How did the judiciary change under authoritarian governments?

Under authoritarian governments, the judiciary often loses its independence and becomes a tool for enforcing government policies.

In a democratic system, the judiciary is typically an independent branch of government, separate from the executive and legislative branches. Its role is to interpret the law and ensure that it is applied fairly. However, under authoritarian regimes, this independence is often compromised. The judiciary becomes a tool for the government to enforce its policies and maintain its power, rather than a check on government power.

One of the first steps an authoritarian government often takes is to replace judges and other judicial officials with loyalists. This ensures that the judiciary will rule in favour of the government in any disputes. In some cases, the government may even create special courts to try political opponents or other perceived enemies of the state. These courts often operate outside the normal legal system and are subject to direct control by the government.

In addition to replacing judges, authoritarian governments often manipulate the law to serve their own ends. They may pass laws that criminalise dissent or opposition to the government, giving the judiciary the power to punish anyone who speaks out against the regime. They may also use the law to legitimise their own actions, for example by passing laws that allow them to seize property or restrict civil liberties.

Furthermore, under authoritarian regimes, the judiciary often lacks the power to enforce its rulings. Even if a court were to rule against the government, the government could simply ignore the ruling without facing any consequences. This further undermines the judiciary's role as a check on government power.

In summary, under authoritarian governments, the judiciary is often transformed from an independent branch of government into a tool for enforcing government policies. This is achieved through a combination of replacing judges, manipulating the law, and undermining the judiciary's power to enforce its rulings.