تأثیر پیشینۀ اجتماعی قضات بر آرای قضایی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، گروه‎ ‎فقه و حقوق، پژوهشگاه زن و خانواده، قم، ایران‏

2 دانشجوی دکتری تخصصی روان‌شناسی بالینی، دانشکدۀ روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه ‏تهران، تهران، ایران

3 استادیار حقوق خصوصی، پژوهشکدۀ حقوق خصوصی، پژوهشگاه قوۀ قضاییه، تهران، ایران

چکیده

     اگرچه معیار در تصمیم‌گیری‌های قضایی، قانون، شواهد و مدارک است، عوامل دیگری نیز نقش اساسی در این زمینه ایفا می‌کنند. پیشینۀ اجتماعی قضات، از عوامل تأثیرگذار بر آرای قضایی  است. پژوهش حاضر درصدد پاسخگویی به این پرسش است که آیا با تکیه بر آمار و شواهد تجربی می‌توان رابطه‌ای بین پیشینۀ اجتماعی قضات و آرای قضایی ایشان پیدا کرد؟ نگارندگان بر این باورند که پیشینۀ اجتماعی قضات از جمله دین و مذهب قاضی، تحصیلات، جنسیت، نژاد، سن یا تجربه، سوابق استخدامی، وضعیت مالی و تعلقات سیاسی می‌تواند بر آرای قضایی ایشان تأثیرگذار باشد. پژوهش حاضر از نوع توصیفی - تحلیلی است و کوشیده است با واکاوی پژوهش‌های مرتبط با پیشینۀ اجتماعی قضات به فهمی منسجم از این موضوع دست یابد و در گام بعد راهکارهایی را برای کمینه‌سازی این اثرگذاری ناخودآگاهانه ارائه کند. راهکارهای ارائه‌شده در این تحقیق را می‌توان به دو دسته راهکارهای ساختاری و شخصی تقسیم کرد: در گروه اول بیشتر درصدد ارائۀ پیشنهادهایی به‌منظور اصلاح و تقویت فرایند دادرسی برآمده‌ایم، درحالی‌که در گروه دوم تمرکز بر تقویت قوای معرفتی-شناختی در قضات تمرکز می‌شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

JUDGES’ SOCIAL BACKGROUNDS AND JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING

نویسندگان [English]

  • Reza Pourmohammadi 1
  • mohammad mahdi Yusefi 2
  • Mohaammad Forushani 3
1 Assistant Professor, Woman and Family Research Institute, Faculty of ‎Islamic Jurisprudence and Law. ‎
2 Ph.D. Candidate in Psychology, University of Tehran. ‎
3 Assistant Professor, Institute of Judiciary, Department of Private Law.‎
چکیده [English]

Abstract
Although the focus of judicial decisions is on laws and evidence, other factors also play crucial roles. Judges' social background is one such factor hypothetically influencing judicial decision-making. The present study seeks to determine whether, based on statistical and empirical evidence, a correspondence can be detected between the judges’ social background and their judicial decisions. Does a judge's financial situation, for example, affect his or her judicial decisions? This essay will argue that a judge' social background, including his religious tendencies, education, gender, race, age and experience, employment background, financial status, and political affiliations, can influence his or her judicial decisions. Using descriptive-analytical method, the present study tries, first, to achieve a coherent understanding of this issue by analyzing the researches already carried out on the judges' social backgrounds and, in the next step, to provide solutions to minimize this unconscious impact. The solutions presented in this research fall into two categories: personal strategies and structural strategies. In the first category, our goal will be to strengthen the epistemological powers of judges, while in the second, we will suggest ways to minimize the impact of judges' social backgrounds by structurally reforming the judiciary.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Keywords: Judges' Understanding
  • Judicial Psychology
  • Decision-Making
  • ‎Legal Hermeneutics
  • Legal Realists.‎

مراجع

  1.  

    منابع

    الف) فارسی و عربی

    1. ‌‫اعرافی، علیرضا (۱۳۹۸). اجتهاد و تقلید، قم: مؤسسۀ اشراق و عرفان.
    2. ‌‫الشریف، محمدمهدی (۱۳۹۹). منطق حقوق، تهران: شرکت سهامی انتشار.
    3. ‌‫بهبهانی، محمدباقر بن محمداکمل (۱۴۱۵ق). الفوائد الحائریة، مجمع الفکر الإسلامی.
    4. پورمحمدی، رضا؛ صالحی مازندرانی، محمد (1399). نظریۀ اصول فهم عرفی، قم: دارالفکر.
    5. ‌‫خمینی، روح‌الله (بی‌تا). تحریر الوسیله، قم: دار العلم.
    6. ‌‫خویی، ابوالقاسم (۱۴۱۰ق). منهاج الصالحین، قم: مدینة العلم.
    7. ‌‫سلار دیلمی، حمزه بن عبد العزیز (۱۴۰۴). المراسم فی الفقه الإمامی، قم: منشورات الحرمین.
    8. ‌‫صانعی، پرویز (۱۳۸۲). حقوق و اجتماع: رابطه حقوق با عوامل اجتماعی و روانی، تهران: طرح نو.
    9. ‌‫علامه حلی، حسن بن یوسف (۱۴۱۰ق). إرشاد الأذهان إلی أحکام الإیمان، قم: مؤسسة النشر الإسلامی.

    ‌‫10. غزالی، محمد (۱۴۳۲ق). احیاء علوم الدین، جده: ادارالمنهاج للنشر و التوزیع.

    1. محقق داماد، سید مصطفی؛ حسینی نسب، سید مصطفی؛ پورمحمدی، رضا (1400). نظریۀ اصولی، قم: مؤسسۀ بوستان کتاب.

    ‌‫12. محقق کرکی، علی بن حسین (۱۴۰۹ق). رسائل المحقق الکرکی، قم: کتابخانۀ آیت‌الله العظمی مرعشی نجفی

    ‌‫13. مطهری، مرتضی (۱۳۷۸). مجموعه آثار، تهران: صدرا.

    ‌‫14. مفید، محمد بن محمد (۱۴۱۰ق). المقنعة، قم: مؤسسة النشر الإسلامی.

    ‌‫15. مقدس اردبیلی، احمد بن محمد (۱۳۶۲). مجمع الفائدة و البرهان، قم: مؤسسة النشر الإسلامی.

    ‌‫16. میرزای قمی، ابوالقاسم بن محمدحسن (۱۴۳۰ق). القوانین المحکمة فی الأصول، قم: احیاء الکتب الاسلامیة.

    ‌‫17. یوسفی، محمدمهدی (۱۳۹۶). نقش برداشت اولیه و شخصیت قاضی در احکام صادره در پرونده‌های کیفری، پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی ارشد، تهران: دانشکدۀ روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی.

