Democracy, technocracy, and the question of judicial (im)partiality

Authors

  • Cristina Foroni Consani Universidade Federal do Paraná

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5380/dp.v17i2.74157

Keywords:

democracy, technocracy, judicial impartiality, separation of powers, rule of law, Waldron.

Abstract

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 judiciary
and 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.

Author Biography

Cristina Foroni Consani, Universidade Federal do Paraná

Professora Adjunta no Departamento de Filosofia da Universidade Federal do Paraná. Doutora em Filosofia e Mestre em Direito pela Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. Visiting Scholar na Columbia University. Coordenadora do GT Teorias da Justiça (2019-2020).

 

Published

2024-04-23

How to Cite

Consani, C. F. (2024). Democracy, technocracy, and the question of judicial (im)partiality. DoisPontos, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.5380/dp.v17i2.74157

Issue

Section

Direito e política: a judicialização da política e a politização do sistema jurídico