Perspectives Of Judges Research Articles

Stigma Associated with Mental Illness: Perspectives of Judges and Lawyers in Lebanon

IntroductionLegal professionals frequently encounter forensic mental health issues in the criminal justice system. These issues can significantly impact the outcome of cases, making it essential to understand the attitudes and perceptions of these experts towards mental illness. Despite a high number of individuals with mental illness in prisons, the availability of forensic mental health services is limited. While prior research has shown widespread stigma towards mental illness, there hasn’t been a study assessing the attitudes of judges and lawyers.ObjectivesThis study aims to investigate the stigma related to mental health among Lebanese legal professionals.MethodsAn online questionnaire was sent to judges and lawyers practicing in Lebanon. The survey included a section on demographics and personal data with the following scales: Reported and intended behavior scale (RIBS) which measures mental health stigma–related behavior and Perceived devaluation and discrimination scale (PDD) measuring the extent to which a person believes that most people will devalue or discriminate against someone with a mental illness.Results A total of 215 participants, with a mean age of 38.69 and a mean 13.16 years of experience, completed the questionnaire. Most were female (62.8%) and worked as civil attorneys (47.4%). Only a minority received instruction on mental health or mental health law during training (10.7% and 8.8%). About a quarter believed their education on mental health issues was sufficient (27%). Participants with positive attitudes (RIBS) were more likely to have a family member with a mental illness (p value = .001), feel comfortable handling cases involving mental health (p value = .001), and have lived with someone with a mental illness (p value = .007). Feeling adequately educated about mental health issues was associated with lower perceived stigma (PDDS, p value = .021). No significant associations with stigma scores were found for factors like age, gender, occupation, years of experience, contact with a mental health professional, taking psychotropic medications, disclosing personal mental health issues to friends or co-workers, receiving education on mental illness or mental health law, or working with individuals with mental health issues.ConclusionsThe findings imply that enhancing mental health education and awareness within the legal profession could be a key strategy to reduce stigma and improve the overall treatment of individuals with mental health issues within the criminal justice system in Lebanon.Disclosure of InterestNone Declared

Problems and Countermeasures in Reading and Writing Teaching - from the Perspective of Judges’ Comments

Problems and Countermeasures in Reading and Writing Teaching - from the Perspective of Judges’ Comments

Formulation of Customary Criminal Law from the Perspective of Judges in Legal Findings

Objective: This study aims to identify and analyze how customary judges' application of criminal sanctions results from disclosing the law through decisions on customary criminal cases. Method: This study employs empirical legal research methods by analyzing criminal cases and utilizing both primary and secondary data to produce qualitative descriptive data. Result: The customary criminal sanctions applied due to the analysis of legal findings by the judge's decision are considered quite effective and capable of being directed forward because customary criminal sanctions provide a deterrent effect consisting of social and criminal sanctions as sanctions for customary crimes. Conclusion: The regulation of customary criminal law still needs updating and legal discovery because there are still no statutory rules that concretely regulate customary criminal law. In addition, the formation of rules or legal discoveries through decisions as mentioned above needs to be adapted to developments in national criminal law.

COMPARISON OF THE TRADITIONAL TRAINING METHOD TO TEACH HANDSTAND AND TRAINING THROUGH A RESEARCHER-MADE DEVICE AND THEIR IMPACT ON THE HANDSTAND DURATION, PAIN AND QUALITY OF PERFORMANCE IN 8-10-YEAR-OLD BEGINNER GYMNAST GIRLS

This research was conducted with the aim of comparing traditional handstand training and handstand training using a researcher-made device among beginner gymnast girls aged 8 to 10 years. To achieve this, 30 qualified female gymnasts were purposefully and conveniently selected and randomly assigned to two groups: one receiving educational assistance with the researcher-made device (n=15) and the other using the traditional method (n=15). Over a span of eight weeks, handstand movements were taught, with one group following traditional methods and the other utilizing the researcher-made device. Upon completion of the training period, various measurements were taken, including the duration of balance maintenance, balance quality as judged by experts, the range of motion in the wrist, elbow, shoulder, and ankle joints, and the assessment of pain in the wrist, elbow, shoulder, and lower back areas. Data were analyzed using independent t-tests, MANOVA, and the Mann-Whitney test, with a significance level set at P≥ 0.05, and the analysis was conducted using SPSS 22 software. The results demonstrated that the use of the researcher-made balance training device led to a significant improvement in balance quality from the perspective of judges, as well as a notable reduction in pain in the shoulder, back, and wrist areas compared to the traditional training method. Additionally, there were no significant differences between the traditional method and the use of the device when considering factors such as balance performance quality as measured by deviation from the vertical line in various body joints, the duration of balance maintenance, the range of motion in the wrist, elbow, shoulder, ankle, and pain in the elbow and knee.

