The autonomy of law vs politics in the context of anti-constitutional political practice

Abstract

The most important rationale for researching the problem of the autonomy of law in relation to politics – analysed from the perspective of the rule of law – is the profound systemic crisis that has emerged in recent years. This analysis is hampered by the ambiguity of the very concept of autonomy, which gives rise to the need to determine its meaning in both legal and juridical language. The phenomenon of politicity is multifaceted, which justifies distinguishing different degrees of its autonomy in relation to the law. The discussion aims to formulate arguments in favour of guaranteeing this autonomy with respect to so-called particularistic politicity. Subjected to a legal-dogmatic and – partly – sociological analysis, instances of anti-constitutional constitutional practice, which make up the complex phenomenon of reverse transit, may exemplify undue politicization of the law beyond its permissible limits. This is particularly undesirable in areas of public authority where far-reaching autonomy of the legal system and politicity is required. In conclusion, the considerations point to the need to ensure autonomy of law and politics, which is particularly necessary in the context of respecting the basic standards of the rule of law: the supremacy of the Constitution; the guarantee that laws and other normative acts comply with the Constitution; adherence to the rule of law; and the provision of effective (primarily judicial) legal protection of individual rights.