Papers by Armen Mazmanyan
Constitutional courts and multilevel governance in Europe
Criticism of the European Court of Human Rights, 2016
Russia: In Quest for a European Identity
The role of constitutional courts in multilevel governance
Constitutional review has not only expanded geographically; it has also expanded in its mission a... more Constitutional review has not only expanded geographically; it has also expanded in its mission and function, acquiring new subject areas and new roles and responsibilities. In examining these new roles and responsibilities, this collection reflects on constitutional review as an aspect of constitutionalism framed in the context of multilevel governance. Bringing together a number of remarkable, yet varied, contributions, it explores how institutional changes of multilevel governance have transformed the notion, shape and substance of constitutional review. To this end, four key roles, new and old, are identified: courts act as guardian of fundamental rights, they oversee the institutional balance, they provide a deliberative forum and they assume the function of a regulatory watchdog. This book explores these different roles played by national and European courts, and the challenges brought about by the involvement in multilevel networks and the shift to new concepts of governance.
On Legalism, Illiberal Takeover, and the Immune System of Constitutional Democracy
This chapter is about legalism and its influence on constitutionalism. It argues that legalism af... more This chapter is about legalism and its influence on constitutionalism. It argues that legalism affects democracy and constitutionalism, making them weaker and prone to autocratic or populist hijacking. It distinguishes between two different legalisms: political legalism, or the legalism of the elites who abuse and manipulate law in the name of its letter, and mass, popular legalism which is spread deep in multiple layers of society. Legalism’s persistence in a society’s mindset is one, albeit important, factor making it prone to illiberal takeover. Populism is on the march throughout the world. In some societies, populism affects rhetoric, popular discourse, and sometimes policies, and in others it affects core institutions and the fundamental pillars of social engineering. If populism and its favourite weapon ‘autocratic legalism’ represent an infection, a virus, then the degree of mass legalism within a society represents the state of the immune system called to resist this virus.
Constitutional Courts
Oxford Scholarship Online
This chapter considers the role of the courts, which is expected to be critical for electoral int... more This chapter considers the role of the courts, which is expected to be critical for electoral integrity through upholding voting rights; examining legal appeals, petitions, and complaints in specific cases; and evaluating the constitutionality of electoral procedures. In many countries, constitutional courts have often played a vital role in judging legal complaints about electoral malpractices. This process is particularly important in democratic states with an independent judiciary. By contrast, in autocratic states, the judiciary is often believed to be in the pockets of ruling parties, although this assumption has been challenged where the courts ruled against the government. Through examining cases in eastern Europe this chapter considers the role and independence of the courts as a check and balance both on the legislature and executive branches.
Constitutional Courts
Oxford Scholarship Online
This chapter considers the role of the courts, which is expected to be critical for electoral int... more This chapter considers the role of the courts, which is expected to be critical for electoral integrity through upholding voting rights; examining legal appeals, petitions, and complaints in specific cases; and evaluating the constitutionality of electoral procedures. In many countries, constitutional courts have often played a vital role in judging legal complaints about electoral malpractices. This process is particularly important in democratic states with an independent judiciary. By contrast, in autocratic states, the judiciary is often believed to be in the pockets of ruling parties, although this assumption has been challenged where the courts ruled against the government. Through examining cases in eastern Europe this chapter considers the role and independence of the courts as a check and balance both on the legislature and executive branches.
Finding optimal design for constitutional courts: The perspective of democratization in post-soviet countries
International Journal of Constitutional Law, 2015
This article analyzes cases of higher court involvement in "pure politics" in post-Soviet countri... more This article analyzes cases of higher court involvement in "pure politics" in post-Soviet countries. The main purpose of this endeavor is twofold. First, the work contributes evidence from this under-studied region to enrich the debate on judicialization and extend its reach. Second, the article traces the nature of political interventions by courts in post Soviet countries and explores whether these represent patterns of judicialization typical to other polities. In particular, this article pays special attention to one essential facet of judicialization-political empowerment of the judiciary-to analyze whether the incidents of judicial decision-making on key political issues in post Soviet regimes is comparable, on important accounts, with the judicialization of democratic politics elsewhere and especially in developed democracies.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2000
The recent research on EU’s role in democratization in the post-communist world has been primaril... more The recent research on EU’s role in democratization in the post-communist world has been primarily concerned with its new member states of Central and Eastern Europe, as well as the prospective member states. A great deal of knowledge is now available on EU’s impact on members or prospective members, but little stays known about EU’s influence on democratic development in the neighborhood beyond the accession orbits. This paper makes an inquiry into the effect of European policies on democratic processes in a country which is not impacted by conditionality for EU accession but where the promise of European integration is nevertheless seen as an important factor affecting political developments. The particular focus of this paper is on the state of inter-institutional accountability within the frameworks of the democratic constitution in Armenia. This rather narrow concentration on constitutional structures is stipulated by the nature of the major European policies and instruments put into effect in the remote neighborhood. As it will be explicated further in the text, these policies and instruments predominantly rely on the reforms of macro-political democratic institutions at the same time as the democratic achievements are largely measured by reference to the formal institutional reform.
Constrained, pragmatic pro-democratic appraising constitutional review courts in post-Soviet politics
Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 2010
Review of Central and East European Law, 2009
This article explores the consequences and the opportunities of political involvement of constitu... more This article explores the consequences and the opportunities of political involvement of constitutional courts in post-Soviet countries. The answers to this inquiry then allow a discussion on institutional design alternatives that would help constitutional courts to better support democracy. The author identifies particular practical difficulties with the present institutional settings (referring to them as to a 'paradox of political empowerment') and investigates the options for addressing the limitations created by the described model.
