How Populist Politicians Are Weakening the Kenyan Judiciary

The Kenyan President and his parliamentary allies are guilty of constitutional vandalism. In what has become an increasingly popular political move, they conveniently blame the judiciary for their unfulfilled promises, making the courts an easy target in a democracy backsliding. Lacking public outreach – judges neither organise rallies nor post on social media –, the judiciary has become a scapegoat to rally political support. While courts aren't beyond criticism, some attacks are self-serving, often from those with pending or impending court cases.

Straflos im Landtag

Einmal angenommen, die AfD bekäme eine absolute Mehrheit im Thüringer Landtag. Und einer ihrer Abgeordneten verharmloste auf einer Parteiveranstaltung den Holocaust. Oder schlüge eine Demonstrantin krankenhausreif. Sofern er nicht bei Begehung der Tat oder im Laufe des folgenden Tages deshalb festgenommen würde, könnte seine Fraktion es zumindest für die Dauer der Legislaturperiode verhindern, dass er dafür zur Verantwortung gezogen würde. Dieser Immunitätsschutz offenbart im Lichte einer möglicherweise extremistischen Parlamentsmehrheit einen blinden Fleck.

Autocratic (Il)legalism

It is a common myth that since the Fidesz-KDNP coalition has almost always had a two-thirds parliamentary majority since 2010, the Orbán-government could pass its illiberal legislative reforms in a legally correct manner. In reality, however, many laws that constitute the pillars of Orbán’s illiberal regime were enacted in violation of the procedural requirements of the rule of law. The European Commission’s country visit to Hungary provides an opportunity to remind the EU bodies of their responsibility to enforce all requirements of the rule of law without compromise.

The Triumph of Evil

Putin's regime finally murdered Alexei Navalny, a Russian patriot and freedom fighter. Regardless of how the events on 16 February unfolded, his death is a direct result of the actions of Russian state agents who had long been working towards his death. Putin’s belief in his absolute impunity, reinforced by appeasement, was a decisive factor that facilitated Alexei Navalny's murder. However, what happened to Navalny must not happen to Vladimir Kara-Murza, Aleksei Gorinov, Ilya Yashin, and many others. Navalny’s death is a huge loss for all Russians who believe in a free and peaceful future for their country, but also for Europe and the world.

Heyday of Autocratic Legalism in Slovakia

Slovakia’s parliament approved an amendment to its criminal code and associated legislation that, if it comes into effect, will significantly reduce the prescription periods for various crimes including rape, the penalties for others, and abolish the Special Prosecutor’s Office. Despite a narrative claiming to commit to restorative justice by reducing lengths for prison sentences and implementing a more diverse set of conviction options, the legislative changes perpetuate violence through autocratic legalism on the vast majority of the Slovak population, and especially those vulnerable to abuses of power. This assault on the criminal legal system in Slovakia by the ruling illiberal coalition is expected to put the Constitutional Court under pressure.

Teaching Human Rights in Russian Legal Education

The growing mistrust towards the West in Russia since the early 2000s, as well as general disillusionment with the results of political transition and economic reforms, along with the aggressive anti-human rights propaganda of the Russian regime for a long time, has led to a perception of human rights as a "Western theory" that does not fit the Russian people. This context made it easy in the 2010s to weaponize human rights in the Kremlin’s foreign policy rhetoric and subsequent direct aggression; the rhetoric of "protecting human rights" became the justification for both the annexation of Crimea and the initiation of full-scale aggression against Ukraine.

Legitimizing Authoritarian Transformation

In the early 1990s, the Constitutional Court of Russia (RCC) was viewed as an important institution for protecting human rights and facilitating the democratic transition. However, the good intentions of the constitutional drafters were insufficient to overcome the country’s totalitarian legacy and practices. An examination of the RCC’s evolution over three decades reveals two significant trends: Firstly, the RCC transformed into a machine for legitimizing laws designed to dismantle political competition, civil society, and civil liberties. Secondly, this dynamic did not prevent the RCC from losing its independence and political weight after the constitutional amendments of 2020. In this blog post, I will provide a brief overview of the RCC’s most controversial decisions over the past 30 years, along with the measures taken to destroy independent constitutional review in Russia.

Regime Adaptation Within Russia’s Judicial Elites

The case of Valery Zorkin, chairman of the Russian Constitutional Court, shows how elites prioritize their own survival and therefore do not oppose a repressive and aggressive regime, most likely because they fear revenge from liberal peers and victims of the system. And since the war against Ukraine, elites have another reason to stay loyal. For those who fear being held responsible for a war of aggression and war crimes, Putin is the only “guarantor of stability.”

Paving the Way for Violence

The negative effects of the 1993 conflict prevailed over the benefits from the end of a confrontation. Its outcomes raised a major barrier to the democratization of Russia and paved the way for the use of violence as a means of preserving power. This conflict contributed to the maximization of presidential power and to the weakening of checks and balances in the constitution, which included significant authoritarian potential. The political order established in Russia after the 1993 conflict largely determined the subsequent trajectory of Russian political evolution and its drift towards a personalist authoritarian regime.