Book Review: The Judicial Process: Realism, Pragmatism, Practical Reasoning and Principles

Abstract

This article is a book review of E W Thomas The Judicial Process (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005) (414 + xxvi pages) Hardback NZ$180. In his belief that too many judges are simply 'muddling along' without a sound conception of what their role entails, Justice Thomas (a retired judge) has written a book putting forward a theory of judicial decision-making. The book represents the development of Thomas' thinking since an earlier monograph on the subject, but the two pillars on which he bases his theory remain unchanged: that the demands of justice in the individual case, and the requirement that the law meets society's reasonable needs, be at the forefront of every judgment. Marten notes that the book is deliberately pitched at a level that many people can read and enjoy. On the whole, Marten states that the book is a well-written and engaging book by one of New Zealand's most distinctive judges.

Konstruksi Kewenangan Majelis Permusyawaratan Rakyat dalam Memberikan Keterangan pada Perkara Pengujian Undang-Undang di Mahkamah Konstitusi

“…Hakim-hakim Mahkamah Konstitusi tidak terikat pada salah satu jenis metode penafsiran konstitusi, bahkan dapat mengombinasikan metode-metode penafsiran konstitusi tersebut menjadi metode penafsiran konstitusi living originalism 21 atau metode penafsiran konstitusi yang berkembang lainnya. Melalui penafsiran konstitusionalnya terhadap suatu kasus, hakim sesungguhnya menjadi "pencipta" hukum 22 sehingga dapat mempersempit atau memperluas kaidah-kaidah dalam konstitusi dan memiliki legitimasi secara yuridis-konstitusional untuk menentukan "what the law it is". Implikasinya sebagaimana yang dikemukakan oleh Laurence Klaus dan Richard S. Kay, kebebasannya untuk merumuskan interpretasi atas suatu konstitusi yang bersumber pada doktrin judicial activism, mendorong Mahkamah Konstitusi untuk terlibat dalam positive constitutional lawmaking, yakni kondisi ketika perubahan dalam suatu penafsiran konstitusi yang telah diformulasikan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi, menciptakan "kewajiban" afirmatif bagi publik untuk menaati dan menjalankannya.…”

Solidarity in the EU: What Is In A Name?

“…126 These shared preferences are closely tied to morality, as they are largely considered moral aspirations underpinning other legal standards. 127 Contrary to norms, values do not possess a deontological force, which is a key feature that differentiates them from principles and rules. In a legal order, their primary role is not one of enforcement, but rather of shaping and elevating the applicable normative standards.…”

Regulation of the international bench

“…Communal deliberation and drafting can create a sense of professional loyalty among members of the bench, with each seeking to meet the expectations of the others and to uphold collectively the professional standards of the institution. 99 Commendably in this respect, the ICJ has promulgated a formal deliberative structure that involves each judge drawing up, presenting, and defending her notes on the key questions prior to the assignment of a drafting committee, whose drafts are then subject to further individual and collective review. 100 This system of internal public reasoning within the court ensures that each judge is held to account and provided an incentive to reflect on and overcome her own biases, so as not to disappoint her peers in this forum.…”