The judge: a new actor in the political landscape

C. Guarnieri, P. Pederzoli
{"title":"The judge: a new actor in the political landscape","authors":"C. Guarnieri, P. Pederzoli","doi":"10.4337/9781839100369.00005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As is the case for other research fields, both the judicial system and the actors performing its numerous functions can be observed from different perspectives and, to a certain extent, these may complement one another. Although legal scholars were the first to engage in this field – practically colonizing it for some time – the social scientists who came later developed an increasingly rich toolbox that now includes a variety of methods, theories and concepts progressively devised to approach the multifaceted world of justice. Our attention will focus more closely, though not exclusively, on the latter framework. In the European context, academic lawyers have traditionally cultivated the study of courts, judicial procedures and jurisprudence, mostly favoring a legal dimension. The formal rules that establish how the system should operate and how the judiciary should act are doubtless fundamental components of the administration of justice insofar as they provide valuable information that scholars cannot neglect whatever their perspective. Yet we know that implementing rules is neither a simple nor an obvious process. Laws do not always generate the expected outcomes owing to a host of factors, ranging from the nature of the issues to be addressed to the complexity of bureaucratic machineries. Such factors may also produce distorting or undesirable effects in implementation and laws may even remain totally or partially unenforced (Howlett and Ramesh 1995). To describe how judicial institutions work in practice, it is thus necessary to look beyond the normative dimension. Appropriate instruments are, therefore, required to investigate both sides of these institutions: how actual behavior develops, and interactions within this environment. This approach enables us to present an image of justice not solely confined to formal data. With this aim, contributions from other scientific fields have multiplied since the middle of the past century, first in the United States and later in Europe. All of them fall within the extended family of social sciences. Although they differ greatly, these studies generally tend to give priority to the operational","PeriodicalId":414720,"journal":{"name":"The Judicial System","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Judicial System","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839100369.00005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As is the case for other research fields, both the judicial system and the actors performing its numerous functions can be observed from different perspectives and, to a certain extent, these may complement one another. Although legal scholars were the first to engage in this field – practically colonizing it for some time – the social scientists who came later developed an increasingly rich toolbox that now includes a variety of methods, theories and concepts progressively devised to approach the multifaceted world of justice. Our attention will focus more closely, though not exclusively, on the latter framework. In the European context, academic lawyers have traditionally cultivated the study of courts, judicial procedures and jurisprudence, mostly favoring a legal dimension. The formal rules that establish how the system should operate and how the judiciary should act are doubtless fundamental components of the administration of justice insofar as they provide valuable information that scholars cannot neglect whatever their perspective. Yet we know that implementing rules is neither a simple nor an obvious process. Laws do not always generate the expected outcomes owing to a host of factors, ranging from the nature of the issues to be addressed to the complexity of bureaucratic machineries. Such factors may also produce distorting or undesirable effects in implementation and laws may even remain totally or partially unenforced (Howlett and Ramesh 1995). To describe how judicial institutions work in practice, it is thus necessary to look beyond the normative dimension. Appropriate instruments are, therefore, required to investigate both sides of these institutions: how actual behavior develops, and interactions within this environment. This approach enables us to present an image of justice not solely confined to formal data. With this aim, contributions from other scientific fields have multiplied since the middle of the past century, first in the United States and later in Europe. All of them fall within the extended family of social sciences. Although they differ greatly, these studies generally tend to give priority to the operational
法官:政治舞台上的新演员
与其他研究领域的情况一样,可以从不同的角度观察司法制度和履行其众多职能的行为者,并在一定程度上相互补充。虽然法律学者是第一批涉足这一领域的人——实际上在一段时间内殖民了这一领域——但后来的社会科学家开发了一个日益丰富的工具箱,现在包括了各种方法、理论和概念,这些方法、理论和概念逐渐被设计出来,以接近多方面的司法世界。我们的注意力将更密切地,虽然不是完全地集中在后一个框架上。在欧洲,学院派律师传统上培养了对法院、司法程序和法理学的研究,大多倾向于法律层面。确立司法系统应如何运作和司法机构应如何行动的正式规则无疑是司法管理的基本组成部分,因为它们提供了有价值的信息,无论学者们的观点如何,都不能忽视这些信息。然而,我们知道,实施规则既不简单,也不是一个显而易见的过程。由于一系列因素,从要处理的问题的性质到官僚机构的复杂性,法律并不总是产生预期的结果。这些因素也可能在执行中产生扭曲或不良影响,法律甚至可能完全或部分得不到执行(Howlett和Ramesh 1995)。因此,为了描述司法机构在实践中是如何运作的,有必要超越规范的维度。因此,需要适当的工具来调查这些机构的两个方面:实际行为是如何发展的,以及在这种环境中的相互作用。这种方法使我们能够呈现一种不仅仅局限于形式资料的正义形象。出于这个目的,自上世纪中叶以来,其他科学领域的贡献成倍增加,首先是在美国,后来是在欧洲。所有这些学科都属于社会科学的大家庭。虽然它们差别很大,但这些研究通常倾向于优先考虑业务
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信