In recent years, the hegemonic dominance of liberal democratic ideas has been contested by the rise of so-called populist governments around the world. Populist regimes vary greatly, with some more prone to adopt authoritarian policies than others, but they have all emerged as a response to the discontent of societies with their political elites. People’s discontent has grown amid a persistent social unrest fueled by structural poverty and income inequality. Neoliberal policies dictated by the Washington Consensus since the 1990s have aggravated the social damage caused by the expansion of global capitalism.
It is in this context that populist regimes have emerged as a response to people’s anxieties and fears. However, their political strategies have left untouched the predatory economic order responsible for the social problems. Instead, their inflamed rhetoric’s have blamed the state’s power restrictions set by liberal institutions such the separation of powers and the rule of law for the people’s sufferings. Among the populist regimes there has been a clear divide between those who have sought to push the legal limits to empower some of the most marginalized sectors of society, and those who have done it to unleash a punitive violence against the poor. However, all populist regimes have shared a strong animosity against courts. In this article collection we are interested in exploring how these hostile politics have influenced the work of Criminal Courts.
Whilst the political tensions between populist regimes and High Courts have been widely covered, there is a dearth of studies on how lower Criminal Courts have experienced the populist policies in the last years. Acknowledging the diversity of political, social, and economic contexts, this collection seeks to shed light on how legal professionals working in Criminal Courts have navigated the challenges posed by populist politics. Courts have had to address police abuses promoted by senior government officials to the empowerment of political leaders under criminal investigations.
We are interested in empirically grounded studies that critically analyze the practices and processes carried in Criminal Courts and the impact that populist policies have had on them.
All manuscripts submitted to this Article Collection will undergo desk assessment and peer-review as part of our standard editorial process. Guest Advisors will not be involved in peer-reviewing manuscripts unless they are an existing member of the Editorial Board.
Please review the journal scope and author submission instructions prior to submitting a manuscript.
The deadline for submitting manuscripts is 20 November 2023.
Please contact Kristen Brida at [email protected] with any queries regarding this Article Collection.
About the Guest Advisor
Pablo Ciocchini is Research Fellow at the Argentinean National Scientific and Technical Research Council and Honorary Research Fellow in Sociology, Social Policy and Criminology at the University of Liverpool. His research adopts a neo-Gramscian approach to analyze the political role of law and legal professionals play in societies of the Global South where state violence is rampant. His work has been published in international journals such as The British Journal of Criminology, Critical Criminology, The International Journal of Law in Practice, Crime, Law and Social Change and the Asian Journal of Social Sciences among others.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure
Dr. Ciocchini declares no conflict of interest.
