Non-Majoritarian Difficulty Squared

Professor Dr. Hubert Smekal Assistant Professor, Department of International Relations and European Studies, Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic; Assistant of the E.MA Director for the Czech Republic; Visiting Fulbright-Masaryk Post-Doc Researcher, Centre for the Study of Law and Society, UC Berkeley School of Law

Non-Majoritarian Difficulty Squared

Professor Dr. Hubert Smekal Assistant Professor, Department of International Relations and European Studies, Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic; Assistant of the E.MA Director for the Czech Republic; Visiting Fulbright-Masaryk Post-Doc Researcher, Centre for the Study of Law and Society, UC Berkeley School of Law

Daniel C. Thomas: Helsinský efekt. Mezinárodní zásady, lidská práva a zánik komunismu.

Daniel C. Thomas: Helsinský efekt. Mezinárodní zásady, lidská práva a zánik komunismu. 1. vydání. Praha: Academia, 2007, 322 stran, ISBN 978-80-200-1506-8 (signatura knihovny ÚMV 53 687)

Strength and Legitimacy of Control Mechanisms in International Human Rights Treaties: The Moderation Effect

The study finds that the strength of a human-rights treaty’s control mechanism moderates the effect of the political regime on how states commit to HR treaties. Empirical test of the “moderation effect hypothesis” showed that the overall speed of the commitment process of communist Czechoslovakia and newer democratic regimes (CR and SR) was quite similar. However, while communist Czechoslovakia preferred commitments to treaties with weak control mechanisms, the transitioning CSFR and its democratic successors were more prone to ratify treaties with a strong control mechanism.Studie ukazuje, jak síla kontrolního mechanismu ovlivňuje rozhodnutí státu ratifikovat mezinárodní lidskoprávní úmluvu

Through selective activism towards greater resilience: the Czech Constitutional Court's interventions into high politics in the age of populism

With technocratic populist Andrej Babiš leading the Czech government coalition, the country has experienced some democratic backsliding. In contrast to its Hungarian and Polish counterparts, however, the Czech Constitutional Court has been spared from executive capture. This article argues that resilient constitutional courts may act as one of the key safeguards against illiberal populism. We demonstrate that resilient constitutional courts are products of an institutional framework, which prevents court-packing by loyal allies of populist leaders, and of courts’ activities that increase their reputation with the public, thus making political attacks against them overly costly. We argue that the Czech Constitutional Court has exercised an approach of selective judicial activism that focuses on keeping political competition fair while avoiding involvement in controversial socially transformative judicial decision-making which would outrage large parts of the population. Moreover, by acting as a guardian of fair political competition, the Court contributed to the further fragmentation of the political landscape, which in turn prevented the accumulation of political power, and hence the Court shielded itself from political attacks.With technocratic populist Andrej Babiš leading the Czech government coalition, the country has experienced some democratic backsliding. In contrast to its Hungarian and Polish counterparts, however, the Czech Constitutional Court has been spared from executive capture. This article argues that resilient constitutional courts may act as one of the key safeguards against illiberal populism. We demonstrate that resilient constitutional courts are products of an institutional framework, which prevents court-packing by loyal allies of populist leaders, and of courts’ activities that increase their reputation with the public, thus making political attacks against them overly costly. We argue that the Czech Constitutional Court has exercised an approach of selective judicial activism that focuses on keeping political competition fair while avoiding involvement in controversial socially transformative judicial decision-making which would outrage large parts of the population. Moreover, by acting as a guardian of fair political competition, the Court contributed to the further fragmentation of the political landscape, which in turn prevented the accumulation of political power, and hence the Court shielded itself from political attacks

Výzkum lidských práv: Kritická reflexe současných přístupů

Čtyři vybrané publikace totiž vhodně ilustrují současné relevantní pozice kritických pohledů na mezinárodní lidskoprávní režimy. Samuel Moyn (2014b, Human Rights and the Uses of History) zastupuje pohled kritických historiků, Eric Posner (2014, The Twilight of Human Rights Law) perspektivu právníků s přesahem do mezinárodních vztahů, Risse, Ropp a Sikkink (2013, The Persistent Power of Human Rights) a kolektiv politologů a teoretiků mezinárodních vztahů a konečně Follesdal, Schaffer, Ulfstein (2013, The Legitimacy of International Human Rights Regimes) a další přístup filosofů a právních teoretiků. Zároveň také vybíráme tyto knihy proto, že ukazují různorodost současných přístupů – od empirických přes teoretické až po kritické. Rovněž teoretická perspektiva přináší značnou diferencovanost, knihy zahrnují jak zástupce konstruktivistických (Risse, Ropp a Sikkink et al.), tak neorealistických (Posner) přístupů. Na základě vybraných publikací předestíráme argumenty a proti-argumenty ze současné debaty o mezinárodních lidských právech, která ve srovnání s dřívějšími léty přešla do kritičtějšího tónu. Argumenty, které prosakují vybranými publikacemi autorských kolektivů, se dají rozdělit do tří velkých okruhů: (1) kritická reflexe samotné podstaty a legitimity mezinárodních lidskoprávních režimů a jejich nastavení a obsahu, (2) kritika a obhajoba jejich fungování a působení, a konečně (3) reflexe současného výzkumu mezinárodních lidskoprávních režimů.The review essay discusses current critical approaches towards international human rights regimes and categorises them according to their normative, functional, and methodological bases. The paper builds on four recent books which are examples of current relevant positions in human rights scholarship. The books focus, respectively, on a critical examination of human rights historiography, on the functioning of international human rights regimes, on their legitimacy, and finally on the impact of international human rights in the national context. We claim that despite the different backgrounds and topics of the books, all these works can be clustered around three kinds of issues: (1) normative concerns, i.e. those denouncing the very existence and content of international human rights regimes; (2) functional concerns, i.e. those asking whether international human rights bodies have a real effect on the quality of human rights protection in individual countries. (3) Finally, the third group of concerns is driven by the increasing need for the implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods challenging previous empirical findings (and the lack thereof) on the functioning of human rights regimes. We argue that some positions are practically irreconcilable and that the debate will probably continue for some time without reaching common ground

