Judicial Jurisprudence Between Necessity and the Requirements of Legal Security

Abstract

The application of legal texts by the judge requires that they be clear and free from ambiguity; otherwise, the judge intervenes to interpret them in order to reveal their meaning and remove the ambiguity or contradiction surrounding them, so that he may be able to decide the case brought before him. Since judicial interpretation differs from one judge to another, this inevitably leads to divergence in judicial rulings within the state, which contradicts the characteristics of legislation that require equality before the law and the unity of legislation. In light of the necessity of judicial intervention and the imperative of preserving legal security, which requires legal rules to be clear, understandable, and not subject over time to frequent or unexpected changes, and with the aim of achieving stability in legal relations and legal positions, and spreading confidence and reassurance among parties and within legal relations, mechanisms must be established to frame judicial jurisprudence.