Democracy, technocracy, and the question of judicial (im)partiality
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5380/dp.v17i2.74157Keywords:
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.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 DoisPontos

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright for articles published in this journal belongs to the author, with first publication rights for the journal. Because of appearing in this public access journal, the articles are free to use, with terms of reference, in educational and non-commercial applications.
