Events

Speaker: Sonia Cruz Dávila, University of Warwick Law School

Chair: Daniel Matthews, University of Warwick Law School

Title: Judges Appointed by Lottery: A Solution to a Legitimacy Deficit?

Abstract: In response to the well-known crisis of liberal democracy, democratic theorists have proposed ‘democratic innovations’ as a way of creating meaningful opportunities for citizen representation, participation, and deliberation. Among such innovations are ‘deliberative mini-publics’ (DMPs), which are randomly selected groups of citizens that come together to collectively debate issues of public concern, making decisions that either become binding or merely advise other lawmaking authorities. While most mini-publics have been conceived as auxiliary bodies that issue recommendations to either the executive or the legislature, there have been proposals to design DMPs which are integrated into the judiciary and have the power to make judicial decisions. These forums, called ‘constitutional juries’, would not only evaluate evidence to decide whether accused parties are guilty or innocent in criminal cases (as a trial jury would), but also determine bill-of-rights issues (as a constitutional court would). Whilst no proposal to confer judicial powers upon citizens has been implemented, two initiatives in Italy and Switzerland have sought to change the mechanism to appoint judges, shifting from a system where judges are designated by state authorities or a judicial council to one where they are randomly selected. Although crucially different in nature, both initiatives could be taken as a testament to the crisis of legitimacy facing judges, who often fail to legitimise themselves in the eyes of citizens. In light of these theoretical and empirical developments, this project seeks to understand the implications of the idea of appointing judges by lottery for the legitimacy of the judiciary.