Direct Style of Writing in Decisions of Constitutional Councils/ Courts

Amini Pozveh, Hossein; Tahan Nazif, Hadi

doi:10.22034/qjplk.2024.1827.1660

Direct Style of Writing in Decisions of Constitutional Councils/ Courts

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Ph.D. Student in Public Law, Faculty of Islamic Studies & Law, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran

² Associate Prof, Faculty of Islamic Studies & Law, Imam Sadiq University, Tehran, Iran

10.22034/qjplk.2024.1827.1660

Abstract

The decisions of the courts, especially the constitutional courts and councils, are studied in various research from different perspectives. The writing style of these decisions is one important aspect, which relates to other significant issues such as legitimacy, transparency, accountability, and oversight. Direct style is one type of writing style. The question of this paper is to examine constitutional courts and councils in terms of how they write their decisions based on a direct style. This paper addresses this issue using a descriptive-analytical and comparative method. As a result, there is currently a consensus among these institutions regarding the use of a direct writing style. More specifically, today, not only is the writing of decisions by judicial authorities in common law systems direct, but developments in this style are also underway in the judicial institutions of civil law systems, including the French Constitutional Council.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Guardlan Council

References

Arlettaz, J. (2017). CC ITALIENNE. In L'élaboration des décisions des cours constitutionnelles et européennes, (184-200).

Armstrong, S. V. & Terrell, T. (2008). Understanding “Style” in Legal Writing. Perspectives, 17 (1), 43–47.

Arts, A. & Melchior, M. (2002). Entretien avec MM. Alex Arts et Michel Melchior, Présidents de la Cour d'arbitrage de Belgique. Cahiers du CC, (12).

Assy, R. (2011). Can the Law Speak Directly to its Subjects?. Journal of Law and Society, 38 (3), 376–404.

Badet, G. (2019), LE CAS DES DÉCISIONS DE LA CC DU BÉNIN. In L'écriture des decisions (145-149), Paris: (ACCPUF).

Balmford, C. (2002). Plain Language: beyond a 'movement'. 4th International conference. Toronto, (PLAIN).

Bhatia, V. K. (2010). Legal Writing: Specificity. In The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics (37-50). New York: Routledge.

Carcassonne, G. (2007). L’intelligibilité des décisions du CC. La qualité des décisions de justice. CEPEJ.

Carlson, K.; Livermore, M. & Rockmore, D. (2016). A Quantitative Analysis of Writing Style on the U.S. Supreme Court. Washington University Law Review, 93 (6), 1461–1510.

Cassard-Valembois, A. (2017). CC FRANÇAIS. In L'élaboration des décisions des cours constitutionnelles et européennes (133-184).

Catalina, R. (2015). Plain English in Legal Language. Alicante Journal of English Studies, (28), 147–163.

CC d’Algérie (2019). CC d’Algérie. In L'écriture des decisions (175-181). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC de Belgique (2019). CC de Belgique. In L'écriture des decisions (193-209), Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC de Côte d’Ivoire (2019). CC de Côte d’Ivoire. In L'écriture des decisions (283-290). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC de Guinée (2019). CC de Guinée. In L'écriture des decisions (313-318). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC de la République démocratique du Congo (2019). CC de la République démocratique du Congo. In L'écriture des decisions (413-423). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC de Moldavie (2019). CC de Moldavie. In L'écriture des decisions (375-386). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC de Roumanie (2019). CC de Roumanie. In L'écriture des decisions (425-444). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC de Slovénie (2019). CC de Slovénie. In L'écriture des decisions (457-470). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC du Bénin (2019). CC du Bénin. In L'écriture des decisions (211-227). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC du Burkina Faso (2019). CC du Burkina Faso. In L'écriture des decisions (228-234). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC du Gabon (2019). CC du Gabon. In L'écriture des decisions (299-312). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC du Liban (2019). CC du Liban. In L'écriture des decisions (325-339). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC du Maroc (2019). CC du Maroc. In L'écriture des decisions (357-367). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC du Mozambique (2019). CC du Mozambique. In L'écriture des decisions (393-399). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC du Sénégal (2019). CC du Sénégal. In L'écriture des decisions (445-455). Paris: (ACCPUF).

CC français (2019). CC français. In L'écriture des decisions (290-298). Paris: (ACCPUF).

Charité, M. (2017). Réflexions sur la modernisation du mode de rédaction des décisions du CC. Revue générale du droit.

Clauss, H. B. (2020). The History of the Plain Language Movement and Legal Language. CHP, 3–34.

Conrado, H. M. (2020). A deliberative style is a moral style, 1–36.

Cour suprême du Canada (2019). Cour suprême du Canada. In L'écriture des decisions (248-265). Paris: (ACCPUF).

Cutts, M. (2020). Oxford guide to plain English. Oxford: OUP.

Disant, M. (2019). Synthèse générale des travaux. In L'écriture des decisions (107-118), Paris: (ACCPUF).

Domnarski, W. (1996). In the opinion of the court. Urbana: UIP.

Drago, G. (2016). Contentieux constitutionnel français. Paris: PUF.

