Zoekresultaat: 2 artikelen

x
De zoekresultaten worden gefilterd op:
Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid x
Werk in uitvoering

The role of attitudes in the professional judicial decision-making progress: a work in progress

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 1 2020
Trefwoorden Professional judicial decision-making process, Attitudes, Impartiality, Semi-structured interviews, Scenario-survey
Auteurs Mr. Elke Olthuis
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In our daily decision-making processes, attitudes play an important role. An attitude is an evaluative judgement of a person, object or an issue on a scale of favorability. A large amount of research has been done on the role of attitudes in our daily decision-making processes. There is, however, a gap in empirical knowledge when it concerns the role of attitudes in the professional judicial decision-making process. It has been accepted that the professional judicial decision-making process has a subjective element, but this subjective element remains unexplained. Attitudes are inherently personal and subjective, and they can make our decision-making process easier. They can, however, also be the basis for biases and prejudices. Herein lies a potential risk, especially in the professional judicial decision-making process. If attitudes play a role in the decision-making process of judges there is a possibility that impartiality, one of the judiciary’s core professional values, might be unobtainable. To see whether attitudes play a role in the professional judicial decision-making process semi-structured interviews will be conducted among judges, who will also be asked to fill in a scenario survey. Hopefully the obtained data will lead to a start in filling this gap in empirical knowledge.


Mr. Elke Olthuis
Elke Olthuis is een promovenda bij de Universiteit van Amsterdam. In haar onderzoek integreert ze recht en psychologie. Ze is verbonden aan het PPLE College en het Paul Scholten Centre for Jurisprudence.
Discussie

Dik of dun?

Tijdschrift Recht der Werkelijkheid, Aflevering 2 2011
Trefwoorden European Court of Human Rights, constitutional questions, fundamental principles of justice, judicial activism
Auteurs Thierry Baudet
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In a footnote on the last page of her article, Janneke Gerards writes: ‘Here I will leave to one side the debate on the involvement of the ECHR with questions that are not really constitutional.’ But it is precisely the involvement of the ECHR with questions that are ‘not really constitutional’ – and therefore not really fundamental – that the debate is about. It is regrettable that those who are indignant about my critique of the course that the ECHR is currently taking hardly – if ever – respond to my arguments against such an expansive course. The fact that the Court is now facing a pile of waiting cases rapidly approaching 200,000, as well as problems of legitimacy after taking a stand in undeniably political cases such as prisoners’ voting rights, limits to the freedom of speech, as well as its hinting that it would disapprove of a ban on the burqa, all undermine and impede what the ECHR was originally set up for: to be an effective, swift and authoritative voice in the protection of ‘fundamental principles of justice’. By indulging in meddlesomeness and political correctness, the ECHR is digging its own grave.


Thierry Baudet
Thierry Baudet studeerde geschiedenis en rechten aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam en zit thans in de eindfase van zijn promotieonderzoek in de rechtsfilosofie aan de Universiteit Leiden. Tevens schrijft hij een tweewekelijkse column voor NRC Handelsblad.
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment twee filters: rubriek en jaar.