Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenor:
-
. CESS
Send message to Convenor
- Discussant:
-
Feisal al-Istrabadi
(Indiana University)
- Formats:
- Panel
- Theme:
- Law
- Location:
- GA 3015
- Sessions:
- Friday 21 October, -
Time zone: America/Indiana/Knox
Abstract:
LAW01
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Friday 21 October, 2022, -Paper abstract:
Politics in most of the Former Soviet Union (FSU) states is characterized as patronal, meaning that the political power is concentrated in the hands of an individual ruler (patron) who grants his personal acquaintances (clients) access to resources in exchange for their loyalty and political support. Scholars agree that the rule of law reforms aimed at building and strengthening effective judicial systems in such societies show limited results. This concerns the constitutional courts which in different forms and shapes exist in all FSU states. This research aims to explain the varying degrees of judicial power in the context of the observed patronal regimes and what triggers patronal regimes to introduce and implement reforms towards or away from stronger constitutional justice mechanisms. Answering these questions informs an understanding of the value of the rule of law institutions for the regimes that are not democratic. The central argument advanced here suggests a curvilinear relationship between judicial power and patronal regime: constitutional courts will have higher levels of judicial power in the weakest and strongest patronal regimes than in patronal regimes of middling strength. Examination of the case studies in three countries of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan) validates this proposition.
Paper abstract:
The paper bridges the gap on legal and politico-legal dimensions of the external rule of law promotion initiatives of the so-called western actors such as the European Union (EU) and the United States of America (USA) in the Central Asia region. The thesis answers the question of how rule of law is contextualized, and what are the reasons for repetitive, continuous attempts to promote rule of law despite the absence of meaningful outcomes on the ground. In addressing these questions, the thesis draws on the methods of socio-legal research by employing case study method, content (document) analyses, and semi-structured expert interview techniques.