Publication Type

Book Chapter

Version

Preprint

Publication Date

3-2013

Abstract

Courts, whether national or European, are sometimes subject to charges of judicial activism. Adopting a comparative perspective, this contribution charts the ways in which constitutional courts in the Member States have sought to mitigate or pre-empt charges of activism. The primary purpose is to identify attractive solutions or lessons the ECJ may draw from dealing with this perception of judicial activism. It is important at the outset to be clear about what is meant by ‘judicial activism’. Judicial activism is often used as a slogan to communicate dislike or disagreement with a particular judgment or line of case law. While such a subjective approach has rightly been criticized, we should acknowledge that politicians, the media and the public regularly employ the term in this derogatory sense. As such, judicial activism is closely connected to the way in which these actors perceive the legitimacy of the court and its judgments, whereby judicial activism is commonly seen as a legitimacy-eroding factor.

Keywords

Judicial activism, constitutional courts, jurisdiction, locus standi rules, techniques of decision-making, European law

Discipline

European Law | Judges | Law

Research Areas

Law, Society and Governance

Publication

Judicial Activism at the European Court of Justice

Editor

Mark Dawson; Bruno De Witte; Elise Muir

First Page

188

Last Page

210

ISBN

9780857939401

Identifier

10.4337/9780857939401.00014

Publisher

Edward Elgar

City or Country

Cheltenham

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Additional URL

http://doi.org/10.4337/9780857939401.00014

Share

COinS