The Doctr!ne 0f StaRe Dec!siS
PROs
Often, it is said that the Doctrine of Stare Decisis, also known as Doctrine of Judicial Precedent provides greater legal certainty. Think this way, our common law is backed by a considerable amount of case laws which in turn means that the probable outcome for cases is already provided. Since the problem already has a solution, therefore it is convenient to judges as it saves their effort and time to consider the facts then process the case before reaching a conclusion. Justice in law is of major importance thus fairness can be ensured under this system as similar cases are treated in the same way by refering to previous cases. Furthermore, any misjudgements can be avoided if past cases are used as guidance. As an important source of law, the Doctrine promotes the development of law where new laws are easily formed through the modification of existing laws.
CONs
Though legal certainty is led by the strong foundation underlying our laws, complexity and confusion will also arise parallelly due to the increasing amount of case laws which will caused difficulties in searching for relevant cases. Some who do not support this system argued on the issue of flexibility in which judges are not able to make own judgements as they are abide by the Doctrine. Another saying will be the judge's discretion is limited by this precedent. Hence, there are criticisms that the judicial precedent indeed has lead to system rigidity. If mistakes have been made in past cases, the mistakes will be repeated by the judge that followed the past cases unless the mistakes are corrected when discovered. The development of law is restricted within the border of judicial precedent thus it is hard to create new laws with further scope beyond. However, new laws are needed in order to prevent injustice especially under our changing nature.
0 comments:
Post a Comment