Sanhendrin 3:7
Should internal court deliberations be public or secret?
ืืืจื ืืช ืืืืจ, ืืื ืืื ืืกืื ืืืชื. ืืืืื ืฉืืืื ืื ืืืืจ, ืืืฉ ืคืืื ื ืืชื ืืืื, ืืืฉ ืคืืื ื ืืชื ืืื. ืืื ืื ืืืฉืืฆื ืืื ืื ืืืื ืื ืื ืืืืจ, ืื ื ืืืื ืืืืจื ืืืืืื ืืื ืื ืืขืฉื ืฉืืืจื ืจืื ืขืื, ืขื ืื ื ืืืจ (ืืืงืจื ืื, ืื) ืื ืชืื ืจืืื ืืขืืื, ืืืืืจ (ืืฉืื ืื, ืื) ืืืื ืจืืื ืืืื ืกืื.
Once the [judges] reached a verdict they would bring in [the defendant]. The senior judge would say, โMr. Doe, you are innocent,โ or, โMr. Doe, you are guilty.โ What is the source [for the practice] that when one of the judges goes out [of the court] he must not say, โI exonerated [you] but my colleagues found you guilty; what can I do since they are in the majority?โ Regarding this it says (Lev. 19:16), โDo not go talebearing among your people,โ and it says (Prov. 11:13), โthe talebearer reveals a secret.โ
Comments
Rabbinic law does not use peer juries, but rather relies on courts of sages. The smallest court consists of three judges. Ancient Jewish cities maintained courts of twenty-three judges. In Jerusalem, the great Sanhedrin of seventy-one judges ruled on matters of national significance. All courts had an odd number of judges to prevent a deadlock. Although unanimous opinions were not required (indeed a unanimous opinion to execute a criminal was considered suspect), our Mishnah indicates that the internal deliberations of the court were considered secret.
Questions
- Does this Mishnah imply that all court deliberations are to be kept secret, or only the actual vote record?
- According to this text, a judge must defend a verdict that he himself opposed. What are the positive and negative consequences of such a policy?
- Does the public have a right to know what arguments were used in finding a verdict, even if the identity of the voters is kept secret?
