Justice and the neutral state: A postmodern,feminist critique of lehning's account of justice

In this journal, Lehning (1990) defended the liberal view of political justice, arguing on behalf of a comprehensive principle of state neutrality as the linchpin of justice. By failing to deal with the postmodern challenge to the Enlightenment-liberalist conception of neutrality and by thoroughly ignoring the feminist understanding in which neutrality actually conceals a masculinist bias, Lehning's analysis is seriously undermined with respect to its possibility for understanding, let alone for accomplishing political justice.     

Welfare state, unemployment, and social justice: Judgments on the rights and obligations of the unemployed

This article reports judgments on the rights and obligations of the unemployed in The Netherlands. A large majority of the Dutch population is shown to support (i) the unemployed’s right to social security as well as their obligation to work, (ii) the principle that declining a job offering should be punished, and (iii) harsh sanctions in some specific cases of job refusal. An emphasis on the obligation to work results from conservative attitudes regarding both distributive justice (economic conservatism) and retributive justice (cultural conservatism). Furthermore, conservative attitudes regarding distributive justice derive from a privileged economic position (especially high income and infrequent experience of unemployment), whereas conservative attitudes regarding retributive justice result from a restricted cultural position (low level of education, technical rather than cultural type of education, and limited involvement in arts and culture).     

哈耶克自由主义理论之研究:方法与立场

在政治哲学谱系中占有重要位置的哈耶克自由主义理论是与二十世纪国际政治格局、尤其是与极权主义和计划经济给人类带来的灾难性影响有关。正是对二十世纪“各种形式的集体主义”政治情势和意识形态的敏锐启动了哈耶克自由主义思想的开展,而对政治情势和意识形态的学理诊断则是哈耶克所担负的哲学使命和知识职责。研究哈耶克自由主义理论的方法应是哲学式的,而评判立场则不能以我们置身其间的政治情势和意识形态作为择取的标准。     

Community,market, and state: Reflections on their potential for achieving economic justice

This paper investigates the potential of distinct societal decision-making and coordinating mechanisms as means of achieving economic justice. Within the enormous diversity of actual institutional arrangements that guide and shape whatever happens in economies, three overarching ideal types of mechanisms which separately or in combination enable mankind to cope with its economic challenge are discernible: communities, markets, and states. Each of these ideal types represents a different way in which economic decisions are made and the economic actions of members of society are coordinated. The specific question to be answered is how each of these mechanisms can contribute to the solution of the problem of economic justice in modern times.     

Citizenship and social justice

Discussions on the problems of the welfare state are increasingly framed in terms of citizenship rather than social justice. The popularity of the concept of citizenship raises the question of its implications for social justice theory and research. In this article it is argued that whereas the dominant approach in social justice is essentially individualistic, the concept of citizenship focuses rather on individuals as members of a societal community, from which both rights and obligations are derived. This focus on communal membership suggests three important topics for social justice theory and research: (i) the need to distinguish between a civic and a justice motive for human behavior, (ii) the need to specify the frame of reference respondents should use when they make their justice judgments, and (iii) the need to recognize the fact that justice judgments may result from both adhering to criteria of justice and considering the consequences of their application.     

Critical justice consciousness: Social injustice and the criminal justice system

In this essay I examine the importance of social justice to my identity and the changing interpretation of my “justice consciousness” resulting from changes in my work life. Drawing on my academic experience as well as my experience as an attorney, I describe the meaning that social justice has for me. I also examine the connections that I see between social injustice and the operation of the critical justice system.     

Distributive and procedural justice: Multifaceted meanings and interrelations

Distributive, procedural, and interactional justice have taken on various interpretations. Even when the meaning assigned to each term has been specified and clarified, however, no single set of unique interpretations for each term allows for an unambiguous set of interrelations among the terms. That is, definitional clarity alone cannot resolve all of the questions that can be raised about how one construct is related to another. My discussion raises some of those questions to illustrate that point. A related point is that although an agreed upon set of conceptual defintions might allow for independence of the constructs and thus their independent manipulation, in practice—and as measured (rather than manipulated) variables—these constructs inevitably reveal considerable overlap. Several different reasons for this overlap are explored and the implications discussed.     

Distributive justice: Theory and research

The concept of distributive justice and the theoretical and empirical work conducted on it during the past two decades are examined. Three questions provide the structure for this examination: (i) What are fundamental conceptual dimensions of distributive justice and the specific substantive issues to which they are related? (ii) What central questions has recent work on distributive justice addressed? and (iii) What are the most important emerging issues on which work in the near-term future should focus? Much of the theory and research examined in the paper is social psychological in nature, but reference is made to related work in related disciplines, particularly sociology and philosophy.     

现代宪法的理论基础:自由主义抑或共和主义?

近代以来西方国家的宪法强调自由主义,以公民个人自由、权利的保障为核心来型塑各种制度。然而在现代社会,以自由主义为基础的宪法面临着困境,其需要从共和主义理论中汲取营养;中国宪法强调共和主义,需要用自由主义的核心价值弥补其不足。现代宪法的理论基础应该是自由主义与共和主义的有机结合。     

欧盟宪法发展进程中的双重变奏——共和主义与自由主义的视角

欧盟宪法较之于民族国家的宪法的一个突出特征在于，欧盟宪法不是来自于一次政治决断，而是由多个连续性的决断构成，这就表现为欧盟宪法的发展或欧盟统合秩序的形成是一个由多种力量或因素参与其间的法律与政治进程，其中，共和主义与自由主义最为重要，从而欧盟宪法的发展进程也就体现为共和主义与自由主义的双重变奏。共和主义是欧盟宪法的灵魂与骨架，而自由主义在欧盟宪法发展之初是作为一种积极的力量而存在的。随着欧盟宪法的发展，因触及了各个民族国家的政治、社会发展模式及成员国人民的福利，自由主义则成为欧盟宪法发展中重要反对性力量所借助的思想资源，但是，源于“欧洲梦”的追求，共和主义较之于自由主义始终具有正当性与统摄性。欧盟宪法未来的发展，在一定意义上就取决于共和主义与自由主义之间的平衡。     

Perspective and procedural justice: Attorney and litigant evaluations of court procedures

A comparison of the procedural justice judgments of attorneys and those of lay people judging the same procedures offers an opportunity to generate new information on what factors affect judgments of fairness. In a survey of reactions to conventional and innovative procedures in a United States district court, attorneys and lay people involved in tort and contract cases were asked to judge the overall fairness of court procedures and the fairness of specific procedures used in arbitration hearings. The respondents were also asked for their judgments concerning the favorability of the procedure's outcome, the opportunity to have the case heard and decided by an impartial third party, and their side's control over what happened in the case, all of which are factors found in previous studies to affect procedural fairness judgments. The results showed that, while attorneys gave higher overall fairness ratings than did litigants, the difference was not affected by the procedure assigned to the case. In addition, attorneys and litigants appeared to use the same standards to evaluate the fairness of procedures, although they disagreed about where the procedures they experienced fell on these dimensions. The theoretical and practical implications of the results are discussed.     

被害人权利保护与恢复性司法

以恢复性司法为制度进路,追求刑事被害人权利保护这一事关实质正义实现的法治目标。对犯罪人的制裁更多地涉及法律的一般性与普遍性,因此偏重于追求形式正义;对被害人权利的弥补、修复、保护更多地涉及生活中实际、具体的事件之合理性与被害人个别处遇,因此偏重于追求实质正义。在传统刑事司法制度中,被害人的权利长期遭受不应有的忽视,而在欧美获得蓬勃发展的恢复性司法制度则针对不同案件、不同犯罪人和被害人开展了形式多样的恢复性司法计划,为我国惩治犯罪人、保护被害人与实现个案中的实质正义提供了良好的理论资源与制度进路。     

Perceptions of justice: Clientele evaluations of conflict adjustment by a utility regulatory agency

During the past 15 years social psychological research on justice has evaluated hypotheses about linkages among various personal and institutional attributes and variables like outcome favorability and perceptions of procedural and distributive justice in decision-making contexts. This article reexamines hypotheses and findings about procedural and distributive justice using data from the dispute adjustment process used by a state regulatory agency. This study differs from any previous studies of perceptions of justice in two respects. First, the study employs data about the perceptions ofboth sides of a disputing experience before a public authority. Second, rather than using multiple regression and path analysis as in many past studies, we illustrate the value of hierarchical log-linear analysis as an analytical technique. The data analyzed through loglinear analysis permit us to reconsider previous conclusions about the procedural neutrality and participation in dispute adjustment and the linkage of these concepts to the legitimacy of the political regime.     

Beyond normative constraints: Declining institutionalism and the emergence of substantive and procedural justice

Popular notions of what it means to be put on trial invariably generate thoughts of the adversarial criminal trial, most often before a judge and jury. However, the criminal trial as the site for the testing of evidence of wrongdoing via a model of proof that proceeds according to prescribed processes in a normative institutional milieu is in decline. Controversially, this decline has been met with resistance from the legal profession, academics, policy makers and other stakeholders seeking to preserve the due process model that defines the criminal trial as an adversarial exchange between state and defendant. While the due process model continues to dominate as popular conceptualisation, the twenty-first century criminal trial has changed to such an extent that it is no longer seen as the quintessential form for the meting out of procedural fairness and testing of state's evidence, that emerged toward the end of the seventeenth century. Rather, the rise of control orders, modifications to the law of evidence, and the right of the accused to confront their accuser, together with the inclusion of non-traditional agents of justice, specifically victims and the community, has brought forward an era of substantive and procedural justice that lies beyond the normative constraints of the criminal trial. Robed counsel and bewigged judges beware; the advent of substantive and procedural justice has allowed for greater innovation transgressing the orthodoxies of criminal law in common law systems of justice. This paper will consider the virtues of the introduction of a transgressive criminal procedure.     

Levinas and the possibility of justice

I consider the question of whether critical legal theory can amount to more than an obstructive exercise and point to an alternative approach to the problem of institutional justice. I am not trying to redeem critical legal theory neither do I attempt to exonerate it from the charge of obstruction or as Drucilla Cornell terms it, negative dialectics. However, I share to some lesser degree the concern that it ought to be possible to offer more than the exposure of camouflaged injustice. By camouflaged I mean that branch of jurisprudence, positivist in outlook and tonality that maintains and defends the violation of the other as an integral and necessary aspect of law and further argues that as such it is entirely ethical. I examine a number of different perspectives to this seemingly impossible challenge. Borrowing from and adapting their theses I then go on to suggest my own solution for applying alterity to juridical encounters with the Other.Dr. Amanda Loumansky is a Sessional Lecturer at the Faculty of Continuing Education, Birkbeck College, University of London, London, UK     

The intellectual adolescence of organizational justice: You've come a long way,maybe

To highlight the advances and limitations in the study of organizational justice as reflected by the articles in this issue, the field is characterized as being in its intellectual adolescence. Following this analogy, some signs of scientific maturity are noted. Among these are (a) increased attention to the connections between organizational justice and various organizational processes, (b) expanded efforts toward conceptual refinement, and (c) greater reliance on research conducted in natural settings. At the same time, the adolescent state of the field is also marked by its intellectual awkwardness and immaturity. Indications of this include (a) the absence of guiding theory, (b) an underdeveloped research agenda, and (c) an overreliance on the use of ad hoc measurements. Based on these limitations, suggestions are made for ways of nurturing the field's development. The article concludes with an optimistic vision of tomorrow's field of organizational justice.     

Introduction: Emotions and justice

The articles in this collection all assume that emotions are an essential foundation for justice. Within this broad framework, many different possibilities are explored. These range from the role of empathic emotions to the role played by a desire for vengeance. They involve the examination of emotional responses to injustice in different cultures. And they include an exploration of the different sorts of selves that are possible and how one of these may be the self of a just person.     

The role of procedural justice in the allocation of limited resources: A West German perspective

Following the experimental design used by Barrett-Howard and Tyler (1986), this study examines the importance given by West German university students to procedural and distributive justice allocation decision making. After reading one of eight scenarios in which there was a limited resource to be allocated, the subjects answered questions concerning the importance and meaning of justice. For the most part, the results correspond to previous U.S. findings of the importance of procedural justice and its definition across various allocation settings. However, the West German students placed greater importance on having mechanisms for correcting inadequate decisions than did their American counterparts. Beyond the design of the initial U.S. study, however, the West German students were asked in an open-ended format to discuss their concerns in making the allocation decision. Nearly half of the unprompted responses centered around justice issues.     

Heidegger's Political Philosophy and the Theory of the Liberal State

The paper explores Martin Heidegger's political philosophy and its relation to the theory and ethical foundations of the liberal state. It first reconstructs the key doctrines of Heidegger's philosophy formulated in Being and Time. It then turns to Heidegger's later philosophy after the famous turning and investigates its relation to the fundamental ontology of Heidegger's earlier years. In a third step, Heidegger's much discussed Nazism and its link - by some commentators fervently defended and by others passionately denied — to his philosophy is the focus of attention. The findings about Heidegger's philosophy are then critically assessed: firstly as to their philosophical merits concerning fundamental questions of epistemology, ontology or philosophical anthropology and secondly as to their relations to the ethical and theoretical foundations of the liberal state. As a result some proposals are made as to whether or not it is justified to regard Heidegger's work as part of the darker legacies of European thought. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Procedural justice in managerial selection: Identification of fairness determinants and associations of fairness perceptions

The study examined procedural fairness in managerial selection practices. A sample of professional managers were asked to make first, fairness judgments about managerial selection procedures in general; and second, specific fairness judgments based on their own previous experiences in applying for such positions. Using the general fairness ratings, the determinants of procedural fairness in selection were identified by the factor analysis technique. Five procedural factors (three process and two decision factors) accounted for 57.4% of the total variance. The factor scores derived from fairness ratings of specific selection procedures were then correlated with ratings of candidates' later organizational commitment, work satisfaction, and perceptions of organizational effectiveness. Results showed that process factors were significantly associated with candidate variables but decision factors were not. The findings were discussed in the context of current procedural justice theories.