Report of the First Research Meeting on the Analysis of Judicial Decisions

The court’s judgment as a result of the judicial process, which reflects the arguments for the defense of the parties and the reasoning and argumentative efforts of a judge, should be analyzed and reviewed in depth in the context of legal theories and judicial precedent so that the strengths and weaknesses of each judgment are shown and the reasoning and inference processes of the judicial body of the country is strengthened.This critique and analysis can be performed by judges, lawyers and jurists, taking into account the legal basis, the related articles on statutes and legal principles and refer to both the form and style of making a judgment and the merits, theme and foundation of an argument. Critique and analysis can be in a position of rejection, nullification and negation of the procedural structure or a substantive theme of a judgment or they can be in a position of its approval and confirmation. In other words, criticism and analysis taking into account the judgment subject to review can have positive or negative aspect, as the case may be. Critique and analysis regarding judicial precedent can be related to a judgment handed down by a court or, on a higher level to a case where a judge insists on the validity of his previous decision despite the opinion of the Supreme Court, or even to a binding precedent; it is also possible that the subject matter of critique and analysis be judgments made by judicial or administrative authorities. What is of importance is that critique and analysis regarding judicial precedent, whether with the rejection and negation approach or that of the approval and affirmation, there is a view based on the reform and construction of the judicial procedure.Sometimes critique regarding judicial precedent arises out of criticizing the law; this criticism can eventually lead to the amendment of the law.