Listen to the evidence and testimony presented by both sides - then decide on which side the truth of the case lies, and render a verdict accordingly.
I think that
When jurists cannot come to a decision, they are said to be "dead-locked."
It was the jurists, who wrote treatises on points of law. The two most famous ones were Gaius and Ulpian.
There was not a name for law makers in ancient Rome. The people who made laws changed through the course of the 1,200 years of the history of Rome. During the monarchy (753-509 BC) presumably the king issued laws, even though there is hardly any historical record of this because this period was long before the emergence of the first ancient historians who wrote about the history of Rome. During the early Roman Republic the proposers of bills were the consuls (the two annually elected heads of the Republic). In the Mid and Late Republic, the plebeian tribunes, the representatives of the plebeians, were the main proposers of bills. During the rule by emperors which replaced the Republic, the emperors were the law makers. The laws were imperial edicts issued by the emperors. In 366 BC, during the Republic, the office of the praetura was created. The praetors were the second highest ranking officers of state. They were like chiefs justices. They issued the Praetor's Edict, which stated the praetors' policy on judicial matters for their term of office (one year). Praetors endorsed much of the content of previous edicts, thus ensuring continuity. Although praetors were not legislators and could not introduce new laws, they could make amendments. These introduced needed innovations. Therefore, the development and improvement of Roman law during the Republic owed a lot to the praetors. This role ended when emperors took charge of legislation. Jurists (legal experts) played a crucial role in the formulation legal matters and the development of Roman law. Since the praetors were politicians, not lawyers, they often submitted consulta (written questions) to jurists and their replies were often used for the compilation of the edicts. Emperors also relied on the advice of jurists for their own edicts. The emperor Justinian I commissioned two textbooks for law students in the 6th century AD. They relied heavily on the writings of some prominent jurists of the 2nd and 3rd century AD.
Assuming that the question refers to Iran: The Ayatollahs demanded an Iranian Constitution guaranteeing the primacy of Islamic Law in Iranian governance and themselves as its proper interpreters. This is called "Wilayat al-Faqih" in Arabic, meaning "State of the Islamic Jurist". If the question does not refer to Iran, it is worth noting that Ayatollahs in other countries such as Iraq and Lebanon have decided to support different political factions but not actually become ruling jurists.
International Commission of Jurists was created in 1952.
Howard Tolley has written: 'The International Commission of Jurists' -- subject(s): Human rights, International Commission of Jurists (1952- ), Rule of law
Mahmood Ghaznavi
That some they call "Velayat Faghih" means "Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists".
I think that
[Jurists] They were lawyers, who pleaded a case. They were not experts in their fields, usually ordinary citizens.
the judiciary
A jurist is just a legal scholar. Being a legal scholar says nothing aboit a person's beliefs.
Karen Stiebitz has written: 'Heinz Such (1910-1976)' -- subject(s): Jurists, Biography
The scholars, preachers, jurists, traders, tourists, and spiritual scholars (Called Sufis) spread Islam.
Almost 50 years ago, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) pioneered the practice of sending experts to observe trials where there were concerns about the integrity of the proceedings
When jurists cannot come to a decision, they are said to be "dead-locked."