|
Independence of the judiciary is commonly identified as an essential cornerstone of democratic governance, and as crucial for the legitimacy and stability of any political system. Yet, in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region judges and courts remain exposed to a multitude of pressures, and often have to decide according to the interests of the powerful, thus contributing to the generally low levels of trust fort the state and its institution among the broader public. While many studies have suggested a wide range of reforms to improve the rule of law, most governments show little if any interest to change a situation that serves them so well, and suggestions at reform have remained a dead letter.
The workshop tackles the issue from a more practically oriented perspective: Working from the precedent of the Egyptian “Club of Judges”, who organized a highly publicized boycott against the Egyptian government’s attempt to force the judiciary to rubberstamp a rigged election, the workshop discusses the experiences and the potential of judges to assert their independence within the existing systems and despite the absence of reform. It compares various instances throughout the region where judges or legal proceedings initiated or contributed to public debate, sometimes in environments where all other platforms for such debates (such as the media) were muted or tightly controlled, and seeks to identify the potential of legal practitioners to inspire citizens to take a proactive stand and active role in the public sphere. |
