Abstract
One of the fundamental values of the existence of justice is that it psychologically satisfies the human need for stability and certainty, so that imbalances of power and responsibility can be balanced and disputes can be settled. Judicial justice is reflected in the entire process of judicial adjudication, which is subject to uncertainty. Between the two major uncertainties of judicial adjudication - the uncertainty of the rules of judicial adjudication and the uncertainty of the decision of judicial adjudicators - this article focuses on the latter by classifying and analyzing two major aspects, namely internal and external factors. As individuals in the secular world, judicial adjudicators have different knowledge backgrounds, various levels of experience and competence, distinctive institutional deficiencies, and dissimilar motivations for their interests, so that they perceive and apply the rules of adjudication differently, resulting in different outcomes, thus leading to the uncertainty of judicial adjudication. It is of course necessary for judges to maintain their independence, enforce the law strictly and administer justice impartially, and contribute to the establishment of a society governed by the rule of law, but it is even more necessary for us to create conditions to enhance judicial independence and impartiality through judicial reform, so as to reduce the uncertainty of judicial decisions. This paper proposes some countermeasures on how to reduce the uncertainty of judicial adjudication.
Highlights
Justice is done throughout the process of adjudication, but there is too much uncertainty in the process of adjudication
[9] in an empirical case study consisting of a sample of 11 Helsinki district court verdicts from 2014-2017, which features a medical controversy concerning traumatic brain injury (TBI) diagnostics, it was noted that the difficulties judges face in evaluating the medical expertise result from epistemic asymmetries between legal and medical professionals, which reinforce the uncertainty of judicial decisions. [10]
One of the fundamental values of the existence of justice is that it psychologically satisfies the human need for stability and certainty, so that imbalances of power and responsibility can be balanced and disputes can be settled
Summary
Justice is done throughout the process of adjudication, but there is too much uncertainty in the process of adjudication. Uncertainty in judicial adjudication mainly includes uncertainty in the rules of judicial adjudication and uncertainty in the decisions of judicial adjudicators. The rules of justice themselves are general, abstract, principled, ambiguous and lagging, which makes them uncertain. As individuals in the secular world, judicial adjudicators have different knowledge backgrounds, various levels of experience and competence, distinctive institutional deficiencies, and dissimilar motivations for their interests, so that they perceive and apply the rules of adjudication differently, resulting in different outcomes, leading to the uncertainty of judicial adjudication. Legal truth can be infinitely close to objective truth, but it never reaches it, which is the essence of the uncertainty of judicial decisions and may lead to injustice. The uncertainty of judicial decisions will be discussed and Humanities and Social Sciences 2021; 9(4): 91-96 analyzed mainly from the perspective of the latter one - the judicial adjudicator (i.e., the judge), and corresponding measures will be proposed to decrease the uncertainty of the decisions and increase the judicial justice
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
