The Disputed Role of the Courts

Sen, Ronojoy

doi:10.1353/jod.2017.0048

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, in the famed vehicular pollution cases, the Court held that the “right to life” in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution included the right to clean air and thereby ordered the Delhi government to convert all city buses to compressed natural gas vehicles (Mate, 2015, p. 197). These PIL cases have helped the Indian judiciary become highly active in correcting the actions or omissions of the executive branch to the point where the courts are often accused of “populism and adventurism” (Mehta, 2007, p. 80; Sen, 2017).…”

Section: Judicial Expansion Under Democracy and Authoritarianismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quarantined judicial expansion: The environmental legal entrepreneurship of Chinese courts, procuratorates, and NGOs

Wang

Xia

2023

Law & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although judicial empowerment has become increasingly common worldwide, the expansion of judicial powers in authoritarian countries faces persistent obstacles, such as institutional dependence, lack of political clout, and the repression of civil society. Through empirically examining three cases of environmental legal entrepreneurship under China's new public interest litigation (PIL) system, this study aims to reevaluate the patterns and limits of judicial expansion under authoritarianism. It finds that Chinese judges, prosecutors, and NGOs have been able to leverage the PIL system and their respective institutional advantages to substantially expand judicial oversight on eco‐environmental protection. However, the state has established boundaries for such legal entrepreneurship in terms of subject matter, institutional autonomy, and geographic reach, effectively confining them within political spheres considered unthreatening to the regime. Such quarantined judicial expansion shields relevant actors from authoritarian governments' tendency to suppress legal mobilization and thus may be a more viable form of judicial expansion in nondemocratic settings.

show abstract

Section: Judicial Expansion Under Democracy and Authoritarianismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quarantined judicial expansion: The environmental legal entrepreneurship of Chinese courts, procuratorates, and NGOs

Wang

Xia

2023

Law & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The right-wing government in Poland announced its intention to get rid of BITs, also following (and during) domestic institutional reforms that were widely perceived to reduce judicial independence (Orecki 2017). India's government led by prime minister Modi passed a constitutional amendment to alter the judicial appointment system but India's Supreme Court struck it down citing it as a threat to judicial independence (Sen 2017). Indonesia's Widodo government is the outlier in that it has mobilized more strongly around sovereignty issues and foreign intervention with its domestic court system, especially over severe penalties for drug offenders.…”

Section: Property Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Populism and Backlashes against International Courts

Voeten¹

2019

Perspect. polit.

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International courts, like domestic courts, protect liberal limits on majoritarianism. This sometimes puts these courts in a position to protect the property rights of the "corrupt elites" that are targeted by populists or the civil liberties of those who are targeted in domestic populist identity politics. Moreover, populism offers an ideology to attack the authority of a court rather than just its individual rulings. An empirical examination illustrates the plausibility of this argument. A large number of backlashes against international courts arise from judgments that reinforce local populist mobilization narratives. Populist backlashes against international courts are not just about sovereignty but often follow efforts to curb domestic courts, usually for similar reasons. Yet populist backlashes do not always succeed, either because populist leaders do not follow up on their exit threats or because populism is too thin an ideology for creating successful multilateral reform coalitions.

show abstract

On string cosmology with loop corrections

Saharian¹

1998

Astrophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Disputed Role of the Courts

Cited by 7 publications

References 1 publication

Quarantined judicial expansion: The environmental legal entrepreneurship of Chinese courts, procuratorates, and NGOs

Quarantined judicial expansion: The environmental legal entrepreneurship of Chinese courts, procuratorates, and NGOs

Populism and Backlashes against International Courts

On string cosmology with loop corrections

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About