IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/asr/journl/v6y2016ispecialp128-138.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Values and ethical principles for practicing as magistrate/legal advisor out of the perspective of the codes and national and international statements of principles

Author

Listed:
  • Martian Iovan

    (Faculty of Law, “Vasile Goldis” Western University of Arad, Romania)

Abstract

The coordinating and regulating role of the moral values, of the Deontological Code in practicing the magistrate/ legal advisor position is analysed in this article, so that their decisions correspond the universal imperative of practical accomplishment of justice, implicitly to the audience’s expectations with regard to the efficiency and efficacy of the services delivered by the institutions in the judicial system. The subject is of obvious actuality, fact which results in the existence of a relevant number of cases of violation, deforming of the ethical principles, of the specific deontological norms for the legal advisors, especially for the magistrates, which occur in performing the act of justice. The author highlights through examples, the harmful effects of some magistrates’ side-slipping from the ethical principles (Independence, Impartiality, Integrity) stipulated in the most important deontological codes, statements of principles or national and international conventions. The logical conclusion, resulting from the analyses, aims to perfection the judicial system, the moral part of the legal higher education, of the magistrates’ continuous training and assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Martian Iovan, 2016. "Values and ethical principles for practicing as magistrate/legal advisor out of the perspective of the codes and national and international statements of principles," Juridical Tribune - Review of Comparative and International Law, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, vol. 6(Special), pages 128-138, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:asr:journl:v:6:y:2016:i:special:p:128-138
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://tribunajuridica.eu/arhiva/An6v2/8%20Iovan.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maya Sen, 2015. "Is Justice Really Blind? Race and Reversal in US Courts," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(S1), pages 187-229.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bernardo Guimaraes & Bruno Meyerhof Salama, 2023. "Permitting Prohibitions," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 241-271.
    2. Christina L. Boyd & Pauline T. Kim & Margo Schlanger, 2020. "Mapping the Iceberg: The Impact of Data Sources on the Study of District Courts," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), pages 466-492, September.
    3. Sivaram Cheruvu, 2019. "How do institutional constraints affect judicial decision-making? The European Court of Justice’s French language mandate," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(4), pages 562-583, December.
    4. Bernardo Guimaraes & Bruno Meyerhof Salama, 2017. "Contingent Judicial Deference: theory and application to usury laws," Discussion Papers 1729, Centre for Macroeconomics (CFM).
    5. Guimaraesy, Bernardo & Meyerhof Salama, Bruno, 2017. "Contingent judicial deference: theory and application to usury laws," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86146, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Chen, Daniel L. & Sethi, Jasmin, 2016. "Insiders, Outsiders, and Involuntary Unemployment: Sexual Harrassment Exacerbates Gender Inequality," IAST Working Papers 16-44, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    7. Liu, Chelsea, 2020. "Judge political affiliation and impacts of corporate environmental litigation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ethical values; The Bangalore Principles; Independence; Impartiality; Integrity; judicial decision.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K40 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - General
    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:asr:journl:v:6:y:2016:i:special:p:128-138. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catalin-Silviu Sararu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.