Civil War and the Struggle for Judicial Independence

Civil wars do not just reshape borders and governments – they also impact the very institutions meant to uphold democracy. In their 2019 study, Conflict and Courts: Civil War and Judicial Independence Across Democracies (Epperly & Sievert, 2019), the authors examine how civil conflicts influence judicial independence in democratic nations. Their findings reveal an unsettling reality: even in democracies, war has profound consequences for the rule of law.

The Judiciary as a Battleground

Courts are often viewed as neutral arbiters, standing above political struggles. However, Epperly and Sievert argue that during civil conflicts, democratic leaders may pressure courts to consolidate power. The study highlights a troubling pattern:

• Governments under siege from internal conflict often restrict judicial independence to stabilize their own authority.

• Post-war regimes may use the judiciary to punish political opponents, rather than uphold impartial justice.

• Even in well-established democracies, the judiciary is often reshaped by the political and military pressures of war.

One key finding is that civil war weakens judicial autonomy, even in nations that previously had strong, independent courts. This erosion happens in subtle ways – through court-packing, selective prosecutions, and legal restrictions on judicial review.