Back to Basics: A Critical Examination of the Focal Concerns Framework from the Perspective of Judges

The focal concerns framework is widely used in research on sentencing, although the empirical validity of the framework itself is seldom directly evaluated. To fill this gap, we use survey data from 134 trial court judges to examine two basic questions about the focal concerns framework: (1) How and to what extent do judges consider the original focal concerns of blameworthiness, community protection, and practical constraints in their sentencing decisions? (2) To what extent is perceived rehabilitation potential, or “redeemability,” considered by judges and should it become a fourth focal concern? Results based on open-ended survey questions reveal that judges continue to rely on the original focal concerns, but they operationalize these concerns in a variety of ways. Results further show that most judges are concerned about the rehabilitation potential, or “redeemability,” of defendants. Based on these results, we conclude that the focal concerns framework continues to be of value but that future research using the framework should consider adding redeemability/rehabilitation potential as a fourth focal concern. We caution, however, that some of the factors judges consider in connection with rehabilitation potential/redeemability could increase sentencing disparities.

SENSIVITAS GENDER HAKIM BANDING DALAM PUTUSAN KEKERASAN DALAM RUMAH TANGGA

This study found that judges' sensitivity to gender issues was still low in the Religious High Court, especially in deciding cases related to husband and wife issues. This is due to the judge's understanding of legal sources and the ability of judges to use legal logic which is still gender-biased. This research is a qualitative study (library research) with descriptive-analytical character, using a juridical approach and a gender approach, in which the researcher will describe and analyze according to the data obtained, in relation to court decisions regarding Domestic Violence (KDRT) using the main data source. namely in the form of decisions of the High Religious Courts related to Domestic Violence (KDRT) taken from the website of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, secondary, primary, and tertiary data and judge interviews as supporting data for the study. Data analysis uses content analysis of court decisions related to Domestic Violence (KDRT). Aims to understand the logic of the judge's decision and analyze the judge's argument on the decision on Domestic Violence (KDRT) from the perspective of gender justice in the Religious High Court. There are three aspects used by judges in deciding cases: 1) legal aspects, 2) philosophical aspects, and 3 social aspects. In addition to these three aspects, judges also use legal logic/judges' ijtihad in the discovery of new laws. The perspective of judges' decisions that are not gender-equitable are characterized by the presence of 1) marginalization of women, 2) subordination, 3) stereotypes, 4) violence, 5) double burden.

Narrative Discourse in al-Jahiz's The Judge of Basra and the Fly

This study is an endeavor to apply the concept on The Story of The Judge of Basra and the Fly included by al-Jahiz in the book of al-Hayawan [The Book of Animals] against the three concepts of discourse introduced by Gerard Genette: duration, mode, and voice. The study addressed the concept and its procedures on the theoretical level on one hand and then to use of this concept and apply it on the story, on the other hand. The authority of the story was derived from the authority of the (Judge), which unknowingly trapped him in exercising (veneration)! Al-Jahiz tried through the discourse to deconstruct the authority and bringing it back to (solemnity) and bringing it down from steady to movement and from strength to weakness. The closed sequential order of time showed matching with the status of veneration and steadiness. That was against the opened time which is matching the insistence of flies in its transforming and mobile significance. The perspective followed by the narrator in building his story vision violated the Judge's perspective. The paradox was between the authority of the omniscient narrator represented by al-Jahiz and the central character represented by the Judge. It is a paradox between the discourse and the story. The study revealed a set of results of which the most important are that al-Jahiz relied on solo narration in the discourse of the story and the focus in his rhetoric message on the narration authority through words and actions between the narrator and recipient to explore the deep significance of the story discourse multitude of the mechanisms of producing narration in respective of the persuasive semantics that the narrator sought to establish in the narrative text.

