Assessing Randomness in Case Assignment: The Case Study of the Brazilian Supreme Court.

Law, Probability and Risk 18 (2/3):97-114 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Sortition, i.e. random appointment for public duty, has been employed by societies throughout the years as a firewall designated to prevent illegitimate interference between parties in a legal case and agents of the legal system. In judicial systems of modern western countries, random procedures are mainly employed to select the jury, the court and/or the judge in charge of judging a legal case. Therefore, these random procedures play an important role in the course of a case, and should comply with some principles, such as transparency and complete auditability. Nevertheless, these principles are neglected by random procedures in some judicial systems, which are performed in secrecy and are not auditable by the involved parties. The assignment of cases in the Brazilian Supreme Court is an example of such a procedure, for it is performed using procedures unknown to the parties involved in the judicial cases. This article presents a review of how sortition has been historically employed by societies and discusses how Mathematical Statistics may be applied to random procedures of the judicial system, as it has been applied for almost a century on clinical trials, for example. A statistical model for assessing randomness in case assignment is proposed and applied to the Brazilian Supreme Court. As final remarks, guidelines for the development of good randomization procedures are outlined.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Selective abortion in Brazil: The anencephaly case.Debora Diniz - 2007 - Developing World Bioethics 7 (2):64–67.
Higher Courts.Adam Potthast - 2007 - Teaching Ethics 8 (1):121-124.
Michael H. v. Gerald D.: A Case Study of Political Ideology Disguised in Legal Thought.Jeffrey A. Ellsworth - 2009 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 22 (1):105-122.
Evidence, Persuasion and Diversity.Derek Allen - 2020 - Informal Logic 40 (2):237-254.
Tenth Circuit Upholds BC/BS's Anti-Assignment Provisions.K. M. - 1996 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 24 (1):72-73.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-07-23

Downloads
293 (#66,551)

6 months
102 (#38,391)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Julio Michael Stern
University of São Paulo

Citations of this work

Color-Coded Epistemic Modes in a Jungian Hexagon of Opposition.Julio Michael Stern - 2022 - In Jean-Yves Beziau & Ioannis Vandoulakis (eds.), The Exoteric Square of Opposition. Birkhauser. pp. 303-332.
Randomization and Fair Judgment in Law and Science.Julio Michael Stern - 2020 - In Jose Acacio de Barros & Decio Krause (eds.), A True Polymath: A Tribute to Francisco Antonio Doria. College Publications. pp. 399-418.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference.Judea Pearl - 2000 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference.Judea Pearl - 2000 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 64 (1):201-202.
On small differences in sensation.C. S. Peirce & Joseph Jastrow - 1884 - Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences 3:75-83.
The cathedral and the bazaar.Eric Raymond - 1999 - Knowledge, Technology & Policy 12 (3):23-49.

View all 8 references / Add more references