|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
In the law, the judiciary or judicial system is the system of courts which administer justice in the name of the sovereign or state, a mechanism for the resolution of disputes. The term is also used to refer collectively to the judges, magistrates and other adjudicators who form the core of a judiciary, as well as the support personnel who keep the system running smoothly.
This difference can be seen by comparing India, United States, France and the People's Republic of China:
Differences between civil, socialist and common lawThe idea found in civil and socialist law that the judiciary does not interpret the law in creative ways has its origins in Roman law. It is said that the famed Byzantine Emperor Justinian had the Corpus Juris Civilis compiled and all other decisions by jurists burned to create certainty in the law. Again in the 19th century, French legal scholars at the time of the development of the Code Napoleon advocated the same kind of approach — it was believed that since the law was being written down precisely, it should not need interpretation; and if it did need interpretation, it could be referred to those who wrote the code. Napoleon, who was an advocate of this approach felt that the task of interpreting the law should be left with the elected legislature, not with unelected judges. This contrasted with the pre-revolutionary situation in France, where unelected parlements defending the interests of the high bourgeoisie would often slow the enforcement of royal decisions, including much needed reforms. However, this idea was found difficult to implement in practice. In France, and other countries that Napoleon had conquered, or where there was a reception of the Civil Code approach, judges once again assumed an important role, like their English counterparts. In civil law jurisdictions at present, judges interpret the law to about the same extent as in common law jurisdictions – though it may be acknowledged in theory in a different manner than in the common law tradition which directly recognizes the limited power of judges to make law. For instance, in France, the jurisprudence constante of the Cour de cassation or the Conseil d'État is equivalent in practice with case law.
Socialist law adopted the status of civil law, but added to it a new line of thought derived from Communism — the interpretation of the law is ultimately political, and should serve the purposes of Communism, and hence should not be left to a non-political organ (even though in practice, the judiciary was never much of a neutral organ above politics). See also
bg:Съдебна власт bs:Sudska vlast ca:Poder judicial da:Dømmende magt de:Rechtsprechung es:Poder judicial fr:Pouvoir judiciaire he:הרשות השופטת id:Kehakiman it:Podere giudiziario ja:司法 lt:Teisminė valdžia mk:Судска власт ms:Kehakiman nl:Rechterlijke macht no:Dømmende makt pl:Władza sądownicza pt:Poder judicial sr:Судска власт zh:司法
|
Sites |
Searched sites for "Judiciary" |
|
No sites found. |
Sorry, no matching site records were found. |
Want your site listed here?
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Submit
your site |
|
Relevant quality search results and fast easy navigation throughout the
different sections of the site, make Americola.com |