IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v217y2023ics0047272722001906.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Judicial subversion: The effects of political power on court outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Lambais, Guilherme
  • Sigstad, Henrik

Abstract

Are politicians in power treated more leniently in court? We show that Brazilian mayoral candidates charged with misconduct are 65 percent less likely to be convicted if they narrowly win the election. Politicians play no direct role in the judges’ careers, suggesting that formal independence does not completely insulate the judiciary from political influence. The effect is driven by districts with few judges and by judges with higher career instability.

Suggested Citation

  • Lambais, Guilherme & Sigstad, Henrik, 2023. "Judicial subversion: The effects of political power on court outcomes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:217:y:2023:i:c:s0047272722001906
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2022.104788
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272722001906
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2022.104788?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edward L. Glaeser & Andrei Shleifer, 2003. "The Rise of the Regulatory State," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(2), pages 401-425, June.
    2. Sultan Mehmood, 2022. "The Impact of Presidential Appointment of Judges: Montesquieu or the Federalists?," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 411-445, October.
    3. Sebastian Calonico & Matias D. Cattaneo & Rocio Titiunik, 2014. "Robust Nonparametric Confidence Intervals for Regression‐Discontinuity Designs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 2295-2326, November.
    4. Glaeser, Edward & Scheinkman, Jose & Shleifer, Andrei, 2003. "The injustice of inequality," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 199-222, January.
    5. Hayo, Bernd & Voigt, Stefan, 2007. "Explaining de facto judicial independence," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 269-290, September.
    6. George L. Priest & Benjamin Klein, 1984. "The Selection of Disputes for Litigation," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(1), pages 1-56, January.
    7. North, Douglass C. & Weingast, Barry R., 1989. "Constitutions and Commitment: The Evolution of Institutions Governing Public Choice in Seventeenth-Century England," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 803-832, December.
    8. Ramseyer, J. Mark, 2001. "Why Are Japanese Judges So Conservative in Politically Charged Cases?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(2), pages 331-344, June.
    9. Landes, William M & Posner, Richard A, 1975. "The Independent Judiciary in an Interest-Group Perspective," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 875-901, December.
    10. Lewis Davis & K. R. White, 2021. "Is justice blind? Evidence from federal corruption convictions," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 186(1), pages 63-95, January.
    11. Gordon, Sanford C., 2009. "Assessing Partisan Bias in Federal Public Corruption Prosecutions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(4), pages 534-554, November.
    12. Voigt, Stefan & Gutmann, Jerg & Feld, Lars P., 2015. "Economic growth and judicial independence, a dozen years on: Cross-country evidence using an updated Set of indicators," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 197-211.
    13. Guido Imbens & Karthik Kalyanaraman, 2012. "Optimal Bandwidth Choice for the Regression Discontinuity Estimator," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 79(3), pages 933-959.
    14. Hayo, Bernd & Voigt, Stefan, 2019. "The long-term relationship between de jure and de facto judicial independence," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Weingast, Barry R., 1997. "The Political Foundations of Democracy and the Rule of the Law," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(2), pages 245-263, June.
    16. Ramseyer, J Mark, 1994. "The Puzzling (In)dependence of Courts: A Comparative Approach," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(2), pages 721-747, June.
    17. Chemin, Matthieu, 2021. "Can judiciaries constrain executive power? Evidence from judicial reforms," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Itai Ater & Itzchak Tzachi Raz & Yannay Spitzer, 2023. "The Economic Consequences Of Democratic Backsliding Israel'S Judicial Overhaul," Israel Economic Review, Bank of Israel, vol. 21(2), pages 77-138, December.
    2. Helena Arruda & Rudi Rocha, 2024. "Political Turnover and Fatal Government Transitions," Working Papers 19, Instituto de Estudos para Políticas de Saúde.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fiorino, Nadia & Gavoille, Nicolas & Padovano, Fabio, 2015. "Rewarding judicial independence: Evidence from the Italian Constitutional Court," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 56-66.
    2. J. Mark Ramseyer & Eric B. Rasmusen, 1996. "Judicial Independence in Civil Law Regimes: Econometrics from Japan," Public Economics 9603001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Benjamin Broman & Georg Vanberg, 2022. "Feuding, arbitration, and the emergence of an independent judiciary," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 162-199, June.
    4. Hayo, Bernd & Voigt, Stefan, 2023. "Judicial independence: Why does de facto diverge from de jure?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    5. Katarzyna Metelska-Szaniawska & Jacek Lewkowicz, 2021. "Post-socialist “illiberal democracies”: do de jure constitutional rights matter?," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 233-265, June.
    6. Constantina P. Tridimas & George Tridimas, 2020. "Is the UK Supreme Court rogue to un-prorogue Parliament?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 205-225, April.
    7. Hayo, Bernd & Voigt, Stefan, 2016. "Explaining constitutional change: The case of judicial independence," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 1-13.
    8. Gretchen Helmke & Elena V. McLean, 2014. "Inducing independence: A strategic model of World Bank assistance and legal reform," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(4), pages 383-405, September.
    9. Matthew C. Stephenson, 2003. "“When the Devil Turns … ”: The Political Foundations of Independent Judicial Review," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 59-89, January.
    10. Fiorino, Nadia & Gavoille, Nicolas & Padovano, Fabio, 2015. "Rewarding judicial independence: Evidence from the Italian Constitutional Court," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 56-66.
    11. Raphaël Franck, 2018. "Judicial impartiality in politically charged cases," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 193-229, June.
    12. J. Rosser & Marina Rosser, 2008. "A critique of the new comparative economics," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 21(1), pages 81-97, March.
    13. Djankov, Simeon & Glaeser, Edward & La Porta, Rafael & Lopez-de-Silanes, Florencio & Shleifer, Andrei, 2003. "The new comparative economics," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 595-619, December.
    14. Niclas Berggren & Jerg Gutmann, 2020. "Securing personal freedom through institutions: the role of electoral democracy and judicial independence," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 165-186, April.
    15. Polishchuk, Leonid, 2010. "Misuse of Institutions: Lessons from Transition," WIDER Working Paper Series 075, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    16. J. Mark Ramseyer & Eric B. Rasmusen, 2001. "When are Judges and Bureaucrats Left Independent? Theory and History from Imperial Japan, Postwar Japan, and the United States," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-126, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    17. Fabio Padovano, 2009. "The time-varying independence of Italian peak judicial institutions," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 230-250, September.
    18. F. Andrew Hanssen, 2004. "Is There a Politically Optimal Level of Judicial Independence?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 712-729, June.
    19. Dove, John A., 2018. "It's easier to contract than to pay: Judicial independence and US municipal default in the 19th century," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 1062-1081.
    20. Jacek LEWKOWICZ & Katarzyna METELSKA-SZANIAWSKA, 2021. "De Jure and De Facto Institutions: Implications for Law and for Economics," Ekonomista, Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne, issue 6, pages 758-776.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Judicial independence; Official misconduct;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:217:y:2023:i:c:s0047272722001906. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505578 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.