Objectivity is one of the basic principles of any legal system, and this is all the more apparent when it comes to each specific case before the court. However, my master’s thesis considers the opposing view, and explores whether emotions should be completely forbidden in the courtroom, and whether they always lead to biased decisions by the judge. Using a theoretical basis, I have found that emotions are not always a bad thing. Being a judge means being emotional, so in my thesis I ask to what extent judges are aware of this and how it affects their decision-making. After examining the question of whether the influence of emotions is necessarily harmful, my answer is not always affirmative, and therefore I address the criteria and conditions of those emotions that are desirable during a trial. I do this in an attempt to show the demarcation between cases of harmful and harmless emotionality. The origin of such a demarcation can be located in values, which also need to be treated with caution, since they are understood in relative terms and are open to interpretation. This is a case of a conflict between the values that support the judge's individual decision, and the values on which the legal system is based.
|
