The Study Of Judges’ Responsibility Of Misjudged Cases

The basis of the judges’ responsibility of misjudged cases lies in the certainty of law and the theory of the only correct answer. By means of the uncertainty of rules and fact finding, realistic jurisprudence launch attacks to formalism jurisprudence, in order to make their theories negative. At the same time, new analytical jurisprudence suggests the discretionary power for judges, because of the vacant structure of legal language. When dealing with complicated cases, judges are often unable to give out the only correct answer, and they need the discretionary power to ensure the rationality of the judgment.Despite all sorts of skepticism, Dworkin believes that legal principles and policy can also be used to handle complicated cases and provide enough support to judges to get only correct answer. And the problem of legal uncertainty can also be solved by setting rules and legal explanation. In Dworkin’s point of view, whether it is the only correct answer depends on the positive influence to the juridical practice, after being used in similar cases.In terms of the present juridical practice, there is a lack of a unified system design, the role definition of the executing agency is not clear, and the accountability procedure is also in chaos. The author suggests that it should be the first step to identify the meaning of misjudged cases specifically, then to formulate the unified responsibility system and standardize accountability procedures. Also, the executing agency should be independent of the court system to ensure the responsibility objective and fair.