D7.2. Bloomsburry Edited Volume – “Dissensus over Liberal Democracy Insights from European Judges”

This book was co-edited by Ramona Coman, Viktor Kazai, Leonardo Puleo, and Andrew Bradley. It explores what judges do and how they perceive their roles in the context of growing dissensus over liberal democracy.

Focusing on the European landscape, it asks eighteen judges how they perceive their roles when judicial independence and democracy are under pressure. The book features interviews with judges from various EU and non-EU Member States and courts, complemented by a series of academic commentaries discussing the relationship between law and politics in times of dissensus over liberal democracy. Each narrative reveals unique personal experiences and reflections, shedding light on the role of the judiciary and the rule of law in the face of contemporary challenges. While the book engages with these issues through European narratives, its findings contribute to broader debates beyond Europe and the EU.

Table of Contents

1. How do Judges Conceive their Roles in a Context of Growing Dissensus Over Liberal Democracy-And Why do Narratives Matter?, Ramona Coman (Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium)
2. Illiberalism on Trial: Ideational Boundaries, Institutional Practices, and Public Diffusion, 3. The Essence of Judicial Independence: The Autonomous Interpretation of the Law, 4. We Can Aim to be Part of the Solution Rather than Being Part of the Problem, 5. Activism is a Responsibility that Every Magistrate Bears, 6…It is, to a Large Extent, a Matter of the Cultural Preconditions of Constitutionalism, 7. High Level of Trust in the Judiciary is the Best Protection you can Have, 8. We Cannot Divorce the Application of the Law from its Origins and Moral Implications, 9.How Can Courts and Legislators Co-Exist?, 10. The Independence of the Judiciary is Not the Privilege of a Group of Professionals, 11. We Must Decide With our Conscience, With the Sole Comfort of the Law, 12. Judges Can be a Big Obstacle for Authoritarian Regimes, 13. We Can Best Uphold Democracy and Defend the Rule of Law by Listening to Citizens, 14. The Judiciary […] has Power over the Meaning of the Law, 15. The European Commission Abandoned the Honest Judges, 16. Judges Cannot Speak Only Through Their Judgments, 17. The Very Status of a Judge Requires Deep Reflection,  18. Constitutional Courts are not the Sole Guardians of Liberal Democracy, 19. When Your Independence and Integrity are Called into Question, you Must be Prepared to Respond, 20. I Went to Bed as a Judge and Woke up a Terrorist, 21. I Am Not Confident That the EU Genuinely Prioritises Judicial Independence in the Serbian Case, 22. Liberal Democracy and its Discontents: Normative Insights from European Judges and Recent Academic Debates, 23. Judges’ Resilience in the Face of Attacks on Judicial Independence: Some Reflections on the German, Italian, and Hungarian Contexts, 24. Activism and the Evolving Role of European Judges: Defending Rights in an Age of Democratic Dissensus, 25. The Fertile Fear of the Abyss: Or, How the Rule of Law Crisis Spurred Judges to Mobilize European Law, 26. The Twilight of Resilience? Reflections on the Limits of Judicial Activism in the Face of Democratic Decline, 27. Law, Politics and Society: Europeanisation Amid Dissensus over Liberal Democracy, Institutions and Values, 28. Learning from Judges: Looking Forward, 

Your e-mail address is only used to send you our newsletter and information about the activities of RED SPINEL. You can always use the unsubscribe link included in the newsletter.

Logo
Co-funded by the European Union

This project receives funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under the Call HORIZON-CL2-2021-DEMOCRACY-01 – Grant agreement n°101061621

Copyright © 2023 Red Spinel. All rights reserved. Legal notice