3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Purging the Judiciary After a Transition: Between a Rock and a Hard Place

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Judges play a key role in the implementation of transitional justice mechanisms. Yet, less attention has been paid so far to the question of how to address their collaboration with non-democratic regimes. In theory, judges can be subjected to virtually all transitional justice mechanisms ranging from criminal prosecution and lustration to truth-seeking, or even amnesties. However, we show in a case study of Czechia that these mechanisms are not well equipped to address the complicity of judges in past crimes for three reasons: (1) judges usually play different roles in past crimes from political elites, (2) the principles of the separation of powers and judicial independence preclude the easy replacement of judges, and (3) pragmatic exigencies, such as the shortage of lawyers who are not tainted by cooperation with the previous regime, further complicate the renewal of the bench. Nevertheless, we argue that the lack of recognition of the role judges have played in non-democratic regimes is dangerous, as it may negatively affect public confidence in the judiciary and taint its legitimacy. Examples from Hungary, Poland and Romania, moreover, show that populist leaders are tempted to abuse the transitional justice rhetoric use the failure to deal with the past of judges as a justification for their court-curbing practices. Post-transition purges are therefore stuck between a rock (interfering in judicial independence and practical exigencies) and a hard place (mental dependence of the judiciary on the previous regime, low public trust in courts). When the democratic opposition defeats the populist leader, such as in Poland in 2023, it unfortunately faces the same dilemma. Thus, the Czech way of dealing with the past within the judiciary in transition from communism to democracy (transition 1.0) provides important insights also for today’s undoing of populist judicial reforms and transition from authoritarian populism to democracy (transition 2.0).

          Related collections

          Most cited references80

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          State Crimes of Previous Regimes: Knowledge, Accountability, and the Policing of the Past

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Judging from a Guilty Conscience: The Chilean Judiciary's Human Rights Turn

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Judicial Independence in an Authoritarian Regime: The Case of Contemporary Spain

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                katarina.sipulova@law.muni.cz
                Journal
                Hague J Rule Law
                Hague J Rule Law
                Hague Journal on the Rule of Law
                Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                1876-4045
                1876-4053
                4 March 2024
                4 March 2024
                2025
                : 17
                : 1
                : 61-93
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Judicial Studies Institute, Faculty of Law, Masaryk University, ( https://ror.org/02j46qs45) Brno, Czech Republic
                [2 ]Department of Constitutional Law and Political Science, Faculty of Law, Masaryk University, ( https://ror.org/02j46qs45) Brno, Czech Republic
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3593-3594
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5025-1367
                Article
                201
                10.1007/s40803-024-00201-y
                11753342
                39845532
                4522efb2-7395-4a9d-90b6-44a7ffdc6ccb
                © The Author(s) 2024

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 20 January 2024
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100019180, HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council;
                Award ID: 101002660
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Masaryk University
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © T.M.C. Asser Press 2025

                transitional justice,lustration,purging,judiciaries,judges,judicial turnover,removal of judges,central and eastern europe

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log