The essay discusses the phenomenon of judicial dissent from a comparative perspective, with special focus on European constitutional courts most of which allow the publication of dissenting opinions. It presents the most common arguments for and against the publication of dissent, discusses dissenting opinions’ difficult relationship with certain fundamental principles, such as judicial independence and legal certainty, and examines their personal dimension, i.e. the judges’ point of view. Finally, it reflects on the compatibility of dissenting opinions with the perceived role of the judge in the civil law tradition.
This article constitutes an excerpt of the main findings and conclusions from the Author’s book Judicial Dissent in European Constitutional Courts: A Comparative and Legal Perspective (Routledge 2018).