Democracy is the most popular and widely accepted type of government in the modern world. It emphasizes sovereignty, political equality, fundamental human rights, and the rule of law. It is important to discuss democracy to understand the government systems existing in the world. However, democracy faces challenges not only from military coups and dictatorships, but also from elected charismatic leaders, who use state institutions, especially the judiciary, to strengthen their government and weaken institutions’ independence. They deploy judges in the courts of their own will and make changes in the Constitution through amendments.
The use of institutions by elected governments for their political benefits was termed “autocratic legalism”. This term was first coined by Kim Lane Scheppele, an American scholar of constitutional law, in 2018 (Scheppele, 2018). According to her, some leaders come to power through democratic elections, but then use laws, the Constitution, and legal institutions to gradually weaken them and concentrate power in their own hands (Scheppele, 2018). According to the V-Dem Democracy Report (2026), nearly seventy-four percent of the world’s population lives under autocratic regimes (V-Dem Institute, 2026).
Autocratic Legalism in Hungary and Poland
As Kim Lane Scheppele argued, autocratic legalism occurs when democratically elected leaders use constitutional amendments to weaken democratic checks and balances and enhance their political power (Scheppele, 2018). Viktor Orbán of Hungary rewrote the constitution of 1989–1990 and added amendments in favour of his government to rule again in 2014, after completing his tenure in 2010. In particular, his government expanded its influence over the election commission, the judiciary and prosecutors’ offices, and weakened the role of the opposition (Scheppele, 2018).
Moreover, Poland borrowed some autocratic legal tactics from Hungary. Firstly, the government targeted the Constitutional Tribunal, controlled appointments in the judiciary, and then used legal reforms to limit the power and independence of the courts (Scheppele, 2018). According to critics, these steps were a threat to democratic justice and judicial independence.
These gradual changes in the system through constitutional amendments, the weakening of state institutions’ status and autonomy, and the enhancement of political power were metaphorically called “death by a thousand cuts” (Bermeo, 2016; Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2018). These step-by-step tactics transformed the democracies into autocratic regimes. In Hungary, after Orbán’s autocratic policies, it faced concerns over judicial autonomy, control over independent media, corruption, and conflict with the European Union. In Poland, under the government of the Law and Justice (PiS) party, the judiciary became weakened and political conflict arose over the independence of the judiciary (Scheppele, 2018).
Exhibit Elements of Autocratic Legalism in Pakistan
In the case of Pakistan, autocratic legalism refers to the use of constitutional amendments (26th–27th), judicial restructuring, and statutory reforms by the political and military establishments to enhance their power. The Federal Constitutional Court snatched the main constitutional jurisdiction from the Supreme Court (AFP/Al Arabiya, 2025; ConstitutionNet, n.d.), and lifetime immunity was granted to the military chief (AFP/Al Arabiya, 2025; Al Jazeera, 2025). The amendments ensured the selection of the Chief Justice by consensus and the decision of executive and legislative bodies.
The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) is also a method used by the government to control dissenting voices, suppress journalists, and diminish liberties (Dawn, 2025b; Journalism Pakistan, 2026). The resignations of two Supreme Court judges, including Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Athar Minallah, are evidence that the autonomy of constitutional courts has been weakened through the amendments (Dawn, 2025a).
How Can We Detect an Autocratic Legalist?
An autocratic legalist has enormous political tactics and implements the policies and laws that he wants. By observation, the first and most important sign is that he uses constitutional amendments as a mechanism and can easily manipulate public opinion in his regime’s favour (Scheppele, 2018). The autocratic legalist can suppress the opposition and the press, use the media, and control the judiciary and other state institutions to curtail liberties while preserving his government in the name of democracy (Scheppele, 2018).
Autocratic regimes are unfair and perilous types of government that gradually weaken the roots of democracy and the overall status of institutions. This is an existing threat to citizens, leading them to subjugation, political inequality, and the stripping of freedom of speech and freedom of association.
Therefore, the public should not only observe the elected leader’s perceptions and practices during his rule, but also judge them through the lens of sovereignty, fundamental rights, the rule of law, and political equality.
If you want to submit your articles and/or research papers, please visit the Submissions page.
To stay updated with the latest jobs, CSS news, internships, scholarships, and current affairs articles, join our Community Forum!
Find our FREE quizzes and MCQs here!
The views and opinions expressed in this article/paper are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Paradigm Shift.
Sikandar Ali is a student of International Relations at Islamia University of Bahawalpur and hails from Tehsil and district Ghotki, Pakistan.
