The Czech debate over the Constitutional Court’s decisions follows a curious pattern.
- A case is brought before the Constitutional Court.
- The opposition (by which I mean the parties that won the parliamentary elections and formed the government but, in practice, failed to take full control of the levers of power) confidently declares its belief that the Constitutional Court will rule impartially—that is, that it will apply the law neutrally, regardless of the individuals involved or the surrounding political circumstances.
- The Constitutional Court just as confidently casts aside the principle of neutrality and makes its loyalty to the liberal oligarchy unmistakably clear.
- The opposition expresses surprise and indignation, hinting that if this continues, it may eventually lose confidence in the Constitutional Court.
- In the weeks and months that follow, the Court’s justices publicly demonstrate their political partiality.
- A few months later, another case reaches the Court. The opposition behaves as though it has forgotten everything that happened before and once again confidently declares its belief that this time the Constitutional Court will rule impartially.
- The Constitutional Court once again just as confidently abandons the principle of neutrality…
And so the cycle repeats.
What is striking is that the Constitutional Court does not engage in propaganda claiming to be neutral or impartial. Quite the opposite: its justices openly express sympathy for one side of the political conflict and publicly affirm their loyalty to that side. It is the opposition—the side that is disadvantaged by these decisions—that repeatedly insists on the supposed neutrality of the Constitutional Court.
Would it not serve the opposition better to acknowledge the situation as it actually is?
To be completely precise, there is perhaps one case out of ten in which the Constitutional Court does rule impartially, creating an impression of unpredictability for the opposition. But such cases are uncommon, and they are far too rare to form the basis of a viable political strategy.