LJU4801
Assignment 1 Semester 1 2022
Unique Number:
DOCUMENT PREVIEW
Tsele M “Rights and religion; bias and beliefs: Can a judge speak God?” (2018)
43 (1) Journal for Juridical Sciences 1 – 25.
1. Give a concise summary of the author's viewpoint. Make sure you
concentrate on legal philosophy and not so much legislation. (Max
word count 200.) (5)
2. What theory of interpretation that you have studied is addressed in the
article? Why do you say this? You need to identify
the theory you have studied that is most closely
associated with the author's viewpoint. (Max word
count 500.) (10)
3. Give your own, philosophical response to the
author's viewpoint. Make sure you address all the
author's arguments. (Max word count 200.) (5)
, Give a concise summary of the author's viewpoint. Make sure you
concentrate on legal philosophy and not so much legislation
Tsele deliberates the relationship and apparent tension between a Judge’s
duty to apply the law in a fair and impartial manner and his or her own
personal right to freedom of religion, and the extent to which those religious
views might influence a Judge in the adjudication of disputes.1
According to Tsele, ‘this dictum illustrates that the limitation to Judges
expressing their social views is narrowly interpreted and will, in most
instances, be limited to situations that involve the adjudication of cases’.2
Certainly, what should be clear on a conspectus of all of the above is that a
Judge is a citizen, entitled to hold religious views and entitled to freely
express him or herself so long as it does not compromise the discharge of his
or her judicial duties.
Accordingly, where a Judge holds views, religious or otherwise, this does not,
without more, constitute partiality, inherently compromising their ability to
adjudicate disputes or their ability to discharge their judicial functions.3
What theory of interpretation that you have studied is addressed in the
article? Why do you say this? You need to identify the theory you have
studied that is most closely associated with the author's viewpoint.
Legal positivism is a philosophy of law that emphasizes the conventional
nature of law— that it is socially constructed. The word “positivism” was
probably first used to draw attention to the idea that law is “positive” or
“posited,” as opposed to being “natural” in the sense of being derived from
natural law or morality. According to legal positivism, law is synonymous with
positive norms, that is, norms made by the legislator or considered as
common law or case law. Formal criteria of law’s origin, law enforcement and
1 Tsele M “Rights and religion; bias and beliefs: Can a judge speak God?” (2018) 43 (1) Journal for Juridical
Sciences 1- 25.
2 Tsele M “Rights and religion; bias and beliefs: Can a judge speak God?” (2018) 43 (1) Journal for Juridical Sciences
page 9.
3 Tsele M “Rights and religion; bias and beliefs: Can a judge speak God?” (2018) 43 (1) Journal for Juridical
SciencesDisclaimer
Assignment 1 Semester 1 2022
Unique Number:
DOCUMENT PREVIEW
Tsele M “Rights and religion; bias and beliefs: Can a judge speak God?” (2018)
43 (1) Journal for Juridical Sciences 1 – 25.
1. Give a concise summary of the author's viewpoint. Make sure you
concentrate on legal philosophy and not so much legislation. (Max
word count 200.) (5)
2. What theory of interpretation that you have studied is addressed in the
article? Why do you say this? You need to identify
the theory you have studied that is most closely
associated with the author's viewpoint. (Max word
count 500.) (10)
3. Give your own, philosophical response to the
author's viewpoint. Make sure you address all the
author's arguments. (Max word count 200.) (5)
, Give a concise summary of the author's viewpoint. Make sure you
concentrate on legal philosophy and not so much legislation
Tsele deliberates the relationship and apparent tension between a Judge’s
duty to apply the law in a fair and impartial manner and his or her own
personal right to freedom of religion, and the extent to which those religious
views might influence a Judge in the adjudication of disputes.1
According to Tsele, ‘this dictum illustrates that the limitation to Judges
expressing their social views is narrowly interpreted and will, in most
instances, be limited to situations that involve the adjudication of cases’.2
Certainly, what should be clear on a conspectus of all of the above is that a
Judge is a citizen, entitled to hold religious views and entitled to freely
express him or herself so long as it does not compromise the discharge of his
or her judicial duties.
Accordingly, where a Judge holds views, religious or otherwise, this does not,
without more, constitute partiality, inherently compromising their ability to
adjudicate disputes or their ability to discharge their judicial functions.3
What theory of interpretation that you have studied is addressed in the
article? Why do you say this? You need to identify the theory you have
studied that is most closely associated with the author's viewpoint.
Legal positivism is a philosophy of law that emphasizes the conventional
nature of law— that it is socially constructed. The word “positivism” was
probably first used to draw attention to the idea that law is “positive” or
“posited,” as opposed to being “natural” in the sense of being derived from
natural law or morality. According to legal positivism, law is synonymous with
positive norms, that is, norms made by the legislator or considered as
common law or case law. Formal criteria of law’s origin, law enforcement and
1 Tsele M “Rights and religion; bias and beliefs: Can a judge speak God?” (2018) 43 (1) Journal for Juridical
Sciences 1- 25.
2 Tsele M “Rights and religion; bias and beliefs: Can a judge speak God?” (2018) 43 (1) Journal for Juridical Sciences
page 9.
3 Tsele M “Rights and religion; bias and beliefs: Can a judge speak God?” (2018) 43 (1) Journal for Juridical
SciencesDisclaimer
