The Quarterly Journal of Judicial Law Views

The Quarterly Journal of Judicial Law Views

Substantive Trial in the Administrative Justice Tribunal

Authors
Shahid Beheshti University
Abstract
Ideology is a conception that existed in the early decades of the French Revolution, and was later developed in different dimensions. The  development which is significant in both negative and positive meanings. Penetration of the ideology to the state arena and its influence in social fabrications doubled its importance. The level of judgment was not immune to this influence, and at the very least it has created a concept called "judicial ideology". This paper while describing the conception of ideology in epistemological meaning, as an integral, and even essential, element of the judge's mentality, depicts the negative meaning of ideology as an politicized and out of the framework  which is tied with the organization, fanaticism and decisiveness. The inseparability of the ideology of the judge's thoughts will lead us to a path in order to analysis the junction of ideology in judges decisions in the framework of the rule of law which is the ultimate goal of establishing a judicial system.

 
Keywords

آرنت، هانا (1390)، توتالیتاریسم، برگردان: محسن ثلاثی، تهران، نشر ثالث.
    بریجانیان، ماری (1371)، فرهنگ اصطلاحات فلسفه و علوم اجتماعی، برگردان: بهاءالدین خرمشاهی، جلد نخست، تهران: انتشارات پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی.
    بودن، ریمون (1378)، ایدئولوژی، برگردان: ایرج علی آبادی، تهران: شیرازه.
    جعفری‌تبار، حسن (1395)، دیو در شیشه: در فلسفۀ رویۀ قضایی، تهران: حق‌گزاران. 
    خورخه، لارین (1380)، مفهوم ایدئولوژی، برگردان: فریبرز مجیدی، تهران: کتابخانۀ تخصصی وزارت امور خارجه. 
    دانشور، فائزه (1395)، «بازخوانی رابطۀ حقوق و ایدئولوژی در پرتو مطالعات میان رشته‌ای»، فصلنامۀ مطالعات میان‌رشته‌ای در علوم انسانی، دورۀ 32، 1-26.
    زارعی محمدحسین (1380)، «حاکمیت قانون در اندیشه‌های سیاسی و حقوقی»، نامۀ مفید، دوره هفتم، صفحات 51-68.
    زارعی محمدحسین (1387)، «حاکمیت قانون و دموکراسی؛ سازگاری یا تعارض»، تحقیقات حقوقی، شماره چهل و نهم، صفحات 65-105.
    زارعی، محمدحسین (1394)، امنیت قضایی به مثابه حق، گفتارهایی در حقوق عمومی مدرن: حاکمیت قانون و دموکراسی، تهران: خرسندی.
    سروش، عبدالکریم (1393)، فربه‌تر از ایدئولوژی، تهران: صراط.
    سیبلی، ک. مالفرد (1394)، ایده‌ها و ایدئولوژی‌های سیاسی: تاریخ اندیشۀ سیاسی، برگردان: عبدالرحمن عالم، تهران، نی.
    علی‌بابایی، غلامرضا و آقایی، بهمن (1365)، فرهنگ علوم سیاسی، جلد نخست نخست، تهران: ویس.
    کارور، ترل (1390)، ایدئولوژی: سیر یک مفهوم، در آرمان‌ها و ایدئولوژی‌ها، برگردان: احمد صبوریِ کاشانی، تهران: کتاب آمه.
    مارکس، کارل و انگلس، فردریش (1377)، ایدئولوژی آلمانی، برگردان: تیرداد نیکی، تهران: شرکت پژوهشی پیام پیروز.
    مک للان، دیوید (1390) ایده‌ئولوژی، برگردان: محمد رفیعی مهرآبادی،تهران: آشیان.
    وینسنت، اندرو (1392)، ایدئولوژی‌های مدرن سیاسی، برگردان: مرتضی ثاقب‌فر، تهران: ققنوس.
    دورکین، رونالد (1387)، حقوق و اخلاق، برگردان: محمّد راسخ، حق و مصلحت (1): مقالاتی در فلسفه حقوق، فلسفه حق و فلسفه ارزش، تهران، طرح نو.
    رحمانی، قدرت الله (1397)، «مطالعۀ تطبیقی تحول مفهوم جرم سیاسی در حقوق ایران و غرب»، دیدگاه‌های حقوق قضایی، دوره بیست و سوم، صفحات 83-111.
Richards, M. J, & Kritzer, H. M (2002), Jurisprudential Regimes in Supreme Court Decision Making, American Political Science Review, Vol.96, 305-320.
Bell, John (2006), Judiciaries within Europe : A Comparative Review, New York, Cambridge University Press.
Booth, James, Freyens, Ben (2014), Ideology and Judicial Decision Making in Australian Labour Courts, paper studies series, D72, J52, K31, K41, Centre of Law & Economics, Australian National University.
Cardozo, Benjamin N (2009), The Nature of the Judicial Process, New York, Farther Trail Press.
Chemerinsky, Erwin (2003), Ideology and the Selection of Federal Judges, University of California Davis, V.36, 619-631.
Epstein, Lee, Landes, William M and Posner, Richard A (2012), Are Even Unanimous Decisions in the United States Supreme Court Ideological? Northwestern University Law Review, Vol.106, 699- 714.
Epstein, Lee and Segal, Jeffrey A (2006), Trumping the First Amendment? Washington University Journal of Law & Policy, Vol.21, 81-121.
