意见问题:评估个人司法意见在国际刑事法院的作用

Kyra Wigard
{"title":"意见问题:评估个人司法意见在国际刑事法院的作用","authors":"Kyra Wigard","doi":"10.1163/15718123-bja10144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis article takes a closer look at the individual opinions of judges at the International Criminal Court (icc). The issuance of separate opinions is one of the most effective ways to investigate individual judicial behaviour, because a judge will only issue opinions if in her/his estimation the benefits outweigh the costs. The number of opinions a judge issues is an important measurement as is their timing. Building on an original dataset, the article identifies patterns by uncovering the predominant issuers, the cases and trial phases where individual opinions are most frequently issued, the dominant topics, and developments over time. Using a probabilistic topic modelling approach, this article suggests that opinions are a common way for several icc judges to engage in judicial politics about several topics with limited judicial restraint and finds that a small group of judges is most avid in using opinions as a judicial tool.","PeriodicalId":55966,"journal":{"name":"International Criminal Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Matter of Opinion: Assessing the Role of Individual Judicial Opinions at the International Criminal Court\",\"authors\":\"Kyra Wigard\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718123-bja10144\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis article takes a closer look at the individual opinions of judges at the International Criminal Court (icc). The issuance of separate opinions is one of the most effective ways to investigate individual judicial behaviour, because a judge will only issue opinions if in her/his estimation the benefits outweigh the costs. The number of opinions a judge issues is an important measurement as is their timing. Building on an original dataset, the article identifies patterns by uncovering the predominant issuers, the cases and trial phases where individual opinions are most frequently issued, the dominant topics, and developments over time. Using a probabilistic topic modelling approach, this article suggests that opinions are a common way for several icc judges to engage in judicial politics about several topics with limited judicial restraint and finds that a small group of judges is most avid in using opinions as a judicial tool.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Criminal Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Criminal Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-bja10144\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-bja10144","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文将进一步探讨国际刑事法院(icc)法官的个人意见。单独发表意见是调查个人司法行为的最有效方法之一,因为法官只有在其估计收益大于成本时才会发表意见。法官发表意见的数量和时间都是一个重要的衡量标准。本文以原始数据集为基础,通过揭示主要的发行方、个人意见最常发表的案例和审判阶段、主要主题以及随着时间的发展,确定了模式。本文运用概率话题建模方法,认为意见是国际刑事法院法官在有限的司法约束下就若干话题参与司法政治的常见方式,并发现一小部分法官最热衷于将意见作为司法工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Matter of Opinion: Assessing the Role of Individual Judicial Opinions at the International Criminal Court
This article takes a closer look at the individual opinions of judges at the International Criminal Court (icc). The issuance of separate opinions is one of the most effective ways to investigate individual judicial behaviour, because a judge will only issue opinions if in her/his estimation the benefits outweigh the costs. The number of opinions a judge issues is an important measurement as is their timing. Building on an original dataset, the article identifies patterns by uncovering the predominant issuers, the cases and trial phases where individual opinions are most frequently issued, the dominant topics, and developments over time. Using a probabilistic topic modelling approach, this article suggests that opinions are a common way for several icc judges to engage in judicial politics about several topics with limited judicial restraint and finds that a small group of judges is most avid in using opinions as a judicial tool.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Thus there is also a need for criminological, sociological and historical research on the issues of ICL. The Review publishes in-depth analytical research that deals with these issues. The analysis may cover: • the substantive and procedural law on the international level; • important cases from national jurisdictions which have a bearing on general issues; • criminological and sociological; and, • historical research.
期刊最新文献
Positive Complementarity in Action: International Criminal Justice and the Ongoing Armed Conflict in Ukraine International Criminal Law, Complementarity and Amnesty Within the Context of Transitional Justice: Lessons from Uganda Atrocity Crime Responses in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Navigating Tensions in Multifaceted Approaches Trajectories of Contestation: Motivational Dynamics in Repressive Regimes Corruption: From International Law and Ethics to Realpolitik and Amoralism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1