    ب) خارجی

    1. Allen, D. W., & Wall, D. E. (1987). "The Behavior of Women State Supreme Court Justices: Are They Tokens or Outsiders?" The Justice System Journal, 12(2), 232–245.
    2. Blume, J., & Eisenberg, T. (1999). "Judicial Politics, Death Penalty Appeals, and Case Selection: An Empirical Study", Cornell Law Faculty Publications. https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/facpub/240
    3. Bornstein, B., & Miller, M. (2009). "Does a Judge’s Religion Influence Decision Making? Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ajacourtreview/300
    4. Boyd, C. L. (2015). She’ll Settle It?" Journal of Law and Courts. https://doi.org/10.1086/670723
    5. Boyd, C. L., Epstein, L., & Martin, A. D. (2010). "Untangling the Causal Effects of Sex on Judging", American Journal of Political Science, 54(2), 389–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00437.x
    6. Canes-Wrone, B., Clark, T. S., & Kelly, J. P. (2014). "Judicial Selection and Death Penalty Decisions", American Political Science Review, 108(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055413000622
    7. Cartmill, E. A., Beilock, S., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2012). "A word in the hand: Action, gesture and mental representation in humans and non-human primates", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1585), 129–143. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0162
    8. Chew, P. K., & Kelley, R. E. (2009). "Myth of the Color-Blind Judge: An Empirical Analysis of Racial Harassment Cases", Washington University Law Review, 86(5), 1117–1166. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol86/iss5/2
    9. Cho, K., Barnes, C. M., & Guanara, C. L. (2017). "Sleepy Punishers Are Harsh Punishers: Daylight Saving Time and Legal Sentences", Psychological Science, 28(2), 242–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616678437
    10. Cox, A. B., & Miles, T. J. (2008). "Judging the Voting Rights Act", Columbia Law Review, 108(1), 1–54. https://ssrn.com/abstract=977271
    11. Cross, F. B. (2007). Decision Making in the U.S. Courts of Appeals.
    12. Dahl, R. A. (1957). "Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker", Journal of Public Law, 6, 279. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055400263983
    13. Danelski, D. J. (1980). A Supreme Court Justice is appointed: David J. Danelski (Reprint of the ed. published by Random House, New York, in series: Random House studies in political science). Greenwood Press, 1964.
    14. Davis, S. (1986). "President Carter’s Selection Reforms and Judicial Policymaking: A Voting Analysis of the United States Courts of Appeals", American Politics Quarterly, 14(4), 328–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X8601400404
    15. Dipboye, R. L. (1982). "Self-Fulfilling Prophecies in the Selection-Recruitment Interview", Academy of Management Review, 7(4), 579–586. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1982.4285247
    16. Dworkin, R. (1978). Taking rights seriously. Harvard Univ. Press.
    17. Easterbrook, F. (1988). "The Role of Original Intent in Statutory Construction", Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 11, 59.
    18. Eberhardt, J. L., Davies, P. G., Purdie-Vaughns, V. J., & Johnson, S. L. (2006). "Looking Deathworthy: Perceived Stereotypicality of Black Defendants Predicts Capital-Sentencing Outcomes", Psychological Science, 17(5), 383–386. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01716.x
    19. Eisenberg, T., Hannaford-Agor, P., Hans, V., Waters, N., Munsterman, G., Schwab, S., & Wells, M. (2005). "Judge-Jury Agreement in Criminal Cases: A Partial Replication of Kalven and Zeisel’s The American Jury", Cornell Law Faculty Publications. https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/facpub/343
    20. Epstein, L. (n.d.). Some Thoughts on the Study of Judicial Behavior. 57, 58.
    21. Epstein, L., & Knight, J. (1998). The choices justices make. CQ Press.
    22. Epstein, L., & Knight, J. (2013). "Reconsidering Judicial Preferences", Annual Review of Political Science, 16(1), 11–31. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-032211-214229
    23. Epstein, L., & Martin, A. D. (2004). "Does Age (Really) Matter? A Response to Manning, Carroll, and Carp*", Social Science Quarterly, 85(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0038-4941.2004.08501002.x
    24. Farhang, S. (2004). "Institutional Dynamics on the U.S. Court of Appeals: Minority Representation Under Panel Decision Making", Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 20(2), 299–330. https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewh035
    25. Fox, R., & Van Sickel, R. (2000). "Gender Dynamics and Judicial Behavior in Criminal Trial Courts: An Exploratory Study", The Justice System Journal, 21(3), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/23277556.2000.10871289
    26. Fulero, S. M., & Wrightsman, L. S. (2009). Forensic psychology. Wadsworth.
