Abstract
Following hypothesis of Andrew Watson, American professor of Psychiatry and Law, the author analyses certain psychological impacts on behavior of judges and examines the relationship between their idiosyncrasies and their judicial decisions. The survey encompasses the judges of Criminal Department of the Supreme Court of Cassation of the Republic of Serbia and, also, for comparative reasons, the judges of Criminal Department of the First Basic Court in Belgrade. Considering the main issues there is no great discrepancy between answers given by the judges of the Supreme Court and those of the Basic Court. Most responses of the Serbian judges deviate from Watson's conclusions, namely: they do not admit that they feel frustrated due to heavy caseloads, the significant majority of judges are reluctant to acknowledge their prejudices and influence of biases on their ruling, the significant majority of judges are not burdened with the idea of possible misuse of their discretion, they nearly unanimously deny that public opinion and media pressure affect their rulings, etc. Generally, the judges in Serbia are not willing to admit that they cannot always overcome their own subjectivities.
Funder
Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia
Publisher
Centre for Evaluation in Education and Science (CEON/CEES)
Reference28 articles.
1. Avramović, D. (2012). Odluka ili norma -slobodno sudijsko uverenje kao pretnja vladavini prava [Decision or Norm -Judicial Discretion as a Treat to the Rule of Collected Papers of the Faculty of Law in Novi Sad, 46(2), 311-325;
2. Avramović, D. (2018). Analiza predvidljivosti postupanja sudija -povratak mehaničkoj jurisprudenciji? [Predictive Analysis of Judicial Behavior -Return to Mechanical Jurisprudence?]. Crimen, 9(2), 155-167;
3. Bernays Wiener, F. (1962). Decision Prediction by Computers: Nonsense Cubed-and Worse. American Bar Association Journal, 48(11), 1023-1028;
4. Bienenfeld, F. R. (1965). Prolegomena to a Psychoanalysis of Law and Justice: Introduction. California Law Review, 53(4), 960-1028;
5. Chase, A. (1979). Jerome Frank and American Psychoanalytic Jurisprudence. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 2(1), 29-54;