The author discusses the importance of selecting and training competent judges to ensure the fair resolution of conflicts in society. He emphasizes the need for judges to rely on the values derived from the constitution and the legal system, rather than personal opinions, to make decisions. However, he critiques the current selection and training process for judges, which focuses heavily on memorization of legal texts and oral exams, rather than practical application of the law through written judgments. This approach, he argues, may favor memorization skills over critical thinking and reasoning abilities and result in a lack of diverse perspectives among judges.
The author suggests a radical shift in the selection and training process for judges, advocating for a more efficient and effective system. He proposes a shorter preparation period of one year, focused on evaluating candidates’ basic legal knowledge, constitutional sensitivity, and analytical and presentation skills through practical case studies. This approach, he argues, would help identify and nurture talented individuals to become competent judges, without burdening them with a lengthy and arduous preparation process. He points to the successful model of the medical entrance exam (MIR) in Spain, which could serve as a template for a similar system in the legal field.
The author underscores the significance of attracting the best and brightest students to the judiciary by offering stable and well-paid positions, selecting the most competent candidates, and providing them with specialized training for their unique role. He highlights the need for judges to possess not only a deep understanding of the law but also social awareness, empathy, and the ability to articulate and communicate their decisions clearly. By prioritizing these qualities in the selection and training process, the author believes that the judiciary can become more inclusive, diverse, and effective in delivering fair and just outcomes.
The author raises concerns about the current emphasis on memorization of legal texts and oral exams in the selection and training of judges, which may limit the development of critical thinking and practical judgment skills. He argues that the focus on memorization skills over reasoning abilities and the lack of practical application assessments may lead to a homogeneous and less effective judiciary. By shifting the focus towards evaluating candidates’ practical skills and abilities to apply legal principles in real-world scenarios, the author contends that the judiciary can better serve the needs of society and ensure the peaceful resolution of conflicts.
In conclusion, the author calls for a reevaluation of the selection and training process for judges to prioritize practical skills, critical thinking, and constitutional sensitivity over memorization of legal texts. He advocates for a more efficient and effective system that identifies and nurtures talented individuals to become competent judges, promoting diversity and inclusivity within the judiciary. By reforming the current approach to selecting and training judges, the author believes that the judiciary can better uphold the rule of law, protect constitutional values, and deliver fair and just outcomes for all.
