By Janne Salminen
This blog post is published to honour the career of Professor Elina Pirjatanniemi. See more here.
More Emphasis on Legal Education and Civil Society
As is widely known, the Venice Commission, formally known as the European Commission for Democracy through Law, revised its Rule of Law Checklist in late 2025 (CDL-AD(2025)002). Although the fundamental method, structure and essence of the Checklist remain intact, the substantive changes introduced by the revision are, in my assessment, of significance. They highlight the new trends and discussion concerning the theme. In this blog, I will discuss one of the changes.
The revised Checklist introduces several new thematic areas which, alongside its traditional core elements, bring into sharper focus the importance of maintaining a checks and balances in the constitutional system of powers and underscore the central role of constitutional review in safeguarding the rule of law. Furthermore, reflecting the challenges characteristic of the contemporary era, the revised Checklist gives greater attention to the considerable power exercised by private actors and the rule-of-law concerns arising therefrom. It also recognises the far-reaching implications of rapid technological transformation and, as a further challenge of our age, engages with the question of rule-of-law restoration (see also Francesco Biagi’s writing here).
In my view, one of the most important features of the Rule of Law Checklist is – has been and still is – its insistence that the rule of law is a legal concept. It is not one that may be redefined according to shifting political preferences or policy objectives. At the same time, it is important to recognise that the language of the rule of law is today frequently invoked in support of a wide variety of political projects, some of which may appear only remotely connected to its core content and, at times, even difficult to reconcile with it. Against this background, the growing emphasis placed on civil society and education in the revised Checklist is particularly welcome. It underlines that citizens, individuals and civic organisations have an essential role not only in promoting and defending the rule of law, but also in preserving a sound understanding of its meaning. A resilient rule-of-law culture ultimately depends not only on courts and other institutions and public authorities, but also on the capacity of society itself to recognise, scrutinise and safeguard the fundamental requirements of the rule of law. This is very much a matter of knowing what the rule of law actually is.
Responsibility of the Legal Profession
Public discourse on the rule of law has undoubtedly become more prominent in recent years. This is, in many respects, a welcome development. The rule of law institutions are of undeniable importance, and sustained attention to the rule of law is necessary precisely because the processes involved in weakening the rule of law have often proven gradual and erosive rather than abrupt. As we have seen, it is a continuous process rather than one event. Simultaneously, however, the increasing prevalence of rule of law discourse carries certain risks. While discussing the rule of law is indispensable to the defence of its core principles, participants in that discussion should remain critical of both their own use of the concept and that of others. As noted above, the concept is susceptible not only to politicisation but also to instrumentalisation. Appeals to the rule of law may become a means of stigmatising political opponents or advancing particular policy objectives, with the consequence that the concept’s genuine legal significance becomes obscured.
In such circumstances, legal scholarship, education and expert knowledge assume a special responsibility. Their task is to emphasise that the rule of law is neither a rhetorical device nor an empty slogan. Moreover, when the rule of law becomes a fashionable expression invoked in virtually every political controversy, it may also be exposed to a form of conceptual inflation. Citizens may find it increasingly difficult to distinguish between a genuine rule of law concern and an ordinary political disagreement. Closely related to this phenomenon is the tendency to present a wide range of objectives, many of them entirely laudable in themselves, as somehow inherent in, or even required by, the rule of law. Such developments risk blurring the boundaries of the concept and diluting its core content.
Furthermore, because the rule of law is closely connected to democracy, as well as to fundamental and human rights, tensions are inherent in these relationships. Such tensions are most commonly manifested in the relationship between the majority’s will, on the one hand, and the protection of minorities and the adjudicative authority of independent courts, on the other. If debate concerning the rule of law comes to be perceived as elitist or detached from broader public concerns, it may also contribute, however unintentionally, to further political polarisation.
None of this is to suggest that the rule of law should be discussed less frequently; quite the contrary. Rather, it underlines the importance of maintaining clarity about what the rule of law is, and what it is not. In this the revised Rule of Law Checklist is of great importance providing us a clear point for reference. Equally, it highlights the need to communicate its meaning more effectively to the wider public. In this respect, the increased attention devoted by the revised Rule of Law Checklist to civic engagement and education appears both timely and well justified.
