Populism undermines trust in the judiciary – analysis and risks!

Populism undermines trust in the judiciary – analysis and risks!

Populist movements are gaining influence in many countries and are increasingly acting against institutions that are central to liberal democracies. One of the most important targets of such attacks is the judiciary. How uol.de reported that populist parties are trying to systematically undermine citizens' trust in the judiciary. This is done in the belief that the judiciary represents a deviation from the “true will of the people.”

Political scientist Philipp Köker emphasizes that courts, especially constitutional courts, play an essential role in liberal democracies. They secure the rights of individuals and minorities as well as social pluralism. In contrast, populists position themselves as norm breakers, which makes it easier for them to control the judiciary. A loss of trust in this jurisprudence opens up space for them to achieve their political goals more effectively.

Strategies of populism

The strategy of populist actors often consists of portraying the judiciary as part of an aloof elite. This insinuation is supported by narratives about system failure and elite oppression. Individual judges are continually attacked and their decisions discredited. Populists specifically exploit the emotional bonds of their followers, who are often unable to recognize contradictions in their arguments.

The role of social media should not be underestimated here. These platforms enable populist parties to spread their messages unfiltered and directly, without going through traditional media. An example of this is the AfD in the Thuringian state parliament, which causes chaos through its strategies and rails against the judiciary in order to promote its political goals.

Philip Manow, a professor of international political economy, argues in his book “Under Watch – The Destiny of Liberal Democracy and its Friends” that an overextension of the liberal model after 1990 also contributed to the emergence of populism. Manow explains that excessive judicial control can undermine the democratic principle. He also observes that many Eastern European countries, inspired by the German model of strong constitutional courts, have not been able to politically adopt the necessary structures to support these implementations, which is leading to tensions.

The dangers of judicialization

Excessive strengthening of the judiciary can also lead to a judicialization of political conflicts, which impairs political decision-making. Manow criticizes the fact that courts should not replace the social consensus process and argues that more trust must be developed in democratic processes. The legal process must not become a means to achieve political goals - especially when it comes to issues such as the power play over abortion legislation in the USA.

Overall, it is crucial that governments emphasize the benefits of an independent judiciary and ensure implementation of their rulings. Public relations work by the courts could also help to strengthen trust in the judiciary and counter false information at an early stage. This is the only way to effectively counteract the delegitimization of judicial bodies. Therefore, it is not only up to the judiciary itself, but also to society and the media to stand together against the attacks of populism.