Open Access Research Article
EMOTIONS OF THE JUDICIARY- DO THEY PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE? A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY
Published Paper
Article Details
EMOTIONS OF THE JUDICIARY- DO THEY
PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE? A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY
Authored By - EASHWAR B K, 3rd Year
School Of Law, CHRIST (Deemed To Be University)
Abstract:
The concept
of Emotion plays a controversial role in any field of work, especially in the
Legal Fraternity and Judiciary, whose primary selling point is to profess
Neutrality and not to pay heed to unsolicited and bland opinions freely thrown
out. While upholding Professionalism in Work is pretty much doable, chaos
arises when society does not render to your Opinion, and no provision stands
the test of time if it is against the public. Not only societal emotions but
also personal emotions come into play. A Judge, an adjudicator, a Mediator, or
a Conciliator, the person engulfed in the role is human.
This paper sheds
light on the role of the abstract notion of Emotions, both of the deliverer and
the receiver ends of Law. The researcher intends to provide an image with
descriptions where the jurists and the people might have to tackle emotions
before countering and adjudicating the situation. References to Mediation,
International Arbitration, and many judgments and domestic legislations shall
be referred to. ADR mechanisms can help societal individuals with a faster and more
efficient process to avail justice without the procedural hassle and leave the
seekers much happier than ever.
Research Questions-
1.
Does a judge's societal and cultural upbringing have a
say in the Courtroom?
2.
Can ADR help the Indian Judiciary to be efficient?
I.
Introduction.
The primary inspiration for the researcher
to take up this topic to write a research paper on was- when law students enter into schools of Law,
the first thing that usually intrigues them is the Judiciary; for them,
Judiciary is the Law. The setup of the Judiciary is much more interesting,
including the scenarios where we look at the Collegium System, the experienced
Judges, and the British architectural amaze of the courts. Consequently, we are
exposed to the fact of the Independence of the Judiciary Emotions are complex
and subjective experiences that are uniquely human. While judges are capable of
experiencing a wide range of emotions, it is essential to remember that their
role is to make decisions based on legal principles and evidence presented in
court rather than their emotions. Judges must remain impartial and make
decisions based on the facts of the case without being influenced by personal
emotions or biases.[1]
II.
Could the
judgments head the other way?
In the Ayodhya case[2],
the Judgment was delivered by the bench consisting of Justice Ashok Bhushan,
Justice SA Bobde, CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Justice DY Chandrachud, and Justice S Abdul
Nazeer. Justice Abdul Nazeer gave the only dissenting Judgment in an overall
controversial case. It was the case where the Islamic citizens of India claimed
their rights over the Babri Masjid while the Hindu counterparts strongly
opposed it being the 'Ram Janma Bhoomi.' The Judgment was delivered on the last
working day of the then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, who led the majority
opinion, which ruled that the Land should go to the temple's trust and the
trust representing the mosque was given 5 acres elsewhere. The Hindus took most
of the chunk from this Judgment on a single overlook. If we decipher the bench
individually, we could consider the possibility that the Judgment could have
had an alternate outcome if the bench could have consisted of another bench. Ranjan
Gogoi has been continuously associated with the ruling government, especially
when he was given the ticket made by the Member of Parliament immediately after
his tenure as the Chief Justice ended.
If not a factual inference, a minute feeble
relation could be drawn as to how the Judgment could have had an alternate
approach if Ranjan Gogoi was not on the bench. S A Bobde, a Brahmin by his
cultural upbringing; could it be that the way he was raised and the faith he
believes in have an effect that has to be overlooked as it is believed in everyday
parlance that a Judge is to profess Neutrality? The underlying point of this paper
is to consider at least that a Judge sitting on a case is not a robot or an AI that
cannot profess detailed thoughts channeled my feelings.
We could also
take the semi-controversial cases of the Triple Talaq Judgment and the
Sabarimala case . The cases could have gotten an alternate approach considering
the societal mindsets of a majority too, which the Judiciary has to cater to
while delivering a Judgment; in the end, the Law has to adhere to the society it
governs.
III.
The Court
Room Emotions.
