The Judicialization of (Separation of Powers) Politics: Lessons from Chile

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Druscilla Scribner
dc.coverage.spatial United States
dc.date.accessioned 2016-01-07T15:29:13Z
dc.date.available 2016-01-07T15:29:13Z
dc.identifier.uri http://desa1.cejamericas.org:8080/handle/2015/3569
dc.description.abstract Most analyses of the judicialization of politics focus on judicial policy-making and rights creation; however when judicialization of politics unfolds in a separation of powers political context courts are also involved in distributing power. The task of power delineation among branches of gov- ernment is different from policy-making or rights adjudication. Judicializing political disputes about power gives courts the opportunity to alter the balance of institutional power, to create stronger executives (or legislatures) and a stronger (or weaker) role for themselves. To illustrate these points, this article examines how the Chilean Constitutional Tribunal (TC) adjudicated a specific type of separation of powers conflict between the Legislature and the Execu- tive from 1990-2005. The analysis of the TC doctrine overtime highlights how the TC has shifted the balance of power in the policy-making process and augmented its influence within the political system.
dc.language.iso English
dc.title The Judicialization of (Separation of Powers) Politics: Lessons from Chile
dc.ceja.source Fuente:  Journal of Politics in Latin America


Files in this item

Thumbnail Files: Scribner.pdf
Size: 246.6Kb
Format: PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record