The Objectives of Reasoning in Judicial Judgments and Its Conditions

Abstract

This research examines and analyzes the purposes of judicial reasoning, which include safeguarding the right of defense, establishing the principle of judicial transparency, enabling litigants to challenge judgments, and activating judicial oversight. The significance of the study lies in its theoretical and practical contributions: it enriches legal scholarship on the mechanism of reasoning, while also providing practical standards that can benefit judges, lawyers, and legislators in enhancing the quality of judicial decisions.

The research aims to clarify the fundamental purposes of judicial reasoning, define its formal and substantive requirements, and highlight its impact on litigation guarantees and the protection of rights. The study adopts the descriptive-analytical method to present and analyze legal texts and scholarly opinions, the comparative method to illustrate differences among various legislations, and the applied method through examining relevant judicial rulings.

The research reached several findings, the most significant of which are: judicial reasoning is not merely a formal requirement but rather the essence of the judicial process and a guarantee for achieving justice and effective oversight; and the absence or insufficiency of reasoning exposes judgments to nullity and undermines public trust in the judiciary.

The study concludes with key recommendations, including obligating courts to provide sufficient and clear reasoning under the supervision of higher judicial authorities, and introducing training programs for judges on drafting and reasoning skills in line with international standards.