ABSTRACT
Judicial power is never exercised for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the judge, always for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the legislature. To grasp the basic features of a certain social order requires us to consider the relationship between the judge and legal provision. Traditionally, the Roman law is bound by a commitment to confining the judge in the cage of the articles of law, while the Anglo-American counterpart requires the judge to cocoon himself in the precedents of law. As opposed to legal determinism, subjectivism denies that the judge's decision is truly objective. People who adopt such an approach claim that the act of making a judgment is subjective and the arguments in court and legal interpretations are simply to conceal their subjectiveness and arbitrariness. It has been widely acknowledged that the subjective judgment of value is inevitable within trials and legal interpretations.
