Judicial Resistance: missing part of judicial independence? The case of Poland and beyond

This article critically examines the concept of "judicial resistance" in Poland between 2015-2023, drawing insights from both Polish and international legal frameworks, jurisprudence, empirical research and literature. The study aims to define and differentiate judicial resistance from other judicial attitudes, interrogate its legal character, and explore whether there exists judges’ right or duty towards such resistance. The article posits a definition for judicial resistance, emphasizing actions—both collective and individual, in-court and out-of-court—taken by judges to counter political endeavors that infringe upon judicial independence and violate the law. A pivotal criterion proposed is that the breach of judicial independence must be illegitimate as per national standards and validated as such. To support this, the article references formal assessments from both national and international bodies. The findings indicate a potential necessity for a broader conceptualization of judicial resistance, suggesting it as a possible safeguard against future erosions of the rule of law.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Oñati Socio-legal Series
Published
2024-09-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl.1893
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
20.37

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Judicial Resistance: missing part of judicial independence? The case of Poland and beyond

Łukasz Bojarski
5 citations
Oñati Socio-legal Series
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
20.37
article

Judicial Resistance: missing part of judicial independence? The case of Poland and beyond

Łukasz Bojarski
article en
5 citations

Abstract

This article critically examines the concept of "judicial resistance" in Poland between 2015-2023, drawing insights from both Polish and international legal frameworks, jurisprudence, empirical research and literature. The study aims to define and differentiate judicial resistance from other judicial attitudes, interrogate its legal character, and explore whether there exists judges’ right or duty towards such resistance. The article posits a definition for judicial resistance, emphasizing actions—both collective and individual, in-court and out-of-court—taken by judges to counter political endeavors that infringe upon judicial independence and violate the law. A pivotal criterion proposed is that the breach of judicial independence must be illegitimate as per national standards and validated as such. To support this, the article references formal assessments from both national and international bodies. The findings indicate a potential necessity for a broader conceptualization of judicial resistance, suggesting it as a possible safeguard against future erosions of the rule of law.

Oñati Socio-legal SeriesVol. 15(2)
University of Oslo (NO)
European Commission, Universitetet i Oslo, Norges Forskningsråd, Instituto Internacional de Sociología Jurídica de Oñati
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
20.37
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.