Noví aktéři na poli válečných konfliktů: Případová studie Nejvyššího soudu Izraele

Článek se zabývá diskuzí přítomnosti nové skupiny aktérů na poli vedení válečných konfliktů, a to vnitrostátních soudů. Na případu Nejvyššího soudu Státu Izrael ukazujeme, že proces označovaný jako judicializace se prosadil i v oblasti rozhodování o způsobech vedení ozbrojených konfliktů. Upozorňujeme, že k adekvátnímu uchopení situace se nelze zaměřit pouze na poměrně odvážnou judikaturu soudu, ale je nutné zohlednit také míru akceptace této judikatury důležitými hráči v politickém systému Státu Izrael.The article discusses the occurrence of a new group of actors in the field of pursuing military conflicts, namely the national courts. We present on the case of the Supreme Court of the State Israel that the process described as judicialization gained importance even in the issue of decision-making on pursuing military conflicts. We point out that in order to adequately grasp the position of the Supreme Court and its influence, it is necessary to consider also the acceptance of the Court’s case-law from the side of other important actors in the political system of the State Israel

Between Human Rights and Transitional Justice: The Dilemma of Constitutional Courts in Post-Communist Central Europe

The essay sheds light on the role of constitutional courts in transitional justice, focusing on their role in mitigating the conflicts between transitional justice and international human rights commitments. Through a study of the Czech Constitutional Court’s case law, we demonstrate that international human rights work both as a constraint and a tool. Constitutional courts use international human rights law selectively, when it suits their reasoning and views on transition. Nevertheless, the influence of international human rights law strengthens over time, especially when supported by the adverse rulings of international bodies, and gradually prevails over transitional justice justifications

Drivers of domestic politicisation of European issues: explaining low politicisation of differentiated integration in Czechia

This article contributes to the debate on domestic politicisation of EU issues by suggesting hitherto overlooked explanation of (non)politicisation. This paper uses Czechia as an intriguing case in which the mainstream explanations of a low level of domestic politicisation of EU issues do not apply. The Czech case illustrates that, first, even in the context of high public Euroscepticism, EU issues do not necessarily become politicised, particularly so when the public does not consider them to be important. Second, high politicisation does not occur when there is a path dependency of a mismatch between positions of political parties and significant parts of their electorates on EU issues. Finally, the rise of catch-all populist parties prevents a high level of politicisation of EU issues

Empirický právní výzkum

Příspěvek si klade za cíl představit možnosti a meze empirického právního výzkumu, a to především na příkladech z oblasti práva a politiky. Text načrtává, proč by pro právníky bylo přínosné, kdyby se obeznámili se základy empirického výzkumu, a odkazuje na díla, která by mohla posloužit jako uvedení do problematiky. Právníci se často nejen ve výzkumu, ale také při tvorbě a aplikaci právních předpisů dostávají do kontaktu se světem mimo samotný právní systém, proto by se měli snažit o pochopení základních principů společenskovědního výzkumu, který má v poznávání společenské reality dlouhou tradici. Text dále poukazuje na nezastupitelnou roli právních expertů ve výzkumu týkajícím se práva. Článek upozorňuje na přednosti a limity kvalitativních a kvantitativních přístupů ke zkoumání a načrtává, jakým směrem by se mohl empirický právní výzkum v budoucnu ubírat.The article seeks to introduce the possibilities and limits of empirical research, using particularly examples from the field of law and politics. The text suggests why it would be beneficial for lawyers to become familiar with the fundamentals of empirical research and points to works which could serve as an introduction to the field. When doing research, as well as when drafting and applying legal rules, lawyers often overstep the closed legal system and make contact with the social world; therefore, they should seek to understand the basic principles of social science research, which has a long tradition in uncovering social reality. The text further acknowledges the irreplaceable role of legal experts in research on law. The article points to advantages and limits of qualitative and quantitative approaches to the research and suggests the direction in which empirical legal research could go in the future