Ferejohn, John A, Kramer, Larry D (2002) Independent Judges, Dependent Judiciary: Institutionalizing Judicial Restraint, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW, Vol.77, 962-1039.
Finck, Danielle E (1997), Judicial Review: The United States Supreme Court Versus the German Constitutional Court, Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, V.20, 123-157.
Fischman, Joshua B (2009), What Is Judicial Ideology, and How Should We Measure It? Washington University Journal of Law & Policy, V. 29, Empirical Research on Decision-Making in the Federal Courts, 133-214.
Gerhardt, Michael J (2009), How a Judge Thinks, MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW, V.93, 2185-2204.
Geyh, Charles G (2013), The Dimensions of Judicial Impartiality, Florida Law Review, Vol.65, 493-551.
Group of Authors (2003), Human Rights in the Administration of Justice: A Manual on Human Rights for Judges, Prosecutors and Lawyers, Geneva, OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS.
Hamilton, B Malcolm (1987), The Elements of the Concept of the Ideology, Political Studies, XXXV, 18-38.
Hanna, John (1957), The Role of Precedent in Judicial Decision, Villanova University Law Review, Vol. 2, 367-384.
Harry T. Edwards (1985), Public Misperceptions Concerning the “Politics” of Judging: Dispelling Some Myths About the D.C. Circuit, University of Colorado Law Review, Vol. 56, 619-625.
Jeffery A. Segal & Harold J. Soaeth (2002), The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited, London, University of Cambridge Press.
Kennedy, Emmet (1979), Ideology from Destutt De Tracy to Marx, Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol.40, 353-368.
Keong, Chan Sek (2010), Securing and Maintaining the Independence of the Court in Judicial Proceedings, Singapore Academy of Law Journal, Vol.22, 229-251.
Kmiec, Keenan D (2004), The Origin and Current Meanings of Judicial Activism, California Law Review, Vol.92, 1441-1478.
Kritzer, Herbert M, and Richards, Mark J (2005), The Influence Of Law In The Supreme Court’s Search-And-Seizure Jurisprudence, American Politics Research, Vol. 33, 33-55.
Penny J White (2002), “Judging Judges: Securing Judicial Independence by Use of Judicial Performance Evaluations”, Fordham Urban Law Journal, Vol. 29, 1053-1060.
Piedrafita, Laliena, Libertad, Ana and Others, (2011), Judicial Impartiality: Between Law and Ethics, Available at:
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/35375362/judicial-impartiality-between-law-and-ethics-ejtn.24/1/2018.
Posner, Richard A (2008), How Judges Think, New York, Harvard University Press.
Posner, Richard A (1993), What Do Judges and Justices Maximize? (The Same Thing Everybody Else Does), Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics, Chicago Working Paper in Law & Economics, Vol.15, 17-21.
Sag, Matthew and Others (2007), THE EFFECT OF JUDICIAL IDEOLOGY IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES, 2nd Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies Paper. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=997963. 10/8/2017.
ŞAHİN, Kemal (2008), Impartiality of the Judiciary, Ankara bar review, Vol.1, 16-18.
Salmond, John W (1913), Jurisprudence, Forth Edition, Available at: https://archive.org/stream/jurisprudence00salm#page/n3/mode/2up. 16/11/2017.
Saunders, Justice Jamie W. S (2003), Judicial Independence and Impartiality, Lecture, Nova Scotia, Available at: www.courts.ns.ca/From.../From_The_Bench-JUDICIAL_INDEPENDENCE.pdf. 12/1/2018.
Scherer, Nancy (2015), Testing the Court: Decision Making Under the Microscope, Tulsa Law Review, Vol. 50, 659-668.
Segal, Jeffery A and Spaeth, Harold J (2005), The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited, New York, Cambridge University Press.
Jollimore, Troy (2017), Impartiality, Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Available at:https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/impartiality/. 22/1/2018.
Wardle, Ben (2016), The Four Axes of Legal Ideology, A Dissertation in Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Griffith Law School, Australia.