مخاصمة القاضي في القانون الليبي وفق قانون المرافعات

Abstract

This research aims to highlight the procedures of an indictment of judges for judicial misconduct in Libyan law. These procedures are vital to protect the judges' rights in Sharia and law in case of judicial misconduct. Judicial misconduct occurs when a judge acts in ways that are considered unethical or otherwise violate the judge's obligations of impartial conduct whether intentionally or not, resulting in harm to one of the opponents. These procedures of the indictment of judges are subjected by the Libyan legislator to special rules governing them, different from the general rules of liability. The subject of judicial misconduct was discussed of its historical development, definition, lawsuit procedures, and legal basis. The limitation s of the research includes only the civil liability of the judge. To deal with the whole research aspects, the descriptive analytical approach is adopted for data collection by reference to jurisprudence views, and legal text related to the subject of the indictment of judges and by the way how to be analyzed and discussed following the Libyan law in terms of the lawsuit and its basis. The researcher also adopted the inductive approach for tracking the related religious and legal texts, as well as the historical approach, which was used to track the historical development of the litigation case. By the end of the research, we concluded that the procedures of the indictment of judges were known by Islamic law and that this litigation suit is a liability claim of a special kind and nature and singled out by law with specific conditions and characteristics, and it contrasts with some similar systems. The procedures of this kind of litigation suit are carried out in two phases, unlike the rest of the cases, and the state is responsible along with the judge in paying the compensation and has the right to back it up. In light of the findings of the study, it recommends that the legislator explicitly stipulate special cases that were not mentioned in Article (720) pleadings, and stipulate ways to prove the judge’s mistake in cases of deception, fraud, and treachery.