IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/dcu/journl/v9y2015i1p134-146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimization Of Decision Making In Judicial Cases. A Comparative View Between Usa And Romania

Author

Listed:
  • Viorel Sîrca

Abstract

The article has a twofold goal: bringing to light both the advantages and the disadvantages of individual and group decision in juridical cases (the situation of the jurors is considered in the sociological literature as a quasi-natural experiment. The paper analyzes various dimensions and aspects of this topic, including a short history of each model, in order to better understand the reasons why both systems are operating today. The research started from the question: which of these two juridical systems (the American system and the Romanian one) are regarded as more efficient by those who practice law. A series of semi-structured interviews applied to experienced lawyers from both countries focused on: differences perceived between decision-making processes involving a court of jury and a judge vs. judge alone; advantages and disadvantages of each decision making system; weak points of each system; possible changes for the optimization of the decision-making process; and an evaluation of the reaction of the public opinion. The analysis of the data showed that some of the hypotheses were partially valid. In the final part, I discussed the perspectives of the implementation of the decision-making process based on a court of jury in Romania.

Suggested Citation

  • Viorel Sîrca, 2015. "Optimization Of Decision Making In Judicial Cases. A Comparative View Between Usa And Romania," FIAT IUSTITIA, Dimitrie Cantemir Faculty of Law Cluj Napoca, Romania, vol. 9(1), pages 134-146, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:dcu:journl:v:9:y:2015:i:1:p:134-146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://fiatiustitia.ro/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/209-Article-Text-402-1-10-20151105-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:dcu:journl:v:9:y:2015:i:1:p:134-146. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Dimitrie Cantemir Faculty of Law Cluj Napoca, Romania (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://fiatiustitia.ro .

    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.