«Separate opinion» as a unique independent genre of judicial discourse: practice of foreign courts

Author:

Kupianska A. M.ORCID

Abstract

The article examines the main characteristics of a separate opinion of the judge as a unique independent genre of judicial discourse. It is emphasized that a special opinion of consent, or simply opinion, is declared in cases where the judge has no objection to the decision of the college itself and joins it, but either considers the above arguments or ways of resolving the legal dispute unsuccessful, or brings to argumentation additional consideration. This type of special opinion is characterized by greater freedom of expression of legal position in terms of content and arguments. It is noted that the constitutional justice of Ukraine formed a model of complete openness of a separate opinion of the judge of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, the highest degree of which is the publication of a separate opinion together with the decision. A separate opinion of the judge of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is determined by such that should not be confidential. It is proposed to identify a special opinion of a judge of a collegial body as an optional, structural and functional element of a judgment that is entered into the text of a decision or attached to it in the form of a separate document that has no obligatory legal force, but exists in an inseparable logical, semantic and structural. The main court decision, which determines its content and context and is characterized by individual argumentation, emotionality, imagery and evaluation. A separate opinion is an expression of a position on an issue that has already been decided by the court. This is the cry of the soul about the fact that certain arguments of the judge were not reflected in the motivational part of the court decision, or he does not agree with the decisive part of it. Special opinion is a unique independent genre of judicial discourse, in which argumentation is achieved, on the one hand, by logic and appeal to the letter of the law, and on the other, by the use of various means of emotional linguistic influence. The Institute of Distinctive Opinions serves as a guarantor of judicial independence and enables judges to position themselves not only as a part of the discursive expert community, but also as a sovereign person, a carrier and translator of a subjective creative legal position. Key words: a separate opinion of the judge, judicial discourse, constitutional justice, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, legal positions, court decisions, argumentation.

Publisher

Koretsky Institute of State and Law of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

Subject

General Economics, Econometrics and Finance

Reference29 articles.

1. Kuibida, R., Syroid, O. (2013). Posibnyk iz napysannia sudovykh rishen. Kyiv: «Drim Art» [ukr.].

2. Slinko, T. M., Tkachenko, Ye. V. (2011). Pravova pryroda okremoi dumky suddi Konstytutsiinoho Sudu Ukrainy. Biuleten Ministerstva yustytsii Ukrainy. 11 [ukr.].

3. (2018) Okrema dumka: instrument vplyvu na sudovu praktyku chy pidryv lehitymnosti rishennia. Sudebno- juridicheskaja gazeta. 26 nojab. [ukr.].

4. Suetina, O. G., Serebriakova, S. V. (2020). The Types of Intertextual Connections in the Judicial Discourse. The European Proceedings of Social & Behavioural Sciences EpSBS. 2020. 92.

5. Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1856. United States Supreme Court. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/ us/60/393/

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3