Realism in Criminal Decision Making

Judicial decision-making, regardless of whether it should be fair and in accordance with the rules and regulations, is influenced by various factors such as the inadequacy of the set of rules and legal rules to answer all issues, lawsuits, attitudes and personality of the judiciary, judicial expediency. Judicial decision-making is the perception and reading of a judge as a human being from the text of the law; Because the law is fixed after approval, but society is faced with various changes and developments. Accordingly, in the face of the slow performance of the legislature, social, economic, and cultural issues are rapidly changing. In the meantime, it is the judge who adapts the law to the existing facts to the best of his ability and makes decisions. The main purpose of the present article, which is a descriptive-analytical research and is based on documentary method, in addition to reviewing and rethinking theories of formalism and realism, examining the contexts and manifestations of judges' tendency to realism and avoiding formalism in decision. The question is, should judges in judicial decision-making in criminal matters pay attention to the facts and the fairness of the sentences, or should they enforce the laws unquestioningly? Therefore, after examining the theories of formalism and realism, we turn to the fields of tendency of judges to realism in criminal decision making and the manifestations of this tendency in criminal decision making.