Strategies of Judicial Review
Marcin Matczak
Poland%20report.pdf (2.23 MB)
Strategies of Judicial Review

Analysis of judicial discretion in administrative cases in Poland.

 

The research asks:
  1. to what extent the administrative courts in Poland have made the transition from the traditional approach, whereby judges are considered the mouths of the law, to a more contemporary approach according to which Judges rule on the basis of general standards.
  2. It attempts to identify the obstacles the administrative courts encounter when moving from the traditional model and embracing more fully a more acceptable contemporary approach.
  3. What would be the effect on business activity in Poland if judicial practice law were to remain locked into an outdated mode of adjudication?
ALSO OF INTEREST
Report
The Courts and Social Policy in the United States

Workshop with the Aspen Institute examining policy issues including affirmative action, reproductive rights, and anti-terror legislation.

Download
Policy Brief
Congress and the Supreme Court in a Partisan Era

There are significant lessons to be learned about relations between the Court and Congress from this analysis of the past dozen years.

Download
The Conflict between Government and the Judges

Conflict between the judges and government is built into the very concept of the judicial protection of human rights. The Human Rights Act does presuppose a basic consensus on human rights between the judges, on the one hand, and the government, people and Parliament on the other. However, there is clearly no consensus when it comes to the rights of unpopular minorities, particularly concerning controversial issues such as asylum seekers suspected terrorists.

Download
Policy Brief
Judging Judges

The principle of independence of the judiciary, while fundamental to a society based on the rule of law, is sometimes used to preclude the evaluation of courts. Such an approach is mistaken: judges and courts should be both independent and subject to evaluation.

Download