law (judicial independence, in particular), but also to fight the shrinking civic space. This article surveys the concept of the ‘rule of law from below’ by critically analysing the actions of CSOs in response to attempts to undermine judicial independence, providing a part of a broader ‘rule of law backsliding’ picture. The article concludes with a detailed analysis of two case studies – reactions from CSOs to Poland’s so-called ‘reform of the judiciary’.","PeriodicalId":44535,"journal":{"name":"Utrecht Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utrecht Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36633/ulr.673","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The article discusses approaches to defending the independence of the judiciary – one of the main institutional requirements of the rule of law – adopted by civil society organisations (CSOs) in Poland since 2015. Beginning by describing the rule of law backsliding in context, this article shows how civil society organisations reacted to the orchestrated threats to judicial independence in Poland. The article highlights the negative consequences of rule of law backsliding for the civic space, proving that the role of CSOs was not only to protect the rule of law (judicial independence, in particular), but also to fight the shrinking civic space. This article surveys the concept of the ‘rule of law from below’ by critically analysing the actions of CSOs in response to attempts to undermine judicial independence, providing a part of a broader ‘rule of law backsliding’ picture. The article concludes with a detailed analysis of two case studies – reactions from CSOs to Poland’s so-called ‘reform of the judiciary’.
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
波兰法治倒退时期公民社会在保护司法独立中的作用
本文讨论了自2015年以来波兰民间社会组织(cso)采取的捍卫司法独立的方法——法治的主要制度要求之一。本文首先描述了法治倒退的背景,展示了公民社会组织如何应对波兰司法独立受到的精心策划的威胁。文章强调法治倒退对公民空间的负面影响,证明公民社会组织的作用不仅是维护法治(特别是司法独立),而且是对抗萎缩的公民空间。本文通过批判性地分析公民社会组织在应对破坏司法独立的企图时的行动,概述了“自下而上的法治”的概念,提供了更广泛的“法治倒退”图景的一部分。文章最后详细分析了两个案例研究——公民社会组织对波兰所谓的“司法改革”的反应。
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
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊最新文献
Field Experiments Examining Trust in Law: Interviewer Effects on Participants with Lower Educational Backgrounds Legitimacy as Expressed versus Legitimacy as Experienced: Methodologies to Assess an Elusive Concept Towards Evidence-Based Legitimacy Interventions in EU Law: Challenges and Directions for Empirical Research Digitalisation of Enforcement Proceedings (Re)defining Conflicts: Democratic Legitimacy in Socially Sensitive Court Cases
×
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