Search

Summary

The chapter argues that courts in hybrid regimes face a legitimacy paradox: an activist court risks attracting backlash from the authoritarian, whereas a deferential court may undermine the trust of a democracy-supporting population. The chapter first lays out the conventional view of perceived legitimacy, including the mechanisms behind it and its utility. The conventional view is premised upon the political dynamics of a democracy; this requires modification in order to be applicable to a hybrid regime. It then takes on this task by introducing a relational angle. An audience-based framework is shown to help us identify the key audiences that are relevant to judicial legitimacy in different regime-types. The audience-based framework is then applied to a hybrid regime to set out the legitimacy paradox. The effects of the paradox are practical, as exemplified by the tensions between the expectations different political actors within a hybrid regime have of a constitutional court. It will be explained how these conflicting expectations create challenges for judicial maneuvering in a hybrid regime.

Search Results

Refine search

Refine search

Actions for selected content:

1 results

5 - The Legitimacy Paradox

Summary

Search Results

Refine search

Refine search

Actions for selected content:

Save Search

1 results

5 - The Legitimacy Paradox

Summary