Members Of Judiciary Research Articles

The judge, the AI, and the Crown: a collusive network

ABSTRACT The article examines the potential implications of ChatGPT ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) [Alec Radford and others, ‘Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training’ Amazon Web Services (2018) <https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/openai-assets/research-covers/language-unsupervised/language_understanding_paper.pdf> accessed 28 May 2024; When this article was submitted, only ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 was available. However, during the revision stage, ChatGPT-4o (also known as GPT-4 Omnus) was introduced to the market, as announced on 13 May 2024.] in judicial decision-making process. This is especially salient given that judicial decisions are made within an interactive ritual chain (Bergman Blix) rather than an ivory tower. This cutting-edge natural language processing model leverages deep learning techniques to potentially aid judiciary members in formulating legal judgements. Therefore, this article assesses the capabilities, limitations, and potential applications of ChatGPT, aiming to evaluate the model's feasibility as a collaborative contributor to legal judgements. In particular, the article examines the utilisation of ChatGPT as an adjunctive tool, supporting human judges in their decision-making processes and, consequently, establishing to what extent artificial intelligence (AI) is used as a tool or collaborator in judicial decision-making. This determines authorship and, accordingly, ownership of judgements.

Briefly Noted

On Tuesday, April 20, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled in Case C-896/19, Repubblika v. Il-Prim Ministru that Malta's system for appointing judges did not contradict EU law. As reported by JURIST, the ruling went before the national court when Repubblika, an association created to promote the rule of law in Malta, had challenged the procedure, which was provided by the Constitution of Malta. The process in the Maltese Constitution stated that judiciary members are appointed by the president acting under the advisement of the prime minister. However, appointees must satisfy certain conditions and are subject to background checks or other examinations by the Judicial Appointments Committee, whose purpose is to assess candidates and provide feedback to the prime minister. The national court brought this to the CJEU to decide whether this system was constitutional under EU law, specifically under Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union, in light of Article 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which states that member states must provide conditions for a fair, independent, and impartial trial to ensure true justice. The court reached the conclusion that this practice was not prohibited by EU law because, in order to guarantee conditions of judicial independence and impartiality, procedures must exist to ensure that appointees are free from influence from the legislature and/or executive with regard to judiciary proceedings. The Court found that power of the prime minister to submit a candidate that was not suggested by the Judicial Appointments Committee was not contrary to EU law because of various safeguarding measures included in the Constitution. The Court held: “Inasmuch as the Prime Minister exercises that power only in quite exceptional circumstances and adheres to strict and effective compliance with that obligation to state reasons, that power is not such as to give rise to legitimate doubts concerning the independence of the candidates selected” (para. 71). Therefore, the Court concluded that the national provisions at issue do not give rise to any legitimate uncertainties, or doubts of independence, regarding the chosen judiciary candidates.

Transferring Alternatives to Pre-trial Detention in the European Union context. Can European Agreements Be Trusted?

ABSTRACT One critical element of interagency and international cooperation in the area of criminal justice is whether organizations – and more generally countries – can trust one another to follow through on agreements that have been mutually established, such as the utilization of a home country’s alternatives to incarceration. This paper builds on the existing literature on mutual trust and adds more empirical data regarding how competent authorities in the European Union (EU) perceive the mutual trust concept in day-to-day practice. In our examination of mutual trust, we draw on an EU survey and three interviews with judiciary members in Spain. Based on our review of the survey findings and interview data, we find that, although mutual trust is essential for all mutual recognition instruments in the EU, its dimensions are far from being fully understood. Whilst the political discourse at the EU level presumes the “pure” existence of the mutual trust, both the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights recognize its limitations, especially when human rights standards are in question. Scholars have also started to challenge the absolute existence of mutual trust independent of any determinants. This paper adds to this debate by illustrating how mutual trust is not only complex and dynamic but also selective and differential. It seems that different problem-solving strategies in the field of criminal and juvenile justice demand different levels of mutual trust, and mutual trust appears to manifest itself more with some Member States than with others.

Invoking Precedent: Discussion of Supreme Court Decisions at Circuit Court Confirmation Hearings

Judicial confirmation hearings offer a rare opportunity for senators to engage in a public exchange with current and future members of the federal judiciary. Below the Supreme Court level, however, we know relatively little about how members of the Judiciary Committee use these hearings. In this article, we examine senator mentions of Supreme Court cases at circuit court confirmation hearings between 1993 and 2012 to test whether these hearings serve as a venue for position-taking, as well as for interbranch dialogue. We find evidence that senators do reference decisions in ways that seem motivated by electoral considerations. However, we also find that hearings are frequently used as a forum for interbranch dialogue over Supreme Court cases. When used in this fashion, the dialogue is often focused on cases that challenge congressional power. The results suggest that confirmation hearings are an underappreciated venue for interbranch conversations.

Heróis de capa: dos tribunais para as listas de intenção de votos. A representação dos juízes Joaquim Barbosa e Sérgio Moro nas capas das principais revistas brasileiras entre 2007 e 2017

In this essay, we focus on how the three main Brazilian weekly magazines – Veja, Epoca e Isto E – portrayed judges Joaquim Barbosa and Sergio Moro, in the period between 2007 and 2017, in search of image construction of the judge-hero. To support our view that there was a deliberate action by the editors to promote greater visibility to the aforementioned judges, we have compared the frequency of appearances by members of the Brazilian Judiciary on the covers of the weeklies in all editions between 1968 and 2017. Subsequently, we have dedicated more attention to the covers that presented the two judges, and we have carried out the textual analysis of the titles and subtitles that made up with the imagistic construction of the message objectified by the editorials of the magazines. Finally, we have cros- sed the information obtained with the results of a survey carried out in Brazil in 2017, where we have found the flagrant opposition, on the level of credi- bility manifested by Brazilians, between politicians and political institutions and between members of the judiciary and judicial institutions.

