Constitutional courts as political actors: Russia in comparative perspective

Why are judicial review mechanisms being incorporated into so many democratizing states? Why do these courts become independent, powerful political actors in some cases but not in others? These are the central questions addressed in this comparative study of the several attempts to establish a constitutional court in Russia. The study analyzes why politicians create an independent judicial institution with the authority to overrule their own decisions, and once established, why do politicians involve the court in the political process and agree to abide by its decisions. It sheds light on the role constitutional courts play in the consolidation phase of a democratic transition, and the functions these institutions perform in systems of representative government that help to sustain democratic politics.; This study focuses on one of those countries with no tradition of independent judicial review or of democratic forms of governance—Russia. Past practices and historical precedent do not support the formation of an independent judiciary in Russia, and yet a potentially powerful constitutional court now exists. Moreover, during the course of the transition from the Soviet state to the Russian Republic, there were three attempts to create an independent judicial review mechanism only one of which could be termed a success.; This analysis focuses on the self-interested calculations of politicians. There are two stages to the process: first, the creation of the court, and second, the development of a potentially powerful institution. During the first stage, political actors establish a constitutional court to enhance their democratic credibility. Once established, the constitutional court can take on a central political role or it can be marginalized. During the second stage, the interests of the politicians who enlist the court, and the interests of the judges who serve on the court are often in conflict; politicians seek to alter the rules in order to increase their power while judges seek to solidify the rules in order to ensure the survival of the constitutional court. A successful constitutional court must first be used; the disputes it hears must be significant political questions; and politicians must respect its decisions.