Democracy, technocracy, and the question of judicial (im)partiality
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 3900109 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Cristina Foroni Consani (0000-0001-6072-9053, Universidade Federal do Paraná, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 17 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 16-27 |
| Publication date | 2024-04-23 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | DoisPontos (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1807-3883 • E-ISSN: 2179-7412 |
| Publisher | Universidade Federal do Parana (PUBLISHER • BR) |
| DOI | 10.5380/dp.v17i2.74157t |
| OpenAlex | W4409679709 |
| Language | EN |
Contemporary societies are faced with a double relationship between the judiciary and politics: in the normative scope, impartiality appears as an assumption; in the descriptive scope, impartiality is not configured. This article analyzes this gap between the normative and descriptive scopes of the relationship between the judiciaryand politics in three moments: firstly, it presents the distinction between political judgments and judicial judgments elaborated by Nadia Urbinati; secondly, based on the work of Jeremy Waldron, it questions the thesis of judicial impartiality and presents his defense of a weak-form judicial review model; thirdly, also based on Waldron's work,it shows how the political performance of the judiciary affects the ideal of the rule of law
Democracy · Epistemology · Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Technocracy · Law · Philosophy · Political Economy and Marxism
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |