About Judicial Analytics

Our Role
Judicial Analytics is dedicated to assisting complainants and solicitors bring about successful court proceedings in the highest court in their respective jurisdiction. We provide assistance by helping solicitors develop ethical arguments to support their cases. The problem for most solicitors is that they don’t have the philosophical training to mount an ethical defence for their clients through the court system. There is a tendency for the solicitors to accept two premises - that:
1. Parliamentary legislation has primacy over Common Law.
2. The judiciary's sole concern is compliance with the law as opposed to correspondence with the facts of reality

The problem is that the judiciary and solicitors in each jurisdiction tend to neglect the opportunity to argue for a ‘natural law’ interpretation of their respective constitutions. Every country has its own constitution which establishes a legal framework. Regardless of the framework, most are based on the British model, with some variations. We will argue that there is an opportunity to defend legal cases in the highest courts on the premise that "the judiciary is obliged to hold a rational standard of value" as opposed to simply complying with "the rule of law". Our value proposition is that we provide a ‘natural law’ interpretation of the law, as well as helping solicitors develop objective arguments to cater for the specific values of particular judges.

Our services
Judicial Analytics provides a number of services to prospective complainants and solicitors seeking to take action through the highest courts in any Western-style legal jurisdiction. We provide the following:

1. Relationships with solicitors in each country whom work with us to fight the current arbitrary statutes enacted by legislators. We provide objective arguments to allow the judiciary to adopt progressive interpretations of the Constitution and case evidence.
2. We are developing a database to allow solicitors to profile judges around the world allowing solicitors to achieve the best possible outcome.
3. We develop arguments to support cases where ‘rule of (statutory) law interpretations would otherwise lead to an unfavourable outcome.
4. We act as an advocacy for judicial activism to ensure the objective protection of rights under natural law where current statutory law is ambiguous.

There is of course no possibility of guaranteeing results. The fact remains that the judiciary is only accountable for its rulings after the fact, and sparingly so. This remains one of the greatest shortcomings in our legal system – its lack of respect for objectivity, which can only reduce the standing of judges which are perceived to offer some semblance of ‘objective interpretation’.

Who we can help
We can only help people who hold 'natural law' principles (whether implicitly or explicitly) and apply them to the specific context in which those laws apply to them. We cannot help claimants defend illegitimate acts. We can only assess the merits of a case on a case-by-case basis.

For further information on our objectives refer to our report on global efforts to sponsor judicial activism.