|
ŠELIGA, J.: When the
judge objects
Právny obzor, 99, 2016, č. 4, s. 310
– 330.
Abstract. That article
deals with the issue of bias and impartiality of the judge especially through
the prism of the argument ad hominem, in context of so called
anti-discrimination action, or the famous case named „Čentéš“. Thesis of the
article claims that successful use of the ad hominem depends on size of the “touched”
group by argument (judges in case of impartiality for instance). With regard to
the objection of bias of the judge author explains that the objecting to one
judge as biased has greater chances to succeed than if we object all the judges.
Arguments which article provides for the defense of the postulated thesis can be
divided into two related categories. The first category says that, the
subjective or objective test of bias, respectively impartiality of the judge in
certain situations can be understood as a methodological tool for the system,
rather than as a qualifying element of the whole system. The second category of
argument is founded on the requirement of vertical institutional cohesion among
concepts of democracy, justice and judges. The article also covers the argument
ad hominem as such. Especially it deals with situations when this argument may
be considered as a logical error or when it is correct argument within the
argumentation scheme.
Key words: ad hominem, impartiality,
testing of impartiality, bias
|
ISSN 2729-9228
(online)
ISSN 0032-6984
(print)
THEORETICAL REVIEW FOR ISSUES OF STATE AND LAW.
Právny obzor is peer-reviewed journal and is indexed in SCOPUS and HeinOnline database (INDEX TO FOREIGN LEGAL PERIODICALS).
|