Attitudes toward Wife Abuse of Police Officers and Judiciary Members in Turkey: Profession, Gender, Ambivalent Sexism and Sex Roles

This study examined the attitudes of police officers and judiciary members toward wife abuse in Turkey and the relation between these attitudes and profession, ambivalent sexism (hostile/benevolent sexism), gender, and gender roles. The following instruments were used for the analyses: The Attitudes Toward Wife Abuse Scale (AWAS), the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI), and the Bem Sex Role Inventory. The participants were 300 police officers and 150 judiciary members selected from different regions of Turkey. Results showed that compared to judiciary members, police officers are more tolerant of physical and verbal abuse of women in marriage, but less tolerant of the idea of the victim leaving an abusive marriage partner. Similarly, men were more tolerant than women of those husbands who physically and verbally abuse their wives, but less supportive of the wife leaving the abusive partner. Profession and ambivalent sexism (hostile/benevolent sexism) were found to be the strongest predictors of attitudes toward wife abuse.

Attitudes among judiciary and junior clerks toward the survivors of childhood sexual abuse

Childhood sexual abuse is a growing concern throughout the world, although the legal sequelae of this phenomenon are frequently neglected. We aimed to reveal and compare the attitudes of judiciary and junior clerks toward sexually abused children that might contribute to these sequelae. We divided 302 study participants into two groups of judiciary members and junior clerks. All the participants were asked to anonymously complete a questionnaire about stigmatization, including questions assessing social distance, dangerousness and skillfulness. In their responses, 51.2% of the judiciary and 64.0% of the junior clerks displayed a negative attitude toward “asking a childhood sexual abuse (CSA) survivor to supervise their child for few hours” (p=0.029). When asked “What would you think if your child wanted to marry a CSA survivor?” 76.5% of the judiciary and 84.1% of the junior clerks were opposed to the idea (p=0.095). Interestingly, significantly more judiciary than junior clerks believed that a “CSA survivor can control his/her rage” (p=0.001), and significantly more of the junior clerks did not believe that “CSA survivors do not behave impulsively” (p=0.034). Both groups of legal professionals in this study appear to distance themselves from or have negative thoughts about CSA survivors, particularly when the issue involves their own children and/or social situations. Along with other factors, these negative assumptions might also contribute to lower prosecution rates and retestifying procedures.

PERSPECTIVES ON PARENTING COORDINATION: VIEWS OF PARENTING COORDINATORS, ATTORNEYS, AND JUDICIARY MEMBERS

Because the development of effective parenting coordination depends upon a sound relationship with the court, this study examined attitudes and expectations toward the parenting coordination process held by judiciary members, attorneys, and parenting coordinators. Respondents from the 11th Judicial Circuit of Florida reported anonymously on background demographics and prior personal experience with and attitudes toward the process. Overall, respondents reported favorable views toward parenting coordination; analyses also provided initial insights into potential interdisciplinary differences in views among members of the three important constituencies. Results may be helpful in informing training processes, shaping conversations about legislation, and guiding the administration of parenting coordination through court programs.Key Points for the Family Court Community: This article will inform parenting coordination program developers of the expectations and attitudes of judiciary and attorneys toward the parenting coordination process in order to build in safeguards that may enhance the success of the program. This article will inform the development of prospective legislation on parenting coordination so that the outcomes also meet the expectations of the court and legal communities. Readers will be able to identify behaviors of parenting coordinators, attorneys, and judges that may enhance the parenting coordination process. This article will inform parenting coordination trainers of necessary components to be included in their educational programs of the roles and functions of parenting coordinators and the limitations of any statutory or rule provisions, so that the expectations of attorneys and judges are realistic. This article will inform parenting coordinators about the attitudes and possible unrealistic expectations of judges and attorneys in order to anticipate and manage ethical dilemmas in the parenting coordination process. Readers will be able to identify the positive outcomes of parenting coordination perceived by judges, attorneys, and parenting coordinators and to consider improvements to the process.

Brazil's Judiciary Reform: Mobilizing Judiciary Members and Re-Stating the State Country's Power

This work is the result of a research in process which aims at remaking the conceptions of the Judiciary power which join in the debate around its “Reform”, along the nineties and part of the year 2000. One focuses two great dimensions of analysis. The conceptions of the Judiciary power and its legitimacy within the space of power. The social professional and intellectual powers and the political corporate ties which stand for the positions in competition within the debate’s scope. The social professional and intellectual courses and the political and corporate ties of the main leaderships which stand for the positions in competitions within the debate. In the two dimensions are considered the relationships of the “Reform’s” national debates with the international movements of institutions reforms aiming at comparison with other Latin America countries. The making of the research material occurs mainly through the qualitative methods specially the checking of statements, bibliographical production and holding interviews with the judges and political leaderships who stood out in the instances that defined the “Judiciary Reform’s” propositions.

The Human Element in the Judicial Process

The imprecision in ascertaining facts and the uncertainty in laws is the subject of this article. The author discusses this in the framework of judicial discretion by examining the strengths and weaknesses of the exercise in discretion. He recognizes that judges do not blindly apply fixed laws by emphasizing the unavoidable imprecision in the law and the exercise of judicial discretion in making law. The author concludes by pointing out the existence of personal factors which enter into the judicial decision-making process and the tremendous social importance of the selection of members of judiciary.