| Abstract [eng] |
The research master's thesis analyzes the attitude of the representatives of the school of realism towards law and morality, discusses the directions of American and Scandinavian realism, and analyzes specific authors. American realists are identified as being divided into a "sociological wing of realism" and an "idiosyncratic wing of realism." Also, this paper analyzes selected sociological and legal literature, presents various approaches to the adoption of a court decision. It is determined that the sociological literature states that a judge cannot distance himself from the formation of a preconceived opinion when evaluating certain evidence or making a court decision. Legal literature indicates that the formation of a preliminary opinion is not possible. The concept of Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is explored, and the required element of justice is discussed based on scientific literature and the doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights. The jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights is also examined. The relationship between expert knowledge and the right to justice is sought. The doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights reveals the problems of expert bias, non-appointment of alternative expertise, and process delay. Violations of national courts regarding the admissibility and evaluation of evidence, the adversarial principle, ensuring equal (equivalent) defense are also examined, and are associated with the application of expert knowledge. The research master's thesis reveals that judges are given a great deal of discretion in evaluating expert knowledge. Based on the cases of the European Court of Human Rights, it is found that often national courts become formal enforcers and the function of justice is delegated. |
