Debiasing Strategies and Judicial Decision-Making: Exploring a Duty to Improve Judges’ Capabilities

Judicial decision-making carries profound consequences for individuals and society, with expectations that judges act with objectivity and neutrality. However, traditional legal frameworks assume a rationalist model of reasoning that inadequately addresses implicit biases. While existing legal safeguards target explicit instances of bias, they fail to account for biases that subtly influence judicial perceptions and judgments. This article explores how current legal norms, grounded in a syllogistic model of judicial reasoning, are insufficient to address implicit biases. Drawing on Behavioural Realism, the analysis demonstrates how judges remain susceptible to implicit biases despite their training and commitment to impartiality. The article proposes integrating debiasing interventions into judicial practice, including habit modification, environmental changes, and decision-support tools. It argues that such interventions should be encompassed within judges’ professional duties, making their adoption mandatory under certain conditions.