Challenging judicial impartiality

IF 0.6 Q3 COMMUNICATION

Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2019-09-25 DOI:10.1075/jaic.17026.plu

H. Plug

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Impartiality is one of the core values underlying the administration of justice. A complaint about a judge’s supposed lack of impartiality may be filed on the grounds of the judge’s verbal behavior. In this article I will analyze complaints that concern the judge’s use of rhetorical questions during court hearings. I will explore what role these complaints may play in the strategic maneuvering of a party who seeks the judge’s disqualification.

查看原文本刊更多论文

质疑司法公正

公正是司法的核心价值之一。对法官所谓缺乏公正性的投诉可以基于法官的言语行为提出。在这篇文章中，我将分析与法官在庭审中使用修辞问题有关的投诉。我将探讨这些投诉在寻求取消法官资格的一方的战略策略中可能扮演什么角色。

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

Journal of Argumentation in Context COMMUNICATION-

CiteScore

1.80

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of Argumentation in Context aims to publish high-quality papers about the role of argumentation in the various kinds of argumentative practices that have come into being in social life. These practices include, for instance, political, legal, medical, financial, commercial, academic, educational, problem-solving, and interpersonal communication. In all cases certain aspects of such practices will be analyzed from the perspective of argumentation theory with a view of gaining a better understanding of certain vital characteristics of these practices. This means that the journal has an empirical orientation and concentrates on real-life argumentation but is at the same time out to publish only papers that are informed by relevant insights from argumentation theory.