Concepts and Dangers of Authoritarian Law and Politics

Abstract The rise of authoritarian populism and hybrid regimes has become a pressing challenge to liberal democracy, raising urgent questions about the role of law in these political transformations. This paper examines how authoritarian regimes reshape legal systems by creating and deploying what will be termed ‘authoritarian law’. The study applies a comparative and theory-oriented approach, systematically engaging with major conceptual frameworks to examine how authoritarian regimes manipulate legal structures for the purpose of political consolidation. The paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of the process of how authoritarian regimes manipulate legal structures and legislative processes, the aim is to identify the specific ways in which populist governments bypass or erode democratic norms. The paper is based on the theoretical investigation on five conceptual traditions: authoritarian legalism, which highlights the emergence of a distinct authoritarian conception of law; the dual state theory, which distinguishes between normative and prerogative forms of law; populist constitutionalism, which uncovers constitutional paradigms departing from liberal norms; the Unitary Executive Theory, which reveals transatlantic dimensions of authoritarian law; and the concept of constitutional dictatorship, which emphasises the use of exceptional measures. Results indicate that authoritarian regimes use law not to safeguard democratic institutions but to erode them through political instrumentalisation and weaponisation of legal processes. The paper concludes that law itself becomes a central institutional framework for stabilising authoritarian rule, undermining its own normative integrity.