No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Judging and Judgment in Contemporary Asia: Editor’s Introduction to this Special Issue
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 October 2021
Abstract
Although the figure of the wise judge may be a universal trope, respect is not automatically accorded every person who passes judgment on another. To be perceived as legitimate, judges must occupy an institutional status with the power to decide controverted cases and must have access to specialized or even sacred knowledge and moral authority. Historically, Asian judges could claim legitimacy through their connection to transcendent legal principles, such as dhamma or dao or shari’a. In contemporary Asia, however, conceptions of law and legal legitimacy have become pluralistic, contested, and contradictory. Judges may to some extent retain a connection to the sacred and the transcendent, yet that connection is no longer sufficient in itself to insulate their judgments—or their character—from criticism. How, then, can the “good judge” be distinguished from judges who fall short of the mark? In this Special Issue, five distinguished scholars explore the crisis of legitimation as it affects judging and judgment in Sri Lanka, India, China, Indonesia, and Thailand.
- Type
- Judging and Judgment in Contemporary Asia
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Asian Journal of Law and Society
References
REFERENCES
Baker, Chris, & Phongpaichit, Pasuk, trans. and ed. (2016) The Palace Law of Ayutthaya and the Thammasat: Law and Kingship in Siam, Ithaca, NY: Southeast Asia Program Publications, Cornell University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butt, Simon (2021) “What Makes a Good Judge? Perspectives from Indonesia.” Asian Journal of Law and Society [this issue].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Das Acevedo, Deepa (2021) “From Mythic Saviors to #MeToo.” Asian Journal of Law and Society [this issue].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm M. (1979) The Process Is the Punishment: Handling Cases in a Lower Criminal Court, New York: Russel Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Lammerts, D. Christian (2018) Buddhist Law in Burma: A History of Dhammasattha Texts and Jurisprudence, 1250–1850, Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lincoln, Bruce (1997) “Competing Discourses: Rethinking the Prehistory of ‘Mythos’ and ‘Logos.’” 30 Arethusa 341–67.Google Scholar
Lingat, Robert (1959) “Evolution of the Conception of Law in Burma and Siam.” 38 Journal of the Siam Society 9–31.Google Scholar
McCargo, Duncan (2021) “Punitive Processes? Judging in Thai Lower Criminal Courts.” Asian Journal of Law and Society [this issue].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ng, Kwai Hang, & Chan, Peter C. H. (2021) “’What Gets Measured Gets Done’: Metric Fixation and China’s Experiment of Quantified Judging.” Asian Journal of Law and Society [this issue].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salim, Arskal (2008) Challenging the Secular State: The Islamization of Law in Modern Indonesia, Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar
Schonthal, Benjamin (2021) “Judging in the Buddha’s Court: A Buddhist Judicial System in Contemporary Asia.” Asian Journal of Law and Society [this issue].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, James C. (1998) Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Thammasat University (2005) Kotmai tra 3 duang: Chabap phim mahawithayalai wichathammasat lae kanmuang kaekhaiprapprungmai, Bangkok: Sathaban Pridi Phanomyong.Google Scholar