ANALYSIS OF THE INFLUENCE OF NON-LEGAL FACTORS ON COURT DECISIONS Текст научной статьи по специальности «Право»

УДК 347.962

ANALYSIS OF THE INFLUENCE OF NON-LEGAL FACTORS ON COURT DECISIONS

Dzhangarashev Rolan Maratovich

Deputy Director of the Institute of legislation and legal information of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Nur-Sultan, Republic of Kazakhstan, e-mail: dzhangarashev.r@zqai.kz

Keywords: judgement, judge's decision, influence on court decisions, racism', decision-making processes.

Abstract. Judicial decision making has been a subject of studies, by scholars, for decades. There are two main branches of such studies. First, legal formalism and its supporters who base decision making process ofjudges on logical reasoning, law, and processes bound by rules.

On the other study is legal realism, supporting arguments that judicial decision making process is not bound by rules and rarely logical. Instead legal realism emphasises on intuitive aspect of decision making.

In the United States legal realism highlighted significance of non-legal aspects in judicial decision making process such as economic, social and political considerations. Influence of various factors on judge s decision take place before considering the law. In other words, judge first identifies the decision towards client, shortly thereafter use legal instruments to support the decision that has been made. In this circumstances, it can be suggested that studies of legal realism probably as important as controversial in judicature.

One of such controversial studies recently carried out by Danzigera and Levavb. They recorded sequential parole decisions over thousand rulings made by eight Jewish-Israeli judges. The aim was to identify whether extraneous variables affects judicial rulings in granting parole or excepting status quo by rejecting the parole request.

The result shows that chances of granting favourable rulings is higher after lunch break and at the beginning of the day. In contrast, after large number of granted in favour rulings, likelihoods of denying the request increases. Although ironically drown by authors caricature that justice is "what the judge ate for breakfast" raises an important question on whether judicial decisions can be influenced by non-legal consideration or not, it seems some non-legal factors such as race might indeed unconsciously have an influence on judges' decision.

On order to answer to this question, the paper will first define theoretical aspects of decisionmaking processes, described in dual process theory. Second, it will examine empirical studies conducted on racial biases in judicial decision making, and provide an example of such racial biases in Jaba s case. The final part of this paper will include recommendations for further research.

ц¥к;ык;тык; емес факторлардьщ сот

ШЕШ1МДЕР1НЕ ЭСЕР1Н ТАЛДАУ Ролан Марат^лы Жангарашев

Казацстан Республжасынъщ Зацнама жэне цуцыцтыц ацпарат институты директорыныц орынбасары, Казахстан Республикасы, Нур-Султан ц., e-mail: dzhangarashev.r@zqai.kz

TyUw свздер: YKiM, судьяныц шешiмi, сот шешiмдерiне дсерi, нэсшшшдж, шешiм цабылдау процестерi.

Аннотация. Сот шешiмдерiн цабылдау галымдардыц ондаган жылдар бойы ЖYргiзген зерттеулершц тацырыбы болып табылады. Мундай зерттеулердщ ею негiзгi багыты бар. Бiрiншi, судьялардыц шешiм цабылдау процест логикалыц пайымдауларга, зацдарга ждне цагидалармен байланысты процестерге негiздейтiн цуцыцтыц формализм ждне оныц жацта-ушылары.

Екiншi, сот шешiмдерiн цабылдау процеЫ цагидалармен байланысты емес ждне цисынды екендт сирек болатыны туралы ддлелдердi растайтын цуцыцтыц реализм болып табыла-тын зерттеулер. Оныц орнына цуцыцтыц реализм шешiм цабылдаудыц интуитивтi аспек-тшне назар аударады.

Америка Курама Штаттарында цуцыцтыц реализм экономикалыц, длеуметтт ждне са-яси кезцарастар сияцты сот шешiмдерiн цабылдау процестде цуцыцтыц емес аспектшердщ

мацыздылыгын атап emmí. Судьяныц шештте дртYрлi факторлардыц dcepi зац царалганга дешн болады. Басцаша айтцанда, судья алдымен клиентке цатысты шeшiмдi айцындайды, содан кешн кеп узамай цабылданган шeшiмдi цолдау ушт цуцыцтыц цуралдарды пайдалана-ды. Мундай жагдайларда цуцыцтыц peализмдi зерттеу зац практикасындагы полемика си-яцты мацызды деп болжауга болады.

Осындай царама-цайшылыцты зерттеулердщ бipiн сeгiз израильдж судья шартты mYp-де мерзгмтен бурын босату туралы шыгарган мыцнан астам ддйeкmi цаулыны айцындаган Данзигер мен Левавб ЖYpгiзгeн. Мацсаты сыртцы езгермелшердщ шартты mYpдe мерзгмтен бурын босату туралы сурау салуды цабылдамау арцылы шартты mYpдe мерзгмшен бурын босату немесе статус-квоны жою туралы сот шeшiмдepiнe дсер ететшн айцындау болды.

Ндтиже туст Yзiлiсmeн кешн ждне куннщ бipiншi жартысында оц шеш\м цабылдау мумктдг жогары екенш кеpсemeдi. Кер1с1нше, пайдасына шыгарылган кептеген шeшiмдep-ден кешн сурау салуды цабылдамау ыцтималдыгы артады. Бip цызыгы, авторлар кeлeмeждi турде сот терелт - бул «судьяныц тацгы асца жейтт тамагы» деп санаса да, сот шeшiм-дepi бурыс кезцарастарга байланысты болуы мYмкiн бе, жоц па деген мацызды мдселеш кетередг, бграц ндст сияцты кеü6íp зацсыз факторлар шынымен де судьялардыц шeшiмiнe ойланбастан дсер emуi мYмкiн едг.

Бул сурацца жауап беру Yшiн мацалада алдымен цосарланган процестер теориясында сипатталган шеш\м цабылдау процестернц теориялыц аспeкmiлepi айцындалатын болады. Ектшгден, сот шеш1мдер1н цабылдау кезтде тер\с тусшк тудыруы мYмкiн ндстдЫ кезца-растарды эмпирикалыц зерттеу царастырылады. Бул цужаттыц соцгы белг dpi царай зерттеу ЖYpгiзу Yшiн усынымдарды цамтиды.

АНАЛИЗ ВЛИЯНИЯ НЕПРАВОВЫХ ФАКТОРОВ НА СУДЕБНЫЕ РЕШЕНИЯ

Джангарашев Ролан Маратович

Заместитель директора Института законодательства и правовой информации Республики Казахстан, Республика Казахстан, г. Нур-Султан, e-mail: dzhangarashev.r@zqai.kz

Ключевые слова: приговор, решение судьи, влияние на судебные решения, расизм, процессы принятия решений.

Аннотация. Принятие судебных решений является предметом исследований ученых на протяжении десятилетий. Есть два основных направления таких исследований.

Первое, правовой формализм и его сторонники, которые основывают процесс принятия решений судьями на логических рассуждениях, законах и процессах, связанных правилами.

Второе, исследования представляющие собой правовой реализм, подтверждающие аргументы в пользу того, что процесс принятия судебных решений не связан правилами и редко бывает логичным. Вместо этого правовой реализм делает упор на интуитивном аспекте принятия решений.

В Соединенных Штатах Америки правовой реализм подчеркнул важность неправовых аспектов в процессе принятия судебных решений, таких как экономические, социальные и политические соображения. Влияние различных факторов на решение судьи происходит до рассмотрения закона. Другими словами, судья сначала определяет решение в отношении клиента, а вскоре после этого использует правовые инструменты для поддержки принятого решения. В этих условиях можно предположить, что исследования правового реализма, вероятно, столь же важны, как и полемика в юридической практике.

Одно из таких противоречивых исследований, проведено Данзигером и Левавбом, которые зафиксировали более тысячи последовательных постановлений об условно-досрочном освобождении вынесенных восемью израильскими судьями. Цель состояла в том, чтобы определить, влияют ли посторонние переменные на судебные решения об условно-досрочном освобождении или исключении статус-кво путем отклонения запроса об условно-досрочном освобождении.

Результат показывает, что шансы на вынесение положительного решения выше после обеденного перерыва и в начале дня. Напротив, после большого количества вынесенных в пользу решений вероятность отклонения запроса возрастает. Хотя по иронии судьбы авторы карикатурно утверждают, что правосудие - это «то, что судья ел на завтрак», поднимает важный вопрос о том, могут ли судебные решения зависеть от неправовых соображений или нет, похоже, что некоторые неправовые факторы, такие как раса, действительно могли

бессознательно влияние на решение судей.

Чтобы ответить на этот вопрос, в статье сначала будут определены теоретические аспекты процессов принятия решений, описанных в теории двойственных процессов. Во-вторых, в нем будут рассмотрены эмпирические исследования расовых предубеждений при принятии судебных решений. Заключительная часть этого документа будет включать рекомендации для дальнейших исследований.

The answer to the question on whether nonlegal facts might influence or affect judicial decision making can be found in psychology. Understanding of cerebrum capacity and activities in decision making began in 1969 with surveying mathematicians and psychologists in America [1]. Participants answered real questions on robustness of statistical calculation. The results revealed that participants placed overconfidence on small samples while judgments on statistics were less sensitive to the size of a sample [1]. Participants with mathematical abilities were better in comparison to psychology ones and used two different approaches. The one is fast, intuitive, impulsive, and effortless, and the other is slower, governed by rule, effortful, and deliberate [1]. These approaches known as dual process theory. Later these approaches systemised into two systems (system one and system two) and signified in many fields such as psychology, economics, medicine, and law.

The Nobel prize recipient on this topic Kahneman and his associate Frederick explained system one as fast, automatic, revolutionary developed, unconscious, and associative [2]. Kahneman stresses that system one is efficient, almost effortless, and effective at its functioning. However, system one is likely to be disposed to consistent errors in decision making and cognitive biases. Furthermore, it is luck lack of reasoning skills, understanding of statistics and rarely logic and above all, it does not turn off [3]. In these circumstances system two, which it is slower, logical, reasoned and rational, monitors system one and correct it when it is necessary. Authors asserts that both systems function well with each other [3]. In other words, system one rapidly process the judgement for the problem or a question, after which system two assess the quality of the judgement and correct, develop or reject where necessary. Thus, if system two will not override judgements made by system one, the final processed answer will be called - intuitive [3].

Nevertheless, it has been suggested that system two is not always effective in monitoring. It may fail to correct system one's judgement or be unaware that system one has made such a mistake [4]. Tumonis, points out that system one is constant in its operation and does not turn off, and by virtue of slow functioning of system two, it is unrealistic that it will always correct system one. As a result, most of the decisions will be made by system one [3].

This assumption is best tested through the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) developed by Chris Guthrie. It includes following questions:

"(a) A bat and a ball cost $1.10 in total. The bat costs a dollar more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?_cents

(b) If it takes 5 machines 5 min to make 5 widgets, how long would it take 100 machines to make 100 widgets?_min

(c) In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, how long would it take for the patch to cover half of the lake?_days" [5].

Generally, the outcome of this test shows that most participants' instant and intuitive answers to these sets of questions are usually incorrect [5]. This could be contributed to the system one, and failure of the system two to supervise and evaluate the judgement. Interestingly, in the judicatory field, CRT was tested on judges from Florida state. Unsurprisingly, outcome of the results indicated that only 15% of tested judges correctly answered all three questions, and general score was only 1.23 points out of 3.00 [3]. The CRT illustrates that judges are inclined for cognitive errors as same as ordinary subjects of the test.

Thus, it can be suggested that both systems might compete with each other for control over responses. As such, it could lead to biases and errors in judgemental processes. Notably, biases in judgement occur when both systems one and system two fails to produce valuable judgement [1]. As a result of functioning and shortcomings of both systems, it can be suggested that, unconscious biases in judges' decision making processes can be on a ground for nonlegal influences. Although such biases could be economic, political or cultural, in the scope of this essay racial biases will be considered in the following section.

Unconscious racism

In the theory, it has been suggested that biases are related to implicit cognition where a person does not usually have internal control or a conscious over motivated judgments on perceptions or impression of social formation

[6]. Thus, it is known that implicit biases appears through the phenomenon defined as priming

[7]. According to Levinson and Smith, priming evokes stimulus affected by different tasks [7]. In other words, if a person has been asked to consider particular issue, priming triggers network of

knowledge related to the issue. Although the theory of priming is not the concern of this paper, it can be suggested that unconsciously evoked knowledge may have an effect on decisions making process. As such, it seems there is a possibility that such unconscious implicit biases, which in the scope of current paper is racial biases, can be postulated as non-legal consideration in decision making. The numerous empirical studies in America confirmed that individuals indeed might have unconscious biases, or as Armour defines 'unconscious racism', in their judgments.

One of such studies conducted by Payne revealed racial biases among white undergraduate students [8]. The study used two pictures of Black and White male, and two pictures of weapon and hand tool. Pictures of Black and White males were flashed for a short period of time (200 ms), followed by pictures of weapon and hand tools. The results showed that participants were much faster in detecting weapons after Black male pictures compared to White male pictures [8]. The emphasis here is that individuals are likely to be disposed to automatic and unconscious racial biases. One might argue that the results of this studies might not be applicable in judicatory.

However, Chew and Kelley studied over 400 cases on racial harassment ruled by 256 African American and White judges across United States from 1981 and 2003 [9]. The profound results of the study indicated that when White judge is ruling, African American plaintiff, against whom White American committed harassment, have only 22 per cent of success to win the case. Contrary to these findings is that, if the judge is African American, this percentage for those plaintiffs increases to 46. Generally, it indicates that Black plaintiffs 3.3 times more likely to succeed in the case when African American judges are ruling the case [9]. As a result, it can be suggested that judges can be influences by nonlegal consideration triggered from unconscious personal perceptions.

Notably, there are some cases, in which racial biases were apparently inconsistent with other legal facts, and resulted in conviction of an innocent person. The case of Farah A. Jama could be a bright illustration [10]. Jaba, who was nineteen years old Somali-Australian, was convicted of a rape in 2008. The facts of the case are that, complainant (white female) found unconscious in the toilet of the nightclub in suburban area of Melbourne, who allegedly was raped. Suspected in the crime, the only evidence against Jaba was that his DNA matched to the sample from the victim's body. The crime was conducted in the area predominantly occupied

by white individuals'. Furthermore, none of the other facts directly indicated Jaba's guiltiness. There was no footage from surveillance cameras, personal of the night club did not recall Jabas presence, no fingerprints, and any other records [10]. Hence, the court ignored the absence of convincing legal evidences, and sentences black male person, suspected for conducting a crime in the area occupied by white individuals. It seems that racial biases or 'unconscious racism' is an influential non legal factor that might negatively impact on judicial decisions.

In relation to Kazakhstan, subject of this study is unique. Thus, the analysis of scientific works of Kazakhstans scientists regarding nonlegal factors that influence on decision making, it becomes obvious that in Kazakhstan there are no such carried studies.

Basically, research of domestic legal scholars is carried out within the framework of the project of the Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan Zhakip Asanov entitled "7 stones of the judicial system" (Justice, Responsibility and independence, Effectiveness of justice, Administrative justice, Investigative judges, Competence of judges and Digitalization). Undoubtedly, these principles should bring the country's judicial system to a new level of development.

However, these rather general principles do not cover issues related to the influence of nonlegal factors on decision making in judicature.

It is worth noting that such non-legal factors as emotional state, mood, conviction, gender, race or nationality of the defendant and even the judge himself affect the judges' decisions.

Conclusion

Controversial studies and empirical evidences collected by supporters of legal realism theory suggests that biases might be the main influence for inaccurately carried decisions in judicatory system. Attributed to the dual process theory such decisions proved to be unconscious and rarely noticeable as in individuals as in judges' decision making processes. Ideally, justice have to be blind to maters of race, as such, judges should not be influenced by unconscious cognitive factors that affect decision making. After all, justice is not 'what judge had for a breakfast'. Therefore, it can be suggested that more empirical studies, joint by both psychologist and legal academics, should be done for better understanding and developing the strategies that will contribute to issues of avoiding influences of non-legal factors on judicial judgments. Such joint collaboration psychologist and legal academics, particularly, could contribute to Kazakhstan as well.

REFERENCES

1. Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin and Daniel Kahneman (eds), '.Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment' (2002) Cambridge University Press.

2. Jonathan St BTEvans, '.How Many Dual-Process Theories Do We Need? One, Two, or Many?' in Jonathan Evans and Keith Frankish (eds), 'In two minds: Dual processes and beyond' (2009) Oxford University Press.

3. Vitalius Tumonis, Mykolas Savelskis and Inga Zalyte, 'Judicial Decision-Making From An Empirical Perspective' (2013) 6 Baltic Journal of Law & Politics n/a.

4. Keith E Stanovich, 'Distinguishing the Reflective, Algorithmic, and Autonomous Minds: Is It Time for a Tri-Process Theory?' in Jonathan Evans and Keith Frankish (eds), 'In two minds: Dual processes and beyond' (2009) Oxford University Press.

5. Maggie E Toplak, Richard F West and Keith E Stanovich, 'The Cognitive Reflection Test as a Predictor of Performance on Heuristics-and-Biases Tasks' (2011) 39 Memory & Cognition p.1277.

6. Yulia Sergei Nadya Tataina Koublitskaia, 'The Relationship between Legal and Extra-Legal Factors: How Judges Come to Make Their Decisions in Domestic Violence Cases' (2012) University of New Orleans.

7. Justin D Levinson and Robert J Smith (eds), 'Implicit Racial Bias Across the Law' (2012) Cambridge University Press.

8. B Keith Payne, 'Prejudice and Perception: The Role of Automatic and Controlled Processes in Misperceiving a Weapon.' (2001) 81 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 181.

9. Pat K Chew and Robert E Kelley, 'Myth of the Color-Blind Judge: An Empirical Analysis of Racial Harassment Cases' (2008) 86 Washington University Law Review 1117.

10. Emma Cunliffe, 'Judging, Fast and Slow: Using Decision-Making Theory to Explore Judicial Fact Determination' (2014) 18 The International Journal of Evidence & Proof 139.

УДК 342.4

ГОСУДАРСТВЕННЫЕ УСЛУГИ КАК ФОРМА РЕАЛИЗАЦИИ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННЫХ ФУНКЦИЙ ОБЕСПЕЧЕНИЯ ПРАВ И ЗАКОННЫХ ИНТЕРЕСОВ ФИЗИЧЕСКИХ И ЮРИДИЧЕСКИХ ЛИЦ

Нургазинов Багдат Кабылкадырович

Руководитель отдела конституционного, административного законодательства и государственного управления Института законодательства и правовой информации Республики Казахстан, кандидат юридических наук, г. Нур-Султан, Республика Казахстан; e-mail: nurgazinov@list.ru

Жанузакова Лейла Тельмановна

Главный научный сотрудник отдела конституционного, административного законодательства и государственного управления Института законодательства и правовой информации Республики Казахстан, профессор Университета «ТУРАН», д.ю.н. профессор e-mail: zhanleila@mail.ru

Караев Алипаша Агаханович

Главный научный сотрудник отдела конституционного, административного законодательства и государственного управления Института законодательства и правовой информации Республики Казахстан, к.ю.н., профессор ВШП «Адилет» Каспийского университета. e-mail: ali_agahan@mail.ru

Ключевые слова: Государственное управление, государственная услуга, публичная услуга, административная реформа, функции государственного управления.

Аннотация. Статья посвящена вопросам совершенствования предоставления государственных услуг как важнейшей функции в сфере государственного управления и условия повышения её эффективности.

Реформирование системы, принципов и методов государственного управления по мнению авторов является важнейшей задачей государства, которая направлена на реализацию кон-