Failing constitutionalism: From political legalism to defective empowerment
Global Constitutionalism, 2012
Books by Armen Mazmanyan
For some time now, the European Court of Human Rights is under substantial pressure. From a case ... more For some time now, the European Court of Human Rights is under substantial pressure. From a case overload crisis it stumbled into a legitimacy crisis with regard to certain countries. This should be taken seriously, since scholars warn that institutions with eroding legitimacy risk demise or reform. The goal of this volume is to explore how widespread this critical attitude of the European Court of Human Rights really is. It also assesses to what extent such criticism is being translated in strategies at the political level or at the judicial level and brings about concrete changes in the dynamics between national and European fundamental rights protection. The book is topical and innovative, as these questions have so far remained largely unexplored, especially cross-nationally.
Far from focusing exclusively on those voices that are currently raised so loud, conclusions are based on comparative in-depth reports, covering fifteen Contracting Parties and the EU.
With contributions of Olgun Akbulut, Tilmann Altwicker, Katarzyna Blay-Grabarczyk, Anna Gamper, Janneke Gerards, Krystyna Kowalik-Bańczyk, Sarah Lambrecht, Koen Lemmens, Lubomir Majerčík, Giuseppe Martinico, Roger Masterman, Aaron Matta, Christophe Maubernard, Armen Mazmanyan, Katharina Pabel, Eszter Polgári, Patricia Popelier, Clara Rauchegger, Michael Reiertsen and Henrik Wenander.
Far from focusing exclusively on those voices that are currently raised so loud, conclusions are based on comparative in-depth reports, covering fifteen Contracting Parties and the EU.
With contributions of Olgun Akbulut, Tilmann Altwicker, Katarzyna Blay-Grabarczyk, Anna Gamper, Janneke Gerards, Krystyna Kowalik-Bańczyk, Sarah Lambrecht, Koen Lemmens, Lubomir Majerčík, Giuseppe Martinico, Roger Masterman, Aaron Matta, Christophe Maubernard, Armen Mazmanyan, Katharina Pabel, Eszter Polgári, Patricia Popelier, Clara Rauchegger, Michael Reiertsen and Henrik Wenander.
Senior Researcher Aaron Matta from the Hague Institute for Global Justice, together with Armen Ma... more Senior Researcher Aaron Matta from the Hague Institute for Global Justice, together with Armen Mazmanyan, Director of the Apella Institute in Yerevan, contributed a chapter to the volume “Criticism of the European Court of Human Rights: Shifting the Convention System: Counter-Dynamics at the National and EU Level” edited by Patricia Popelier, Koen Lemmens and Sarah Lambrecht.
For some time now, the European Court of Human Rights is under substantial pressure. From a case overload crisis it stumbled into a legitimacy crisis with regard to certain countries. This should be taken seriously, since scholars warn that institutions with eroding legitimacy risk demise or reform. The goal of this volume is to explore how widespread this critical attitude of the European Court of Human Rights really is. It also assesses to what extent such criticism is being translated in strategies at the political level or at the judicial level and brings about concrete changes in the dynamics between national and European fundamental rights protection. The book is topical and innovative, as these questions have so far remained largely unexplored, especially cross-nationally. Far from focusing exclusively on those voices that are currently raised so loud, conclusions are based on comparative in-depth reports, covering fifteen Contracting Parties and the EU.
The chapter contributed by Dr. Matta and Dr. Mazmanyan is entitled ‘Russia: In Quest for a European Identity’. In this chapter they argue that for Russia, its accession to the Council of Europe and to ECtHR’s jurisdiction is perhaps more a matter of identity and status than a normative position. This is an important point in our view. Ultimately, whether Russia is driven to stay within the ECtHR jurisdiction from considerations of its geopolitical identity or whether it wants to share the common values and standards with the rest of European community remains to be seen. What appears rather clear at this point is that politics drive this process more than any legalistic practices, be it geopolitics, identity politics or politics of memory. Normativity stays central to this process; the major question to pose here, though, is whose normativity? If so, Russia’s case may well be extraordinary, but it is in no way exceptional as its DNA is nothing else than what the most essential puzzles of the ECHR system is: its embedded conflict between the national and supra-national, local and the universal, and its perpetual quest for reconciling these.
For some time now, the European Court of Human Rights is under substantial pressure. From a case overload crisis it stumbled into a legitimacy crisis with regard to certain countries. This should be taken seriously, since scholars warn that institutions with eroding legitimacy risk demise or reform. The goal of this volume is to explore how widespread this critical attitude of the European Court of Human Rights really is. It also assesses to what extent such criticism is being translated in strategies at the political level or at the judicial level and brings about concrete changes in the dynamics between national and European fundamental rights protection. The book is topical and innovative, as these questions have so far remained largely unexplored, especially cross-nationally. Far from focusing exclusively on those voices that are currently raised so loud, conclusions are based on comparative in-depth reports, covering fifteen Contracting Parties and the EU.
The chapter contributed by Dr. Matta and Dr. Mazmanyan is entitled ‘Russia: In Quest for a European Identity’. In this chapter they argue that for Russia, its accession to the Council of Europe and to ECtHR’s jurisdiction is perhaps more a matter of identity and status than a normative position. This is an important point in our view. Ultimately, whether Russia is driven to stay within the ECtHR jurisdiction from considerations of its geopolitical identity or whether it wants to share the common values and standards with the rest of European community remains to be seen. What appears rather clear at this point is that politics drive this process more than any legalistic practices, be it geopolitics, identity politics or politics of memory. Normativity stays central to this process; the major question to pose here, though, is whose normativity? If so, Russia’s case may well be extraordinary, but it is in no way exceptional as its DNA is nothing else than what the most essential puzzles of the ECHR system is: its embedded conflict between the national and supra-national, local and the universal, and its perpetual quest for reconciling these.