    27. Fuller, L. L. (1978). The morality of law (Rev. ed., 15. print). Yale Univ. Press.
    28. Galati, D., Sini, B., Schmidt, S., & Tinti, C. (2003). "Spontaneous Facial Expressions in Congenitally Blind and Sighted Children Aged 8–11", Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 97(7), 418–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X0309700704
    29. Gilron, R., & Gutchess, A. H. (2012). "Remembering first impressions: Effects of intentionality and diagnosticity on subsequent memory", Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 12(1), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-011-0074-6
    30. Glynn, A. N., & Sen, M. (2015). "Identifying Judicial Empathy: Does Having Daughters Cause Judges to Rule for Women’s Issues?", Identifying Judicial Empathy. American Journal of Political Science, 59(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12118
    31. Goldman, S. (1965). Politics, Judges, and the Administration of Justice [Ph.D]. Harvard University.
    32. Gottschall, J. (1983). "Carter’s Judicial Appointments: The Influence of Affirmative Action and Merit Selection on Voting on the U.S". Courts of Appeals", Judicature, 67, 165.
    33. Gross, A. E., & Crofton, C. (1977). What is Good is Beautiful", Sociometry, 40(1), 85. https://doi.org/10.2307/3033549
    34. Gruhl, J., Spohn, C., & Welch, S. (1981). "Women as Policymakers: The Case of Trial Judges", American Journal of Political Science, 25(2), 308–322. https://doi.org/10.2307/2110855
    35. Günther, P. (2020). "Groupthink Bias in International Adjudication", Journal of International Dispute Settlement, 11(1), 91–126. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnlids/idaa001
    36. Holmes, M. D., Hosch, H. M., Daudistel, H. C., Perez, D. A., & et al. (1993). "Judges’ ethnicity and minority sentencing: Evidence concerning Hispanics", Social Science Quarterly, 74(3), 496–506.
    37. Idleman, S. (2005). "The Concealment of Religious Values in Judicial Decisionmaking", 91 Virginia Law Review 515 (2005). https://www.jstor.org/stable/3649431
    38. Jamieson, K., & Hennessy, M. (2007). "Public Understanding of and Support for the Courts: Survey ‌Results",The Georgetown Law Journal, 95(4), 899–902.‌
    39. Kritzer, H. M., & Uhlman, T. M. (1978). "Sisterhood in the Courtroom: Sex of Judge and Defendant as Factors in Criminal Case Disposition: An Interdisciplinary Collection", Women’s Studies: An Interdisciplinary Collection, 75–86.
    40. Kuzmanovic, B., Bente, G., von Cramon, D. Y., Schilbach, L., Tittgemeyer, M., & Vogeley, K. (2012). "Imaging first impressions: Distinct neural processing of verbal and nonverbal social information", NeuroImage, 60(1), 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage    .2011.12.046
    1. Landis, J. M. (1930). "A Note on Statutory Interpretation", Harvard Law Review, 43(6), 886–893. https://doi.org/10.2307/1330770
    2. Leiter, B. (2002). American Legal Realism, Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.339562
    3. Lord, C. G., Lepper, M. R., & Preston, E. (1984). "Considering the opposite: A corrective strategy for social judgment", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1231–1243. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.47.6.1231
    4. Lorenzo, G. L., Biesanz, J. C., & Human, L. J. (2010). "What Is Beautiful Is Good and More Accurately Understood: Physical Attractiveness and Accuracy in First Impressions of Personality", Psychological Science, 21(12), 1777–1782. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610388048
    5. MacCormick, D. N., & Summers, R. S. (2016). Interpreting Statutes: A Comparative Study.
    6. Manning, K. L., Carroll, B. A., & Carp, R. A. (2004). Does Age Matter? Judicial Decision Making in Age Discrimination Cases. Social Science Quarterly, 85(1), 1–18. https://doi/10.1111/j.0038-4941.2004.08501001.x
    7. Martinek, W. L. (2010). Judges as members of small groups. In The psychology of judicial decision making (pp. 73–84). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195367584.003.0005
    8. Maveety, N. (Ed.). (2003). The Pioneers of Judicial Behavior. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.11980
    9. Mayoral, J. A., Jaremba, U., & Nowak, T. (2014). "Creating EU law judges: The role of generational differences, legal education and judicial career paths in national judges’ assessment regarding EU law knowledge", Journal of European Public Policy, 21(8), 1120–1141. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2014.915871
    10. McClure, J., Hilton, D. J., Cowan, J., Ishida, L., & Wilson, M. (2001). "When People Explain Difficult Actions, is the Causal Question How or Why?", Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 20(3), 339–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X01020003004
    11. Moore, F. R., Filippou, D., & Perrett, D. I. (2011). "Intelligence and attractiveness in the face: Beyond the attractiveness halo effect", Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 9(3), 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1556/JEP.9.2011.3.2
