This article examines strategies of procedural violation, strategic marginalization, and legalism in Poland, suggesting implications for democracy.
This article contributes to the study of ‘democratic front-sliding’ by proposing an empirically informed typology of strategies a reformist government may adopt towards state institutions after a period of democratic backsliding. Drawing on a single-jurisdiction case study from Poland of a post-backsliding government’s immediate approach to the public service media, the Constitutional Tribunal, and the judiciary we inductively develop a non-exhaustive typology comprising of ‘procedural violation’, ‘strategic marginalisation’, and ‘principled legalism’. We also propose a framework for evaluating these strategies from a liberal constitutional perspective, focusing on: the specificity of the government’s diagnosis of post-backsliding damage; the transparency of its reform plan; the legality and proportionality of its actions; the legitimacy of the measures, understood as acting in good faith and pursuing broader reforms aimed at increasing institutional independence, pluralism, and proper functioning; and, finally, the social reception of these measures and their implications for the perceived legitimacy of democratic front-sliding. Our observations are framed in the period from a reformist government taking office in December 2023 to the presidential election in June 2025.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Skóra et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: