Kritarchy

Part of the Politics series
Basic forms of government
List of forms of government List of countries by system of government
Source of power Democracy (rule by many) Demarchy Direct Economic Liberal Representative Social Socialist Others Oligarchy (rule by few) Anocracy Aristocracy Gerontocracy Kleptocracy Kritarchy Meritocracy Noocracy Particracy Plutocracy Stratocracy Technocracy Theocracy Autocracy (rule by one) Despotism Dictatorship Military dictatorship Tyranny Anarchy (rule by none) Anarchism Free association Stateless
Power ideology Monarchy Republic (socio-political ideologies) Absolute Communist Constitutional Directorial Legalist Parliamentary Presidential Semi-presidential Authoritarian Libertarian (socio-economic ideologies) Anarchism Colonialism Communism Despotism Distributism Fascism Feudalism Socialism Totalitarianism Tribalism Religious Secular State religion Secular state Separation of church and state State atheism Global Local (geo-cultural ideologies) City-state Intergovernmental organisation National government World government Nationalism Internationalism Globalism
Power structure Unitarism Unitary state Empire Principality Client state Associated state Dependent territory Dominion Protectorate Puppet state Puppet monarch Satellite state Self-governing colony Tributary state Buffer state Vassal state Viceroyalty Federalism Confederation Devolution Federation Superstate Supranational union International relations Small power Regional power Middle power Great power Superpower
Related Administrative division Democracy indices Democratic transition Autocratization Democratisation Hybrid regimes
Politics portal
v t e

Kritarchy, also called kritocracy, was the system of rule by Biblical judges (שופטים, shoftim) in ancient Israel, started by Moses according to the Book of Exodus,^[1] before the establishment of a united monarchy under Saul.^[2][3]

Because the name is a compound of the Greek words κριτής, krites ("judge") and ἄρχω, árkhō ("to rule"),^[4] its colloquial use has expanded to cover rule by judges in the modern sense as well. To contrast such a rule by (modern) judges with the actual form of the 1996 Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, judge Albie Sachs coined the term dikastocracy for it, from δικαστής ("judge"), rejecting the coinage juristocracy^[5] for being an admixture of Latin and Greek.^[6] The word jurocracy has also been used by others.^[7]

Stanley Reed

Albie Sachs

Sachs and others rejected the idea that the Constitutional Court of South Africa, on which he sat, was a dikastocracy; using the name to denote what they asserted the Court not to be.^[8] It was used in a 1996 Court opinion that rejected the "horizontal" application (between citizens as opposed to "vertical" application between citizens and the government) of the RSA constitution's Bill of Rights and warned that "horizontal" application would turn the republic into such a dikastocracy.^[9]

Others have similarly used this as an inverse definition to denote what they assert their form of government is not. Supreme Court of the United States justice Stanley Forman Reed, the last dissenter to be convinced in the decision on Brown v. Board of Education used kritarchy as the name for the judicial activism that he initially dissented from, asking his clerk (John Fassett) who argued with the direction to write a dissenting opinion whether he (Fassett) favoured a kritarchy.^[10][11] Fassett was unfamiliar with the word, and Reed told him to look it up.^[10][11] Fassett could not find it in several dictionaries, finally locating it in the Oxford English Dictionary.^[10][11]

The actual term that Reed used was "krytocracy" and he described it as a "government by judges."^[12]

This form of rule (in the non-Biblical sense) is the case of Somalia, ruled by judges with the polycentric legal tradition of xeer.^[13][14][15] The definition employed by Michael van Notten (based upon one by Frank van Dun^[16]) is not, strictly, that of rule by judges, judges not being a formal political class but rather people selected at random to perform that task ad hoc; but rather is that of a legal and political system whose closest analogue in other societies is that of a system based entirely upon customary rather than statutory law.^[17] Ayittey referred to this as a "near-Kritarchy".^[18] Van Notten himself argues that with few exceptions, the system of government which he denotes a kritarchy is "harmonious with the concept of natural law" and "very close to what in philosophy might be called 'the natural order of human beings'".^[17]

In the opinion of libertarian anthropologist Spencer McCallum, the kritarchy represents the governance of stateless societies,^[19] explaining that Somali tribal governments were made up of courts and part-time police.^[20]

Many legal scholars and commentators have spoken of the potential for systems to move to a form of kritarchy, viewing such in a negative light.^[21] A specific example is the Constitution of the Philippines which allows for direct rule by the Supreme Court should the Executive commit a "grave abuse", which is not defined in law.^[22]

Ireland had a system of kritarchy from the 5th century BCE to the 5th century CE under the Brehon Law, the Brehons being the class of judges keeping an oral tradition of secular law from pre-Christian Ireland.^[23][24][4] A kritarchy system was also present in medieval Ireland until the 13th century.^[25][4]

The Icelandic Commonwealth between the 9th and 13th century has been labelled as a kritarchy by David D. Friedman and Einar Olgeirsson.^[26][27]

The Sardinian medieval kingdoms, also called the Judicates, from the 10th to 14th centuries.^[28]

Frisia, at the end of the Frisian freedom, in the 16th century had a system of kritarchy.^[29][4]

Islamic Courts Union from 1994 to 2006 in Somalia, following the legal system of xeer.^[30]

• The fictional regime of Mega-city One, the focus of setting for the Judge Dredd franchise, can be described as a kritarchy.^[31]