The Mean, Harmonious Decision-Making and the Case of Sally Challen
| Author | Ebenezer Laryea |
| Position | Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Northampton. BBA, LLB (Soton), LLM (Soton), PhD (Soton) |
| Pages | 16-30 |
S.S.L.R
Vol.10
16
The Mean, Harmonious Decision-Making and the Case of Sally Challen
Dr Ebenezer Laryea*
Abstract
The task of legal decision-making sits at t he very heart of the legal system as a direct representat ion of how Law
expresses itself as a social system. In order for Law to get its expression right and avoid wrongful convictions or
miscarriages of justice, the endeavour of legal-decision making is one which must be pursued with balance and
harmony. This article argues that pursuing balance and harmony in legal decision making allows for the legal
decision-making process to be anchored at a mea n between Law’s competing extremes. It is further argued that
the anchoring of the legal decision-making proc ess at a mean point between Law’s extremes ensures that the
subject individual in any given case is not lost to Law. Both these arguments are demonstrated through an analysis
of the recent Court of Appeal decision in R v Challe n [2019] EWCA Crim 916 – an authority which this article
highlights as an example of the kind of harmonious decision-making which can be achieved through the pursui t
of balance and a mean in legal decision-making.
Introduction – Upholding the rule of balance
n almost all instances of human endeavour, achieving a correct balance between extremes
often makes the difference between success and failure. As the proverbial saying goes,
too much of one single thing is bad, and can lead to results different to that which are
desired. For example, too much sleep is bad just as engaging in overly excessive work is
equally bad – too much leisure is bad, as is too much a time spent without leisure – gluttony is
bad, so is extreme hunger which leads to malnourishment – extreme inflation is bad and
unwanted in any country, but so is deflation which leads to economic weakness. There is thus
general agreement, that an endeavour pursued with balance is one which achieves the most
optimum results.
Such is the principle underpinning Aristotle’s Golden Mean
1
– it is about getting a balance
between two opposing extremes so as to achieve optimum results. Notwithstanding, the Golden
Mean is about much more than balance; it also about harmony – specifically, the harmony
which can be found in-between two extremes; between work and leisure, between courage and
mindfulness, between praise and blame, between narrowness and wideness.
2
* Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Northampton. BBA, LLB (Soton), LLM (Soton), PhD (Soton)
1
C.D.C. Reeve, Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics (Hackett Publishing 2014).
2
ibid.
I
To continue reading
Request your trial