It is generally accepted that the final judgment of the court is It is the determination of the rights and duties of a person in the law. How a judgment may be right or wrong in the law, usually binding on the parties in the case. Legal disputes shall be settled according to the final judgment of the court. And such judgment is the base of execution as well as the claims of the parties in the case further. The value of having to accept a court judgment is The security of the legal position of the person Resulting in the resulting peace in the legal system
However, in a case, it is always possible that a mistake in the trial of that case may occur. Such mistakes can be caused by willfulness or the organization’s negligence in the course of justice. Or that mistake May arise as a result of force majeure A good legal system establishes the rules for the final review of judgments. In the law, we call for the ultimate process of reviewing judgments. But has a flaw And if left for review Would not be fair to the parties in the case that Rehabilitation of the case In the event that it appears in the process of reconsidering the case that the final judgment It is a wrong judgment. The court that considered the case Would have to raise the original judgment, which was a mistake And judge the said case again
Rehabilitation of the case Is therefore a way of overriding the final judgment But it is a wrong judgment This is in accordance with the predetermined processes, procedures and criteria in that legal system. The organization that has the power to overturn the wrong judgment is the judiciary or the court.
In forensic philosophy and in jurisprudence theory There is still a problem to consider further that In the case where a court or a judge is based on the jurisdiction, the judge adjudicates the case according to the law which is clearly inconsistent with justice. Or in cases where the court or the judge adjudicates the case without respecting the basic principles of the law To put themselves in the service of political power at a particular time Accepting things that may not be considered law Make it law Then deciding the case in the form of a judgment Most of the time later people saw that such a judgment was unrecognizable to have effect in the legal system. And apparently unable to use the method of rebuilding the trial to override that judgment as well Is there any way to override that judgment?
The primary principle in this regard is that rules are severely opposed to justice. Should not be called a law A verdict that is expressly contrary to fundamental principles of law and justice should not be called a judgment.
In germany After the end of the Second World War Apparently Various courts, especially the Special Court at Adolf Hitler established as the highest court in political criminal cases. (Known in German as Volksgerichtshof Which may be translated according to the vocabulary that Supreme People’s Court When first established This court has jurisdiction over national treason. It was later expanded to other criminal cases, such as criticizing or expressing doubts about the Nazi regime’s triumph in war. Such courts may even execute the death penalty for commentators or show suspicion of victory) convicted many people against fundamental principles of law and justice. There are a number of judgments in which the court has adopted a method of interpreting the law to be widespread. To punish someone In many cases it is evident that the court has already flagged the punishment of persons.