Adjudication, that is the judicial interpretation and application of law is not as neutral as mainstream theorists would make us believe. In fact, judges need to make choices from various possible interpretations and such choices are entangled ideologically.

As Prof. Costas Douzinas points out, the law "is first and foremost an ideological practice, a way ofunderstanding the world. The claim that the law is value freeis perhaps the strongest ideological ruse of our time." In examining the relations between law and ideology, I try to look not only for ideological instrumentalisation of the law, but also dig deeper for the ideological unconscious of the law, as well as look into the relationship between general political ideology and lawyers' "guild ideologies"

Chantal Mouffe, following Carl Schmitt, defines the political (das Politische, le politique) as the fundamental social antagonism, which needs to be differentiated from politcs (die Politik, la politique). In my research on law and the political, I try to understand the structural relations between the two spheres, looking specifically into legislation and the political, legal science and the political and adjudication and the political. 

There are two legal theorists whose work I consider to be genuinely fascinating and highly original. The first one is Evgeny Pashukanis (1891-1937), one of the (forgotten) founding fathers of the sociology of law, who developed an original hylomorphic concept of law, embedded in his materialist-realist legal theory. The other one is Artur Kozak (1960-2009), definitely the most original Polish legal theorist of the 20th century, who elaborated his own legal theory known as "juriscentrism."