{"title":"The Return of Forgotten Critique: Some Remarks on the Intellectual Sources of the Polish Populist Revolution","authors":"A. Sulikowski","doi":"10.1163/15730352-bja10009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Law and Justice party (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość, or PiS), which has been ruling in Poland since 2015, has developed a specific narrative about the law and judiciary, which constitutes the ideological background of its stance in the conflict concerning the rule of law in the country. The main tenets of the legal ideology of Law and Justice include the views that judicial decisions are not determined by legal texts (the indeterminacy thesis), and that judges are part of an elite who are detached from society at large and are attempting to impose the liberal world-view upon a conservative society. The aim of the paper is to deconstruct those ideological constructs in a search for their possible sources in certain critical currents in the legal theory of the Polish People’s Republic, represented by Stanisław Ehrlich, Leszek Nowak and Jarosław Ładosz. The paper notes interesting parallels between the legal ideas developed by those three legal theorists and the current narrative put forward by Law and Justice. Whilst stopping short of claiming a direct and conscious inspiration, the paper nonetheless hypothesises possible avenues of influence, including the academic mentorship of Ehrlich over Jarosław Kaczyński in the early 1970s and Nowak’s involvement in the ‘Solidarity’ movement in the 1980s following his anti-Marxist intellectual and political turn. The paper concludes that legal critique in Poland, after a period of being repressed in the 1990s, is now returning; however, whilst its first appearance (in the socialist period) was a ‘tragedy’ (due to its inability to subject socialist law to any form of critique), its current return is a ‘farce’, since critical tools are used not for their original purpose (emancipation), but in order to further a populist-conservative project.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":"103 1","pages":"376-401"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Central and East European Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-bja10009","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
The Law and Justice party (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość, or PiS), which has been ruling in Poland since 2015, has developed a specific narrative about the law and judiciary, which constitutes the ideological background of its stance in the conflict concerning the rule of law in the country. The main tenets of the legal ideology of Law and Justice include the views that judicial decisions are not determined by legal texts (the indeterminacy thesis), and that judges are part of an elite who are detached from society at large and are attempting to impose the liberal world-view upon a conservative society. The aim of the paper is to deconstruct those ideological constructs in a search for their possible sources in certain critical currents in the legal theory of the Polish People’s Republic, represented by Stanisław Ehrlich, Leszek Nowak and Jarosław Ładosz. The paper notes interesting parallels between the legal ideas developed by those three legal theorists and the current narrative put forward by Law and Justice. Whilst stopping short of claiming a direct and conscious inspiration, the paper nonetheless hypothesises possible avenues of influence, including the academic mentorship of Ehrlich over Jarosław Kaczyński in the early 1970s and Nowak’s involvement in the ‘Solidarity’ movement in the 1980s following his anti-Marxist intellectual and political turn. The paper concludes that legal critique in Poland, after a period of being repressed in the 1990s, is now returning; however, whilst its first appearance (in the socialist period) was a ‘tragedy’ (due to its inability to subject socialist law to any form of critique), its current return is a ‘farce’, since critical tools are used not for their original purpose (emancipation), but in order to further a populist-conservative project.
自2015年以来一直在波兰执政的法律与正义党(Prawo i Sprawiedliwość,简称PiS)已经形成了一套关于法律和司法的具体叙事,这构成了其在该国法治冲突中立场的意识形态背景。《法律与正义》的法律意识形态的主要原则包括这样的观点,即司法判决不是由法律文本决定的(不确定性论点),以及法官是精英的一部分,他们脱离了整个社会,并试图将自由主义世界观强加给保守的社会。本文的目的是解构这些意识形态结构,并在以Stanisław埃利希、莱泽克·诺瓦克和Jarosław Ładosz为代表的波兰人民共和国法律理论的某些批判流派中寻找其可能的来源。本文注意到这三位法律理论家提出的法律思想与《法律与正义》所提出的当前叙事之间有趣的相似之处。虽然没有声称直接和有意识的灵感,但这篇论文仍然假设了可能的影响途径,包括1970年代早期埃利希在Jarosław Kaczyński的学术指导,以及诺瓦克在1980年代反马克思主义思想和政治转向后参与“团结”运动。本文的结论是,波兰的法律批判在经历了上世纪90年代一段时间的压抑之后,现在正在回归;然而,虽然它的第一次出现(在社会主义时期)是一场“悲剧”(由于它无法使社会主义法律受到任何形式的批评),但它目前的回归是一场“闹剧”,因为批评工具的使用不是为了它们最初的目的(解放),而是为了进一步推进民粹主义-保守主义项目。
期刊介绍:
Review of Central and East European Law critically examines issues of legal doctrine and practice in the CIS and CEE regions. An important aspect of this is, for example, the harmonization of legal principles and rules; another facet is the legal impact of the intertwining of domestic economies, on the one hand, with regional economies and the processes of international trade and investment on the other. The Review offers a forum for discussion of topical questions of public and private law. The Review encourages comparative research; it is hoped that, in this way, additional insights in legal developments can be communicated to those interested in questions, not only of law, but also of politics, economics, and of society of the CIS and CEE countries.