IJI是否违反了先例?误解导致的分歧

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW
Álvaro Núñez Vaquero
{"title":"IJI是否违反了先例?误解导致的分歧","authors":"Álvaro Núñez Vaquero","doi":"10.18800/derechopucp.202001.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This work aims to clarify, from the point of view of the analytical theory of law, the question of whether the existence of judicial precedents in a legal system necessarily implies a violation of the internal judicial independence (IJI). To answer the question, we will try to clarify the way in which the IJI is being understood to affirm that it would be affected by the presence of a system of precedents (SP’s). It will proceed as follows: First, it will start by making explicit the reasons why it is necessary to deal with this problem. Secondly, it will be specified what it means that there is a binding SP’s. Third, it will explain what judicial independence consists of, presenting the reasons that justify the IJI: respect for the will of the legislator and equality in the application of law. Next, I will present three aspects of the IJI that could clash with the presence of an SP’s. In the fourth section, it will be argued that an SP’s is less injurious to the IJI than attributing to each of the judges a non-revisable competence to establish how the law should be interpreted and applied. In the conclusions, it is pointed out that although there may be reasons against having a precedent system, the IJI is not one of them.","PeriodicalId":41953,"journal":{"name":"Derecho PUCP","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"¿Violan los precedentes la IJI? Desencuentros desde la incomprensión\",\"authors\":\"Álvaro Núñez Vaquero\",\"doi\":\"10.18800/derechopucp.202001.010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This work aims to clarify, from the point of view of the analytical theory of law, the question of whether the existence of judicial precedents in a legal system necessarily implies a violation of the internal judicial independence (IJI). To answer the question, we will try to clarify the way in which the IJI is being understood to affirm that it would be affected by the presence of a system of precedents (SP’s). It will proceed as follows: First, it will start by making explicit the reasons why it is necessary to deal with this problem. Secondly, it will be specified what it means that there is a binding SP’s. Third, it will explain what judicial independence consists of, presenting the reasons that justify the IJI: respect for the will of the legislator and equality in the application of law. Next, I will present three aspects of the IJI that could clash with the presence of an SP’s. In the fourth section, it will be argued that an SP’s is less injurious to the IJI than attributing to each of the judges a non-revisable competence to establish how the law should be interpreted and applied. In the conclusions, it is pointed out that although there may be reasons against having a precedent system, the IJI is not one of them.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Derecho PUCP\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Derecho PUCP\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18800/derechopucp.202001.010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Derecho PUCP","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18800/derechopucp.202001.010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

从法律分析理论的角度来看,这项工作旨在澄清法律体系中司法判例的存在是否必然意味着违反内部司法独立性的问题。为了回答这个问题,我们将试图澄清人们对国际司法联合会的理解,以确认它将受到先例体系的影响。它将如下进行:首先,它将明确说明为什么有必要处理这个问题。其次,将指定存在绑定SP的含义。第三,它将解释司法独立的组成,提出国际司法联合会的理由:尊重立法者的意愿和平等适用法律。接下来,我将介绍IJI的三个方面,这些方面可能与SP的存在相冲突。在第四节中,有人认为,与赋予每一位法官不可修改的权限来确定应如何解释和适用法律相比,特别程序对国际司法联合会的损害较小。结论中指出,尽管可能有反对建立先例制度的理由,但国际司法联合会不是其中之一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
¿Violan los precedentes la IJI? Desencuentros desde la incomprensión
This work aims to clarify, from the point of view of the analytical theory of law, the question of whether the existence of judicial precedents in a legal system necessarily implies a violation of the internal judicial independence (IJI). To answer the question, we will try to clarify the way in which the IJI is being understood to affirm that it would be affected by the presence of a system of precedents (SP’s). It will proceed as follows: First, it will start by making explicit the reasons why it is necessary to deal with this problem. Secondly, it will be specified what it means that there is a binding SP’s. Third, it will explain what judicial independence consists of, presenting the reasons that justify the IJI: respect for the will of the legislator and equality in the application of law. Next, I will present three aspects of the IJI that could clash with the presence of an SP’s. In the fourth section, it will be argued that an SP’s is less injurious to the IJI than attributing to each of the judges a non-revisable competence to establish how the law should be interpreted and applied. In the conclusions, it is pointed out that although there may be reasons against having a precedent system, the IJI is not one of them.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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