    12. Nagel, S. S. (1961)." Political Party Affiliation and Judges’ Decisions", The American Political Science Review, 55(4), 843–850. https://doi.org/10.2307/1952531
    13. Nagel, S. S. (1962a). "Judicial Backgrounds and Criminal Cases", The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science, 53(3), 333–339. https://doi.org/10.2307/1141469
    14. Nagel, S. S. (1962b). "Testing Relations between Judicial Characteristics and Judicial Decision-Making", The Western Political Quarterly, 15(3), 425–437. https://doi.org/10.2307/445033
    15. Nairn, M. (1921). "Social Background", The Public Health Journal, 12(12), 512–517. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41972776
    16. Neitz, M. (2013). "Socioeconomic Bias in the Judiciary", Cleveland State Law Review, 61(1), 137. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2149311
    17. Peltason, J. W. (1963). Federal courts in the political process. Random House.
    18. Pfister, M., Schaub, M. C., Watterson, J. G., Knecht, M., & Waser, P. G. (1975). "Radioactive labeling and location of specific thiol groups in myosin from fast, slow and cardiac muscles", Biochimica Et Biophysica Acta, 410(1), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-2744(75)90220-x
    19. Pinello, D. R. (1999). "Linking Party to Judicial Ideology in American Courts: A Meta-analysis", The Justice System Journal, 20(3), 219–254.https://www.jstor.org/stable/27976992
    20. Pinello, D. R. (2003). Gay rights and American law. Cambridge University Press.
    21. Rosenblum, V. G. (1955). Law as a political instrument. (First edition). Random House.
    22. Schmidhauser, J. R. (1961). "Judicial Behavior and the Sectional Crisis of 1837-1860", The Journal of Politics, 23(4), 615–640. https://doi.org/10.2307/2127129
    23. Schmidhauser, J. R. (1962)." Stare Decisis, Dissent, and the Background of the Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States", The University of Toronto Law Journal, 14(2), 194–212. https://doi.org/10.2307/825322
    24. Segal, J. A., & Spaeth, H. J. (2002). The Supreme Court and the attitudinal model revisited, Cambridge University Press.
    25. Siems, M. M. (2006). "Legal adaptability in Elbonia", International Journal of Law in Context, 2(4), 393–408. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552306004046
    26. Sisk, G. C., Heise, M., & Morriss, A. P. (2004). Searching for the Soul of Judicial Decisionmaking: An Empirical Study of Religious Freedom Decisions. Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=486148
    27. Songer, D. R., & Tabrizi, S. J. (1999). "The Religious Right in Court: The Decision Making of Christian Evangelicals in State Supreme Courts", The Journal of Politics, 61(2), 507–526. https://doi.org/10.2307/2647514
    28. Steffensmeier, D., & Britt, C. L. (2001). "Judges’ Race and Judicial Decision Making: Do Black Judges Sentence Differently?", Social Science Quarterly, 82(4), 749–764. https://doi.org/10.1111/0038-4941.00057
    29. Steffensmeier, D., & Hebert, C. (1999). "Women and Men Policymakers: Does the Judge’s Gender Affect the Sentencing of Criminal Defendants?", Social Forces, 77(3), 1163–1196. https://doi.org/10.2307/3005975
    30. Stone, J. (1946). The Province and Function of Law: Law as Logic, Justice, and Social Control, a Study in Jurisprudence. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    31. Sutherland, C. A. M., Rowley, L. E., Amoaku, U. T., Daguzan, E., Kidd-Rossiter, K. A., Maceviciute, U., & Young, A. W. (2015). "Personality judgments from everyday images of faces", Frontiers in Psychology, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01616
    32. Tate, C. N., & Handberg, R. (1991). "Time Binding and Theory Building in Personal Attribute Models of Supreme Court Voting Behavior, 1916-88", American Journal of Political Science, 35(2), 460–480. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111371
    33. Todorov, A. (2005). "Inferences of Competence from Faces Predict Election Outcomes",Science, 308(5728), 1623–1626. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1110589
    34. Weinberg, J. D., & Nielsen, L. B. (2011). Examining Empathy: Discrimination, Experience, and Judicial Decisionmaking. Southern California Law Review, 85, 313.
    35. Wistrich, A., Guthrie, C., & Rachlinski, J. (2005). "Can Judges Ignore Inadmissible Information—The Difficulty of Deliberately Disregarding", University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 153(4), 1251. https://doi.org/10.2307/4150614
    36. Wood, T. J. (2014). "Exploring the role of first impressions in rater-based assessments", Advances in Health Sciences Education, 19(3), 409–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-013-9453-9 Zweigert, K., & Koetz, H. (1998). An Introduction to Comparative Law (T. Weir, Trans.).

     

     

مطالعات حقوق خصوصی
دوره 51، شماره 3
مهر 1400
صفحه 409-427

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار