W
Willy_Jose
Guest
Specifically I would like to know as to what extent is the avoidance of an obligation justified. Specifically an obligation of a professional nature like the obligation of a judge to try a case that was assigned to him. In a particular case, a judge inhibited himself from trying a notorious case involving multiple murders wherein a powerful and influential figure has been charged. For fear of danger to his family, the judge inhibited himself from trying the case. There is a perceived danger to his family that caused him to inhibit from his duty. At the same time, we also are aware that judges have bound themselves by oath to administer justice without fear. How does one balance these things one way or the other, while still maintaining moral integrity?