Confronting Authoritarian Practices Through Procedural-Based Review: The Case of the Polish Rule of Law Crisis

Abstract This article examines how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or Court) has responded to authoritarian practices that seek to undermine judicial independence, particularly in the context of the Polish rule of law crisis. In contrast to the existing scholarly attention to and emphasis on the subjective right to judicial independence and ulterior purpose doctrines as response mechanisms to these particular authoritarian practices, this article finds that the principle of legality, understood as a ‘procedural’ as well as a ‘substantive’ notion under the European Convention on Human Rights, has done most of the heavy lifting in this context. The article argues that the procedural side of this bifurcated approach to legality may be conceptualised as a new form of procedural-based review in the Court’s broader case law, coining the term ‘procedural legality’, and further notes the unexpected role for procedural-based review in the context of autocratisation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The European Convention on Human Rights Law Review
Published
2026-02-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1163/26663236-bja10150
Primary Topic
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Confronting Authoritarian Practices Through Procedural-Based Review: The Case of the Polish Rule of Law Crisis

Joseph E. Finnerty
The European Convention on Human Rights Law Review
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
article

Confronting Authoritarian Practices Through Procedural-Based Review: The Case of the Polish Rule of Law Crisis

Joseph E. Finnerty
article en

Abstract

Abstract This article examines how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or Court) has responded to authoritarian practices that seek to undermine judicial independence, particularly in the context of the Polish rule of law crisis. In contrast to the existing scholarly attention to and emphasis on the subjective right to judicial independence and ulterior purpose doctrines as response mechanisms to these particular authoritarian practices, this article finds that the principle of legality, understood as a ‘procedural’ as well as a ‘substantive’ notion under the European Convention on Human Rights, has done most of the heavy lifting in this context. The article argues that the procedural side of this bifurcated approach to legality may be conceptualised as a new form of procedural-based review in the Court’s broader case law, coining the term ‘procedural legality’, and further notes the unexpected role for procedural-based review in the context of autocratisation.

The European Convention on Human Rights Law Review
Leiden University (NL)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Judicial and Constitutional Studies
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.