Global Growth of the Importance of the Judiciary in the World: On the Ques- Tion of the Role of the “Rule of Juristocracy”

The article considers modern scientific approaches to the problems of “juristocracy” in foreign legal thought, given that in domestic legal science the topic has not received a systematic scientific analysis. It is emphasized that after the Second World War, in the conditions of the widespread use of constitutional justice, courts deviate from the control function defined by G. Kelsen and begin to impose their interpretation of law on the executive and legislative bodies. This categorically changed the essence of the rule of law, which turned into a juristocracy - the actual rule of judges. The concept of juristocracy has received significant distribution in foreign legal and political science literature. It should be emphasized that there is no systematic and thoroughly substantiated theory of juristocracy, as well as a generally recognized clear definition. But the profile term is actively used, first of all, to determine the special role of constitutional courts in the modern system of power. The article notes that the basic approach of foreign researchers is based on the assertion that juristocracy or judicial hegemony generates a new distribution of powers, which is based on the “growth of the unelected” and does not correspond to traditional democratic ideals. It is stated that the influence of constitutional courts is expanding and increasingly penetrates into everyday politics and the functioning of society. The scope of judicial review includes issues of national policy (megapolitics), for example, the legitimacy of the regime, state building, the competence of executive bodies, electoral processes, etc., as well as issues of political confrontation and inter-party struggle. Decisions of constitutional courts are increasingly becoming an alternative to the legislative process and the rule-making work of executive bodies. Judicial legality creates new rules and procedures, which is seen as evidence of the transition of power from representative democracy to the “rule of judges.”