Chapitre 2. La science est-elle un instrument de pouvoir concurrent dans L'exercice de l'activité juridictionnelle ?

Authors

  • Gaëlle Deharo Docteur habilitée à diriger les recherches en droit privé, Gaëlle Deharo est professeur à Reims Management School et membre du centre de recherche sur la justice et le procès de l’Institut André Tunc de l’Université Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne.

Keywords:

science, expertise juridique, legal expert inquiry, scientific appraisal, guilt, judicial action, public opinion

Abstract

The growing complexity of the relations between scientific and judicial logic in procedures raises the question of the modification of the function of judge who, from having a role as decision-maker can find himself restricted to the role of regulator of a mechanism leading to a conclusion which eludes him. On the other hand, the technician, to the same degree, acquires real power over the content of the judicial truth. As a result, in certain areas, scientific knowledge tends to compete with the exercising of jurisdictional activity. However, it would be excessive to deduce resignation on the part of the judge in favour of the technician: the application of the rules of trial to scientific data along with the emergence of guiding principles for the scientific phase allows the judge to instrumentalise knowledge in favour of the fairest solution.

Published

2023-01-29

How to Cite

Gaëlle Deharo. (2023). Chapitre 2. La science est-elle un instrument de pouvoir concurrent dans L’exercice de l’activité juridictionnelle ?. Journal International De bioéthique Et d’éthique Des Sciences, 17(1-2). Retrieved from https://journaleska.com/index.php/jidb/article/view/8437

Issue

Section

Articles