Emotions
can play a significant role in a courtroom, both for the individuals involved
and the overall outcome of the case. Here are some instances where emotions
show a vital effect[3]-
When it
comes to witnesses and victims under trial, they tend to experience a range of
emotions when recounting their experiences in court, such as fear, anger,
sadness, and anxiety. Not just while undergoing trial, but getting involved in
the judicial process might also have after-effects on a human being. Although
one can try to carry on with their everyday life, society may start to view
them differently, which can potentially cause side effects on a person's mental
health. These emotions could affect their communication ability and may impact their
credibility as witnesses.
Under Jury,
primarily prevalent in the US Judiciary, jurors may also experience emotions
during a court case, such as empathy for the victim or frustration with a
slow-moving trial. These emotions can influence their perception of the
evidence and their verdict. All parties involved in a court case must recognize
and manage their emotions to ensure a fair and just outcome. Additionally,
jurors are expected to be instructed to remain impartial and base their verdict
solely on the evidence presented in court.
One central
notion that goes unnoticed is the feeling of the person entrusted with the
premium responsibility of delivering justice. A judge is a legal professional
who presides over court proceedings and ensures that justice is served
according to the Law. The judge is responsible for overseeing the trial,
ensuring that the prosecution and defense have a fair chance to present their
cases, and making a final decision based on the evidence presented. While
judges may have personal opinions or beliefs, they must set them aside when
making decisions and rely solely on the facts presented in the case. The judge
has to remain impartial and apply the Law fairly and consistently. In addition
to presiding over trials, judges have other responsibilities, such as setting
bail, issuing search warrants, and making decisions on sentencing. Overall, the
role of a judge is to uphold the Law and ensure that justice is served fairly
and impartially.
IV.
Alternative
Dispute Mechanisms-
ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) mechanisms can be
affected by emotions in several ways. Some of the critical instances include
Mediation, where a neutral third party helps parties in a dispute reach a
mutually acceptable resolution. Emotions can play a significant role in Mediation,
as parties may have strong feelings about the dispute or the other party. The
mediator must manage these emotions carefully to ensure that the parties can
communicate effectively and work toward a resolution[4]. Mediation,
unlike litigations, focuses on "Win-Win" scenarios by considering the
intricacies of both parties, including their clear stance, which they portray
on their basis. Mediation usually tends to familial and personal relationship
issues.
Furthermore, arbitration is a process where a neutral
third party makes a binding decision on a dispute. Emotions can also play a role
in arbitration, as parties may have strong feelings about the dispute or the
arbitrator. The arbitrator must remain impartial and make decisions based on
the facts and evidence presented rather than emotions. In arbitration, unlike
mediations, emotions must not be placed on the main stage as the parties
involved are body corporates where parties in a dispute try to reach a mutually
acceptable resolution through direct discussion. Negotiators must be aware of
the emotions involved and work to manage them to ensure productive discussions.
Overall,
emotions can affect ADR mechanisms in both positive and negative ways. On the
one hand, strong emotions can make it difficult for parties to communicate
effectively and work toward a resolution. On the other hand, emotions can also
motivate parties to work harder to find a mutually acceptable solution. Skilled
ADR professionals can help parties manage their emotions and work toward a
resolution that meets their needs.
V.
Conclusion-
In any law of the Land, be it kings who handled it in
the olden days. Now the common law judicial setup, the person adjudicating is
formed on his own over the years, and the point shouldn't be forgotten that he
is a part of the society too, and he is, at last, a human. The purpose of this paper
was to portray that although the decree provided shall be done after hearing
both sides of the case by Judge A, the approach which Judge B had taken would
have been different in the same matter. Such is the way how more or less it
works in real-life courts, and people have to start accepting that alternate
approaches to justice must be considered seriously, where the scope for
emotions is not downtrodden.
[1] Judging, Emotion and Emotion Work. (2018, January 24).
Instituto Internacional De Sociología Jurídica De Oñati.
https://www.iisj.net/en/workshops/judging-emotion-and-emotion-work
[3] Snider, K. M., Devereux, P. G., & Miller, M. K. (2021, April
27). Judges’ emotion: an application of the emotion regulation process model.
PubMed Central (PMC). https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2021.1904454
[4] Mental Health in the Legal Profession - Minority Corporate
Counsel Association. (n.d.). Minority Corporate Counsel Association.
https://mcca.com/mcca-article/mental-health-in-the-legal-profession/
Article Information
EMOTIONS OF THE JUDICIARY- DO THEY PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE? A DESCRIPTIVE STUDY
Authors: EASHWAR B K
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/04/25
- Volume 2
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.