Judging for Democracy

This book examines how constitutional courts can sustainably contribute to advancing democratic norms in hybrid regimes, i.e. regimes that are neither fully democratic nor fully authoritarian. Using a comparative approach analysing cases from across the globe, particularly from Hong Kong, Pakistan, and Uganda, Julius Yam makes the case that courts can assume a democracy-enhancing role to mitigate the problems arising from hybrid regimes. The book reveals the challenges faced by courts in performing such a role. It also proposes a adjudicative framework that systematically integrates principled judging with judicial strategy, and suggests non-adjudicative techniques that judges can adopt to reinforce democracy. While theoretical in substance, this book is informed by empirical studies and draws on a wide range of disciplines, including law, political science, sociology and psychology. The book will be a key resource to judges, academics, and practitioners who are interested in the study of democracy and courts. Its insights are particularly pertinent in an age of democratic backsliding and resurgence of authoritarianism. This title is also available as open access on Cambridge Core.