Constitutional courts in hybrid regimes

Thesis

Democratic backsliding and the resurgence of authoritarianism have led to the prevalence of hybrid regimes in the twenty-first century. This ambiguous kind of authoritarian regime has complicated the traditional democracy-versus-pure-authoritarian-regime divide. Hybrid regime is the new game in town, but can constitutional courts promote democracy in these contexts? And if so, how? Cautiously optimistic about the potential of constitutional courts, the thesis argues that this is not an empty wish. Constitutional courts are not effective substitutions of the political process. Nevertheless, they have a modest but meaningful role to play in advancing democratic norms in a hybrid regime. The thesis provides a valuable examination of hybrid regimes and constitutional courts, and offers theories and tools that aim to guide democratically committed judges in hybrid regimes. These prescriptions are not limited to the adjudicative context, and cover what judges as social actors can and should do as well. While normative theoretical in substance, the thesis is informed by comparative insights and empirical studies, and draws heavily on a wide range of disciplines including law, political theory and science, sociology and psychology. The thesis hopes to illuminate and inspire judges who are operating in politically challenging environments.

Authors: Yam, J

• Type of award: DPhil
• Level of award: Doctoral
• Awarding institution: University of Oxford
• Language: English
• Keywords: Constitutional theory; Hybrid regime; Courts
• Subjects: Constitutional law