Lunch seminar with Michal Kovalcik
When Transparency Meets the Judiciary: Conceptualisation of Judicial Transparency
We live in a ‘transparentocene’ and we are often told that ‘where there is light, no evil can prosper’ . Although the roots of this concept lie in the political sphere and it primarily concerns the executive, the push towards transparency has reached the judiciary as well. Modern judiciaries, endowed with many superpowers, can no longer be shielded by judicial independence from public control. This paper is the first to explore transparency as a common denominator of many discussions within judicial politics.
The paper provides the first conceptualisation of judicial transparency. Building on a principal-agent framework, the paper delineates three core dimensions of judicial transparency: (1) transparency in judicial decision-making, encompassing access to hearings, deliberations, and reasoning; (2) transparency in judicial governance, including selection, promotion, and case assignment mechanisms; and (3) transparency in extra-judicial activities, covering financial disclosures, public engagements, and external affiliations.
Drawing on theoretical literature and preliminary insights from interviews, the study presents a palette of goals that could be sought through transparency as an instrumental value in the sphere of judicial politics (enhancing legitimacy, fostering public trust, mitigating corruption, ensuring procedural fairness etc.). Then, the paper provides a typology of transparency pitfalls, i.e. why transparency is sometimes detrimental or even dangerous. It identifies selective and abusive forms of judicial transparency.
The paper sets out a conceptual framework that can be used for further operationalisation of transparency and following empirical research on this topic. It also sets the stage for my further case studies stemming from my PhD research.
Speaker bio
Michal is a PhD candidate in constitutional law at the Faculty of Law, Masaryk University, and a researcher at the Judicial Studies Institute (JUSTIN), Masaryk University, Brno.
In his PhD project, he focuses on the promises and pitfalls of judicial transparency at apex courts (supervised by David Kosař). At JUSTIN, as a member of the ERC INFINITY project, he explores informalities in the judiciary and their impact on democratic decay. Michal holds a master's degree in law (2023) and a bachelor's degree in political science (2022) from Masaryk University. In his theses, he addressed judicial dialogue, judicial resistance or populism. As part of his master's studies, he also studied at the University of Helsinki. Currently, he works as a judicial clerk at the Czech Constitutional Court. Among his publications, take a look at the "Kovalčík M. Constitutional Referrals by Ordinary Courts: A Platform for Judicial Dialogue and Another Toolkit for Judicial Resistance? European Constitutional Law Review. 2024, 20(1), pp. 52-81.“ and "Kovalčík, M. The instrumental abuse of constitutional courts: how populists can use constitutional courts against the opposition. International Journal of Human Rights, 2022, 26(2), pp. 1160-1180."