Dürr, S. R. (2019). Intervention du représentant de la Commission de Venise. In L'écriture des decisions (119-121). Paris: (ACCPUF).

Fabius, L. (2016). La présence des ex-présidents au CC doit être supprimée. Le Monde.

Felsenfeld, C. (1981). The plain English movement. Can. Bus. LJ, 6, 408–446.

Forrester, R. (1995). Supreme Court Opinions-Style and Substance. Hastings L.J. 47 (1), 167.

Goldstein, J. (2010). The intelligible Constitution. New York: OUP.

Goldstein, T. & Lieberman, J. K. (2016). The lawyer's guide to writing well. California: UCP.

Good, C. E. (1989). Mightier than the sword. Charlottesville VA: BJP.

Gozdz-Roszkowski, S. (2020). Move Analysis of Legal Justifications Constitutional Tribunal Judgments Poland. Int J Semiot Law. 33 (3), 581–600.

Haute CC de Madagascar (2019). Haute CC de Madagascar. In L'écriture des decisions (341-347). Paris: (ACCPUF).

IPCCPL (2019). Instance provisoire de contrôle de la constitutionnalité des lois de Tunisie. In L'écriture des decisions (491-518). Paris: (ACCPUF).

Le Quinio, A. (2017). La motivation des décisions du CC au prisme du modèle ibéro-américain. Les Nouveaux Cahiers du CC. 55-56 (2), 33–43.

Llewellyn, K. N. (2015). The Common Law Tradition. Deciding Appeals. Quid Pro, LLC.

Luquiens, C. (2019). L'écriture des décisions. In L'écriture des decisions (99-102). Paris: (ACCPUF).

Mackay, A. (1887). Introduction to an Essay on the Art of Legal Composition Commonly Called Drafting. L. Q. Rev. 3, 326.

McComb, M. F. (1949). A Mandate from the Bar: Shorter and More Lucid Opinions. ABA Journal. 35 (5), 382–384.

McMenamin, G. R. (2020), Forensic stylistics. Coulthard, Malcolm; Johnson, Alison (Eds), London: Routledge, 539-558.

Minow, M. L. (1990). Judging Inside Out. U. Colo. L. Rev. 61, 795–801.

Mous, A. Y. (1943). The Speech of Judges. Va. L. Rev. 29 (5), 625-641.

Nollez-Goldbach, R. (2015). Le style judiciaire métissé de la Cour pénale internationale. Droit et societe. 91 (3), 521–532.

Posner, R. (1995). Judges' Writing Styles. University of Chicago Law Review. 62 (4), 1421-1451.

Rousseau, D; Pierre-Yves, G. & Julien, B. (2016). Droit du contentieux constitutionnel. Paris: LGDJ.

Selya, B. M. (1994). Publish and Perish. OSLJ, 55 (2), 405-414.

Selya, B. M. (1995). In Search of Less. TLR. 74, 1277-1280.

Service de Documentation des Etudes de La Cour de Cassation (2016), Les modifications de rédaction et de motivation des décisions du CC, Bureau du droit public et du droit constitutionnel.

Shujaei Arani, S (1400). The New Writing Method and Structure of the Decisions of the French Constitutional Council in the field of Conformity of Ordinary and Organic Laws with the Constitution. Knowledge Quarterly of Public Law, 10(33), 83-110.

Silecchia, L. (1996). Legal Skills Training in the First Year of Law School, Scholarly Articles, 246-291.

Sivakumar, S. (2016). JUDGMENT OR JUDICIAL OPINION. JILI 58 (3), 273–312.

Spreutels, J. (2019). LA MOTIVATION DES ARRÊTS DE LA CC DE BELGIQUE. In L'écriture des décisions. Paris: (ACCPUF).

Sullivan, B. & Feldbrin, R. (2022). The Supreme Court and the People. JCL, 1-90.

Tribunal constitutionnel d’Angola (2019). Tribunal constitutionnel d’Angola. In L'écriture des decisions (182-192). Paris: (ACCPUF).

Tribunal fédéral Suisse (2019). Tribunal fédéral Suisse. In L'écriture des decisions (471-478). Paris: (ACCPUF).

Tribunal suprême de justice de Guinée Bissau (2019). Tribunal suprême de justice de Guinée Bissau. In L'écriture des decisions (319-323). Paris: (ACCPUF).

Vance, R. C. (2011). Judicial opinion writing: An annotated bibliography. Legal Writing: J. Legal Writing Inst., 17, 197–231.

Verdussen, M. (2017). CC BELGE. In L'élaboration des décisions des cours constitutionnelles et européennes, 86-112.

Wald, P. (1995). The Rhetoric of Results and the Results of Rhetoric. U Chi L Rev 62 (4), 1371–1419.

Wanderer, N. (2017). Writing Better Opinions. Maine Law Review. 54 (1), 47-70.

WEBER, R. (2017). CC ALLEMANDE. In L'élaboration des décisions des cours constitutionnelles et européennes, 60-86.

Williams, C. (2015). Changing with the Times: The Evolution of Plain Language in the Legal Sphere. Alicante Journal of English Studies, (28), 183–203.