64 • Trial by Jury.
This is a very particular time in the history of institutions in the Argentine Republic. Citizens are looking intently at the Judiciary. Trials are under the scrutiny of the mass media, while there are some who decide to take justice on their own hands. These problems must be subject to a critical a...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo revista |
| Lenguaje: | Español Inglés |
| Publicado: |
Secretaría Académica | UNR
2016
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | http://www.e-universitas.edu.ar/index.php/journal/article/view/149 |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | This is a very particular time in the history of institutions in the Argentine Republic. Citizens are looking intently at the Judiciary. Trials are under the scrutiny of the mass media, while there are some who decide to take justice on their own hands. These problems must be subject to a critical analysis. What is the reason behind this confusion? Why this lack of understanding? How and when can we begin to understand one another? We, the judges, usually work in silence, and we have not been able to properly communicate to others the task we undertake daily. The decisions we make are usually only understood by few people, due to the intricacies of the technical language or else due to the way in which they are explained. The choice of turning to trials by jury implies a Copernican change in the way we make justice. It is not a panacea and it does not generate clarity, comprehension or a legitimization of decisions if it is not accompanied by an all-embracing unequivocal vision. It means a different way of making justice, and it is linked to a way of thinking other than the inquisitorial one we are used to, heir to the colony and clearly favored by our Constitution since 1853. |
|---|