Judges’ perspectives on Malaysia’s bilingual legal system

ABSTRACT Use-based Englishes may act as professional gatekeepers and working languages in Asian societies even where other languages of wider communication are prioritised. Legalese is widely regarded as particularly resistant to societal changes, and in Malaysian law English remains indispensable half a century after Malay became the official medium for West Malaysia, with exonormative acrolects retaining professional prestige. However, legal practitioners also need Malay as it is a requirement for admission to the bar and used extensively in government dealings, as well as in the lower courts of West Malaysia. Courtroom discourse is under the control of judges empowered to interpret language policy in the interests of justice. While there have been a few studies exploring how Malaysian advocates orientate themselves toward bilingualism, this is believed to be the first to address the perspective of judges.

Introducing Social Science Evidence in Family Court Decision-Making and Adjudication: Evidence from England and Wales

This article examines the use of social science research in case level decision-making and adjudication in public and private family law proceedings from the perspectives of judges and lawyers in England and Wales. To provide a context for our analysis, we first review a limited, but nevertheless important, body of international literature concerned with the place of social science in the family courts. We then turn to our empirical material, drawn from a scoping study commissioned by the Nuffield Foundation, to inform the design of a new family justice observatory for England and Wales. The study found that judges and lawyers in England and Wales described similar obstacles to the use of social science evidence at a case level as their international counterparts, despite differences in jurisdictional rules and norms. Specifically, they were concerned with due process and the admissibility of research evidence, as well as the potential for advocacy bias, given the contested nature of social science evidence. Questions about how to apply population data to the specifics of an individual case were also raised. However, analysis also revealed further contextual obstacles in England and Wales resulting from radical changes to the family justice system, following comprehensive review in 2011. Judges and lawyers indicated that a reduction in experts and far shorter timescales for the completion of public law cases, together with an influx of self-representing litigants in private law, have created a context that is less, rather than more receptive to interdisciplinary knowledge, including research evidence.

Competing Perspectives on Legal Decision Making in Early Modern Ashkenaz

The respective roles of jurists and judges in the decision-making process offers a valuable perspective on judicial practice and the delivery of justice in early modern Ashkenazic communities. This essay is concerned with differences in the approaches of poseqim (jurists) and dayanim (judges); it suggests that these distinctions were reflections of the institutional settings in which they worked, the size of their communities, and regional factors. Data unearthed from communal records and rabbinic responsa offer important evidence of disparities between the offices of early modern dayanim and poseqim, their distinct personae, and their respective views of how judicial rulings are decided. Moreover, these differences were related to the slow transition to fixed rabbinic-communal courts in western and central Europe that was a product of forces peculiar to the resettlement of Jews in the west, the deliberate development of communal traditions, and the role of the enlightened absolutist state. The impact of the growing recourse to non-Jewish courts, especially as it evinced differences between eastern and western/central European history and culture, was also a factor. Clearly, regional forces influenced the distinct legal efforts and perspectives of judges and jurists, as did the discrete functions they were assigned, their particular training, and the institutional standing of rabbinic courts. These differences became more glaring in the two centuries prior to the collapse of the ancien regime, as structural changes in western Ashkenazic communities contributed to a new Jewish legal culture.

77.2 A Judge's Perspective: What to Know When You Are Treating a Justice-Involved Youth

Juvenile mental health courts have been established across the country to take into consideration the unique characteristics of justice-involved youth with mental illness diagnoses and to better prevent recidivism and matriculation into the adult justice system. Juvenile mental health courts attempt to do this by providing judicial oversight of mental health treatment. Mental health treatment is most commonly received in the community setting within existing systems of care. This presentation will describe struggles associated with judicially supervised mental health care for children and families housed in existing community systems and provide recommendations for improved collaborative care of justice-involved youth with mental illness diagnoses.

