Uncertainty is a catchword for all sorts of undetermined occurrences, which we might have to confront. We associate economic uncertainty with the difficulty to forecast or predict the economic evolution of key indicators like inflation, GDP, CO2-emissions, energy and raw materials’ prices and availability. Even factors like increases in greed of CEOs, psychological factors like insecurity about external or internal conflicts drive these macroeconomic indicators. Micro-level features of your own stage or evolution of the life course have an impact on and will be affected by uncertainty. Employment, housing, family, or household composition are subject to high levels of uncertainty. These micro- and macro- level factors are, of course, not limited to the domain of economic phenomena. Most recently, political uncertainty has reentered the international and national sphere with the re-election of Donald Trump as president of the United States. This election outcome of the U.S. is perceived by many as increasing the overall uncertainty due to the unpredictability of political decisions and even previous treaties with the U.S. or where the U.S. is a major partner in the agreement. These economic and political uncertainties are accompanied with a perception of growing legal uncertainty even in very personal spheres of life. Last, but not least uncertainty about climate changes like heating up of the planet and more devastating flooding and droughts contribute to increased uncertainty about future developments and the need to initiate adjustment processes and the financing of those.
The individual and societal ways to cope with increased uncertainty are one of the major economic, political, legal and social issues for the coming years. The answers are likely to be found in mutual, cooperative and risk sharing arrangements. The social in society will be a major part of dealing with increased uncertainty. 
(Image: Extrait of Paul Klee, Seiltänzer 1923)
Justice Tech
The digital or hybrid courtroom has become more the rule than the exception in Germany. Video conference equipment reduces costs and can speed judicial processes. Even the production of transcripts from the proceedings and circulation of documents and certificates, enhanced by AI will change the speed to exercise justice. Digital tools and technology has found its way into the courtroom and younger lawyers and judges as well as the accused or defendants will value the simplified procedures. Until this is the standard in all legal domains we shall have to wait a bit. In Germany 2026 is the deadline to install the adequate equipment and tech companies and consulting firms like Arktis are well prepared to support this overdue process. In terms of an economic theory of the judicial process a judgement that is delivered years later has to apply a discount rate of at least equal to annual inflation. For moral issues another discount rte might apply. Excessive delays of judgments may cause additional suffering on the side of victims. Justice Tech, therefore, has a role to play in the practical and theoretical debate about „doing justice“. (Image SCCON Berlin 2024-10)
Democracy celebrates
With all the bad experiences of Nazi-Germany and the failure to defend democracy in Germany against its fascist enemies in the 1930s, it was a pleasure to celebrate democracy in Germany together with a huge crowd. 3 days of information and party around the major institutions of democracy Parliament, government, federal governments, constitutional court and all ministries joining in with pavilions in the parks nearby allowed a bottom up feeling of democracy. Visiting the chancellery as well as the parliament in a single day shows the openness of these institutions and the ease of access to our political system. People of all ages and all walks of life strolled around and enjoyed the day. Freedom to voice your opinion was easy and many took their time to do it. Civil society organizations were a natural part of the show. We seem prepared to stand up for our democratic values and principles. This will be tested in all the forthcoming elections.
Checks and balances
The principle of checks and balances refers back to the separation of powers introduced by the French political theorist Montesquieu in his writings “De l’esprit des loix” in 1748. 40 years later in 1788 James Madison wrote as §51 in “The Federalists Papers” explicitly about the system of checks and balances as part of the constitution of the USA. For maintaining the principle of separation of powers it is necessary to install a system of checks and balances between the powers to prevent one power dominating the others. These well-known principles of democracy face, nevertheless, continuous challenges as to the balance of the powers (legislative, executive, judiciary). In order to safeguard democracy a basic scepticism towards the exercise of power is warranted. “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.” (Federalist Papers, 1788, p. 239).
The necessity of auxiliary precautions has led modern democracies to a multiplicity additional checks and balances. Independent Anti-fraud offices, disciplinary committees within the separate powers as well as the checks and balances between the separate powers play a role in the survival of democracy. Recently, in July 2023 services like the internal service of the police to overlook the adequate execution of the force applied by police have been much in the headlines. Checks and balances apply to each branch of separate powers internally, and if they prove inadequate, they have to be corrected by other powers. This is the procedural as well as fundamental interaction within the separation of power. Presidential systems, where this system of checks and balances has major deficiencies, are very likely to fail its people through an overpowering executive. Neither the country of Montesquieu, nor of the Federalists is free of these dangers. Freedom of speech, freedom of movement and to meet with people, all contribute to strengthen checks and balances in a democracy. “A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control of the government” (p.239). 