The Political Role of the Trial Attorney

Abstract

This article addresses the relationship between legal interpretation and the political dimension inherent in judicial activity, arguing that law presents an "open texture" that allows judges to choose among various alternatives. In this regard, the author points out that the law cannot be applied mechanically, since legal norms have various possible meanings and offer multiple interpretations. In line with this, he alludes to Wittgenstein's thesis on the indeterminacy of words and the necessity of interpreting the rules themselves, and emphasizes that judicial activity does not lead to an apolitical, but to an unconscious politics, which highlights the importance of a personal political reflection by judges and lawyers. Therefore, he emphasizes the need for well-founded and published rulings, as well as the possibility of introducing mass action judicial procedures, while there is an absence of explicit definitions in the laws that grant a significant margin of discretion to judges, which highlights the non-mechanical and political nature of judicial interpretation. Finally, the author argues for the existence of a modernly equipped judiciary that supports its own independent political reflection.