Publication at Faculty of Law |
2016
Abstract
The author demonstrates on selected examples that during the states declared as emergencies judges have significant potential to influence which of the theoretical approaches to states of emergency discussed in the previous chapters, together with its pros and cons, prevails. The author also proposes that the application of the modern theories of proportionality or balancing in judicial decision-making connected to emergencies should reflect an older, but not outdated concept of defensive democracy, which emerged in reaction to the violent threats to democracy.