SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.29 issue2Palestine vs. the United States before the International Court of Justice author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Díkaion

Print version ISSN 0120-8942On-line version ISSN 2027-5366

Abstract

ETCHEVERRY, Juan B.. Judicial Formalism, Activism, and Discretion. Díkaion [online]. 2020, vol.29, n.2, pp.336-351.  Epub Apr 12, 2021. ISSN 0120-8942.  https://doi.org/10.5294/dika.2020.29.2.1.

This article seeks to explain why the terms judicial “formalism” and “activism” are often used as antagonistic ways of discrediting judicial activity. Thus, it will be necessary to clarify that they have different meanings in diverse legal-professional contexts and even carry more than one meaning in the same context. However, this time we will focus on elucidating their pejorative sense. Then, we will argue that both terms, in some cases, are belittling because they identify ways of understanding the judicial function that do not take two essential elements-generally considered valuable-of current Western legal systems seriously: fundamental rights and democratic laws. Finally, we propose an alternative model to understand judicial activity compatible with these elements.

Keywords : Legal technicality; judicial decisionism; judicial arbitrariness; constitutional review; judicial determination of law.

        · abstract in Spanish | Portuguese     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )