The Authentic Judge: French Existentialism and the Judicial Role

Jonathan Crowe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

102 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This article draws on the writings of the French existentialist philosopher
Jean-Paul Sartre to offer some insights about the judicial role. It begins by
exploring the existentially burdensome character of judging, making
reference to Sartre’s discussions of anguish and the moment of decision.
The article then examines why different judges approach the demands of
their role in contrasting ways, drawing on Sartre’s analysis of various forms
of bad faith [mauvaise foi]. The article concludes by sketching an ideal model
of the authentic judge, based on Sartre’s discussion of authentic love (or
‘love in the world’). The authentic judge accepts responsibility for her
decisions, without disclaiming her authority or denying the contingent nature
of her position. She recognises her inherent fallibility, while nonetheless
saying: ‘this is what I have chosen’.


Judges have a difficult and important job to do on behalf of the community.
Much ink has been spilt on how the judiciary should best approach its role.1
Fortunately, however, we need look no further for guidance on this question
than the writings of the French existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre.
Sartre offers us a compelling explanation of, first, what makes the judicial role
so difficult; second, why different judges approach the demands of the role in
contrasting ways; and, third, how the job should ideally be done. That, at any
rate, is what I propose to argue.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)41-48
JournalAustralian Bar Review
Volume47
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The Authentic Judge: French Existentialism and the Judicial Role'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this