Shape of Mediation Procedures for the Amendment of the Civil Code of Conduct – an Attempt to Assess Some Changes from the Perspective of Judges

Shape of Mediation Procedures for the Amendment of the Civil Code of Conduct – an Attempt to Assess Some Changes from the Perspective of Judges

The adoption of innovations in Brazilian labour courts from the perspective of judges and court managers

There is a lack of studies upon the innovation process in the judiciary. To contribute to filling this gap, this study aims to describe the perceptions of the Brazilian labour courts’ judges and managers related to resources and capabilities associated with the development and adoption of innovation, represented by the electronic lawsuit, and the impact on Court's performance and factors that facilitate or hinder the adoption of innovations. A document analysis and 35 interviews were conducted – nine with judges and 26 with court managers – and the data were analyzed using a content analysis with a priori categorization. The results show the following: (i) the process of development and adoption of innovation occurs in three ways – centralized in higher bodies, through partnerships with other courts or through internal development; (ii) there are important resources and capabilities internal to courts and inter-organizational routines associated with the innovation process; and (iii) innovation contributes to the development and integration of other innovations and changes in working routines. Additionally, barriers to and facilitators of the innovation adoption process are discussed and a research agenda is stated.

Judicial Narratives of Ideal and Deviant Victims in Judges’ Capital Sentencing Decisions

Although the Victim’s Rights Movement has led to advances for victims of crime, the use of victim impact evidence in criminal trials remains controversial due to the suspicion that such evidence enhances punitive attitudes and arbitrariness in capital sentencing outcomes. Despite a growing body of literature in this area, it remains unclear if some victims are viewed more favorably than others, particularly from the perspective of judges. The current study examines the construction of victims by judges in capital cases and how this portrayal impacts sentencing outcomes in Delaware, which vests the final capital sentencing authority in judges rather than juries. In examining this gap in the literature, we consider if judges make distinctions between ideal and deviant victims, if these distinctions are associated with victim and offender characteristics, and if the construction of victims impacts offender sentencing. Findings from this study lend support to the idea that judges describe some victims as more “worthy” than others, that victims described in ideal ways are more likely to be white and female, and that “ideal victims” are more likely to result in death sentences.

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP PEREMPUAN DALAM PROSES GUGAT CERAI (KHULU’) DI PENGADILAN AGAMA PALEMBANG

Divorce cases in the Islamic Court of Palembang (Pengadilan Agama Palembang) becomes the top of the list, during the year 2009 (72%), 2010 (72%) and 2011 (in June) about 70%. The purpose of this study is to analyze the causes of high divorce rate happening in the city of Palembang, beside to explain the forms of legal protection and analyzes the factors that becoming obstacles for the wife in a filed divorced. The research was conducted with a Normative-Juridical approach which is completed with Empirical Juridical, The location is in the jurisdiction of the Islamic Courts in Palembang (Pengadilan Agama Palembang. Causes of high divorce cases in the city of Palembang, among others: a) economic factors; b) Lack of responsibility; c) a young age and no permanent employment; d) cheating and Unhealthy polygamy as well as domestic violence. Legal protection towards wives who filed the divorce, in Indonesian legal system has been arranged as equality in law and equal treatment before the law and the right to justice. Barriers toward the wife filing the divorce among others: cultural factors, economic dependence, lack of knowledge, and bias Perspective of judges who tend to blame the women, the long process of trial and expensive fees to be paid, also Over valued self-esteem in Indonesian people's community, as well as women's rights arenot easily executed. Key words: legal protection, divorce process

A Judge's Perspective on Legal Education

A Judge's Perspective on Legal Education

A Judge's Perspective on Legal Education

A Judge's Perspective on Legal Education

Mandating Mediation in Family Law Conflict in Malaysia: Exploring Judges and Lawyers' Perspectives

It is an assertion of this study that the benefits of making mediation mandatory clearly generally prevail over the potential harms for families, even when violence is an issue, provided that its design and realizations are carefully thought of. Thus, the current study is not concerned with whether or not mediation should be made mandatory in family disputes, but rather the best way in approaching its application and implementation in Malaysia. In line with this overall objective, this study was designed to explore the issues and concerns which relates to the establishment and development of a mandatory family mediation program especially from the perspectives of judges and lawyers, being the key informants and experts in contemporary civil family law practice in Malaysia. The findings reported in this paper highlighted the perceptions and expectations of the selected judges and lawyers on the probability of establishing a mandatory family mediation program and arising issues affecting its development in Malaysia. This study thus, is likely to assist policy makers in the country towards the development of a mandatory family mediation service that suits Malaysian civil law context.

Overview of Western Water Adjudications: A Judge's Perspective

Overview of Western Water Adjudications: A Judge's Perspective

Prison Reform Revisited: A Judge's Perspective

Prison Reform Revisited: A Judge's Perspective