Abstract
Judicial review stands as a vital mechanism for upholding the rule of law and safeguarding human rights in democratic societies. This analysis explores the key elements that contribute to its effectiveness, including judicial independence, legal culture, implementation strategies, and socio-economic context.
Judicial independence, a cornerstone of impartial justice, necessitates protection from political interference through transparent appointments, secure tenure, and autonomous budgetary control. Legal culture shapes the operation of constitutional courts, with common law systems emphasizing precedent and civil law systems relying on codified constitutions. Effective implementation of court decisions requires robust enforcement mechanisms and addressing socio-economic disparities that hinder access to justice.
Emerging challenges for judicial review in the 21st century include the rise of populism and the integration of artificial intelligence in court proceedings. To fortify judicial review, governments should prioritize judicial independence, policymakers should develop enforcement mechanisms, and the judiciary should promote transparency and accountability. Future research should explore the impact of populism, transnational law, and AI on constitutional courts, ensuring their continued role as guardians of democracy and protectors of fundamental rights.
Keywords: Judicial Review, Constitutional Courts, Judicial Independence, Legal Culture, Artificial Intelligence.
I. Introduction: Setting the Stage for Scrutiny
Ever wondered who referees the government? That’s where judicial review and constitutional courts step onto the field. Think of them as the umpires of democracy, ensuring fair play according to the constitution (Ginsburg, 2003; Ramos, 2006). They interpret the rulebook, safeguarding the fundamental principles upon which a nation is built. Without these courts, the government could potentially act unchecked, like a soccer team with no referee, making up the rules as they go!
Globally, judicial review is on the rise (Calabresi, 2021), like streaming services becoming the norm. But, just as every streaming service has its own quirks and content, the effectiveness of judicial review varies wildly. Is it truly holding power accountable, or just going through the motions? This is particularly crucial in new democracies (Gardbaum, 2015), where constitutional courts are still finding their feet. Are they robust guardians of the constitution, or are they “paper tigers,” strong in appearance but lacking real power?