Civil Society in the 2016 Rule of Law Checklist
The role of legal education, legal scholarship and civil society received comparatively little attention in the earlier 2016 Rule of Law Checklist (CDL-AD(2016)007). Nevertheless, the Checklist did contain some passages that may be regarded as precursors to the more explicit approach adopted in the 2025 revision. Most directly, civil society was recognised as one of the actors capable of assessing rule-of-law conditions and contributing to legal and institutional reform. Paragraph 27 of the Checklist emphasised that it was intended as a tool for Parliaments and other State authorities when addressing the need and content of legislative reform, as well as for civil society and international organisations.
Civil society also appeared in the context of anti-corruption efforts. The former Checklist identified as a warning sign for the rule of law the “intimidation of journalists and members of civil society who report on corruption”. Although this reference was relatively narrow in scope, it implicitly acknowledged the importance of an active and independent civil society as a mechanism of public accountability.
More broadly, the 2016 Checklist already contained a significant societal dimension. Paragraph 43 stated that the rule of law can only flourish in a country whose inhabitants feel collectively responsible for the implementation of the concept, making it an integral part of their own legal, political and social culture.
This formulation clearly extended the discussion beyond state institutions and legal procedures. It pointed towards a broader understanding according to which the sustainability of the rule of law ultimately depends upon its internalisation within society itself. In this respect, the enhanced emphasis placed on civic engagement, education and rule-of-law culture in the revised Checklist can be understood as the further development of ideas that were already present, albeit only implicitly, in the earlier version.
The Revised Checklist
The revised Checklist states that
“[i]n addition to a receptive and supportive legal and political culture, free media and vigilant civil society, the Venice Commission stresses the significance of legal and civic education. The realisation of the rule of law falls mainly to legal professionals, whose competence and integrity is decisive for promoting the rule of law. Yet, legal education for legal professionals should be complemented by civic education fostering respect for human rights, democracy and the Rule of Law among the general public.” (para 20)
In my view, the revised Rule of Law Checklist places more emphasis on the societal foundations of the rule of law than its predecessor. This is particularly evident in its decision to devote a separate subsection to Legal and Civic Education (paras. 161–163). Rather than focusing exclusively on institutions and legal safeguards, the revised Checklist explicitly turns its attention also to the conditions under which a rule-of-law culture is created, maintained and transmitted from one generation to the next. In this the legal profession – law professors and researchers especially – has an important role.
In the field of legal education, the Checklist asks whether legal studies foster respect for democracy, human rights and the rule of law. It further advises asking whether constitutional law occupies a central place in the curriculum, whether these themes are integrated across legal studies more broadly, whether legal education encourages critical thinking, whether appropriate guarantees exist for the quality and independence of legal education, and whether continuing professional education is available for legal practitioners. These questions reflect a simple but important insight: legal institutions are only as resilient as the people entrusted with interpreting, teaching and applying the law. (See also Olga Ceran’s piece here).
The Checklist adopts a similarly broad perspective in relation to civic education. It asks whether schools adequately educate citizens about democracy, human rights and the rule of law and whether civil society organisations, including lawyers’ associations, actively participate in public debate on these issues. The underlying assumption is that safeguarding the rule of law cannot be left solely to courts, constitutional institutions or legal professionals. It also requires citizens who possess a basic understanding of constitutional democracy and who are capable of recognising threats to the rule of law when they arise.
The 2016 version already hinted at the importance of a broader rule-of-law culture, most notably in its observation that the rule of law can flourish only where citizens regard themselves as collectively responsible for it. The revised Checklist develops that insight further. It treats education, public understanding and civic participation as desirable features of a democratic society and as factors that contribute directly to the long-term sustainability of the rule of law itself. While keeping the contents of the rule of law clear under pressure, there is constant need to talk about its contents and importance to the public.
Janne Salminen, Chancellor of Justice of Finland, Professor
