The Social Courts in the German Democratic Republic—Bodies of Criminal Justice

[Editor's Note] The author discusses the structure, function, and success of the social courts in the German Democratic Republic.     

Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia comprehensive Justice System Reform Program： Baseline study report

In 2002, the Government of Ethiopia established, under the authority of the FDRE Ministry of Capacity Building, the Justice System Reform Program （JSRP） ＂to assess the performance of the various institutions of justice and to propose appropriate reforms＂.
The director of the JSRP, in his presentation in a workshop on Justice System Reform in Ethiopia organized in May 2002, highlighted the most blatant deficiencies in the existing justice system in Ethiopia.     

Beyond the Law?: The Justice of Deconstruction

This paper offers a close reading of Derridas essay Force of Law that emphasises the twin strengths of a deconstructive approach to questions of law and justice -- textual analysis and political context. Derridas interest is in limit or test cases, and so he engages with the fraying edges of the law, its borders, the frontiers that are most heavily policed because they are most fragile, for example capital punishment, genocide, general strikes and terrorism. Derrida undertakes an exploration of violence through a reinterpretation of Walter Benjamins Critique of Violence. At the heart of Derridas difficult argument is a demand for justice that goes beyond the cataloguing of specific injustices, and beyond the terms of Benjamins critique. The utopian impulse that underpins Force of Law is carried over into Specters of Marx, Derridas recent explicit grappling with the legacy of Marxism. The links between these two texts by Derrida implies a sustained politics of radical commitment on the part of deconstruction, a commitment to future forms of legality and egalitarianism, a theory of justice posited upon prescience rather than precedent.     

Shifting Interpretation in International Court of Justice’s Decision in the Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States of America: A Deliberate Step?

Iran and the United States (US) have resorted to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on five occasions to settle their disputes. The latest dispute was initiated by Iran and pertains to US’s decision of withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement and re-imposition of sanctions on Iran, including its nationals and companies. In this brief critique, the authors have analysed the preliminary objections and the ICJ’s approach in deciding the dispute. The authors have noticed that the ICJ digressed from its earlier decisions which involved the Treaty of Amity 1955 between Iran and the US. It is also to be noted that the ICJ has not substantiated its deviation with analytical observation. Also, it is opined that although the international adjudication lacks a system of precedent, it is the sacrosanct duty of the ICJ to establish a coherent jurisprudence in the interest of justice, which the ICJ has consciously neglected to achieve in this present dispute.

     

Corruption and economic growth: does the size of the government matter?

Economic Change and Restructuring - Corruption is often a source of contentious debate, covering different areas of knowledge, such as philosophy and sociology. In this paper we assess the effects...     

Expanding the Boundaries of Criminal Justice: Emphasizing the “S” in the Criminal Justice Sciences through Interdisciplinary Efforts

At its very core, the phrase “criminal justice sciences” points to the interdisciplinary nature of our field. However, efforts to promote and support interdisciplinary teaching and research face significant barriers. In this paper, I address how interdisciplinarity is conceptualized, the history of criminal justice as an interdisciplinary field, why we should promote interdisicplinarity, barriers we confront in interdisciplinary efforts, the degree to which ACJS members engage in interdisciplinary practices, factors related to interdisciplinarity, and opportunities for increased interdisciplinary research in criminal justice. To grow as an academic field, I conclude that we must look to other disciplines such as biology, computer science, policy, and women’s studies as we expand our disciplinary boundaries.     

The Pinochet Case: International Criminal Justice in the Gothic Style?

Book reviewed in this article:
Woodhouse, Diana (ed), The Pinochet Case: A Legal and Constitutional Analysis     

Procedural Justice for Victims and Offenders?: Exploring Restorative Justice Processes in Australia and the US

Sociolegal research indicates that when citizens perceive that legal processes and procedures are fair, both positive and negative legal outcomes will be viewed as acceptable. However, little is known about perceptions of fairness in informal contexts such as in restorative justice (RJ) practices and with victims (and offenders) who participate in these programs. Drawing on interviews with key actors engaged in post-conviction RJ programs for serious crimes in Australia and the USA, this paper asks, do post-conviction therapeutic RJ programs for violent crimes enhance procedural justice for victims and offenders? The data reveal that RJ is compatible with procedural justice for both victims and offenders. Specifically, RJ aids in correcting the harms created by the formal criminal justice system and, thus, satisfies and even greatly enhances procedural justice goals for both victims and offenders.     

New Paths in International Criminal Justice?: The Internal Rules of the Cambodian Extraordinary Chambers

The Internal Rules of the Cambodian Extraordinary Chambers adoptedin June 2007 provide some insight into how a non-adversarialsystem might work in the context of a hybrid tribunal with jurisdictionover both domestic and international crimes. This approach presentsvarious novelties, especially with respect to the pre-trialand trial stages of the proceedings, and provides an exampleof integration into a domestic non-adversarial system of principlesderived from international criminal procedure.     

Trends in the Experience of Injustice: Justice Indexes About Earnings in Six Societies, 1991–1996

This paper examines trends in the experience of injustice in six societies—Bulgaria, Czech Republic, East and West Germany, Hungary, and Russia—between 1991 and 1996. Using data collected by the International Social Justice Project, we estimate the justice index, JI1, and its decomposition into the amount of injustice attributable to poverty and the amount of injustice attributable to inequality; and we also examine gender differences in the justice index and its decomposition. The justice index is a summary measure of individuals' justice evaluations, and therefore the paper also takes a preliminary look at the two basic quantities that underlie the justice evaluation—actual earnings and just earnings—and their determinants, investigating, for the men of East and West Germany, the actual and just returns to schooling and experience in 1991 and 1996.     

A Refugee from Justice? Disparate Treatment in the Federal Court of Canada

This article paints a troubling picture of disparate treatment in the Federal Court of Canada. Examining more than 600 immigration and refugee claims, the results link judicial action to litigants' representation, their demographics and national region, and the background and ideology of the judges involved. When compared with prior research in Canada and similar studies from the United States, the findings suggest that an applicant in search of a just result would do as well to hire an experienced lawyer and hope for a sympathetic judge as to prepare an excellent appeal. Canada's immigration process requires greater attention so that the reality of its operation matches the promise of the nation's intentions.     

How Does the European Court of Justice Reason? A Review Essay on the Legal Reasoning of the European Court of Justice

This review essay analyses two significant recent contributions to the debate over the reasoning of the Court of Justice (CJ). These contributions highlight the impossibility of a wholly scientific and deductive approach to attributing ‘correct’ outcomes to the Court's case‐law. At the same time, their analysis adds significant findings for the debate over the Court's possible ‘activist’ or political role. Following from these contributions, this essay makes two arguments: firstly, that the inability of the Court to anchor its reasoning solely in a deductive form of legal reasoning should encourage the CJ to engage in a more advanced ‘constitutional dialogue’ with the EU's political institutions; and secondly, that truly understanding the Court's reasoning involves a closer analysis of the institutional and personal dynamics influencing Court decisions. Understanding European judicial reasoning may require a closer look at the social and political—as well as doctrinal—context within which European judges act.     

Judicial Interpretation or Judicial Activism? The Legacy of Rationalism in the Studies of the European Court of Justice

During the last two decades, law as a factor in European integration has attracted great scientific interest. Numerous studies and theoretical analyses have been published that have undertaken the task of examining and explaining the role of law in the progress of integration. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) in particular, as Europe's judiciary body, draws much attention in this context. However, the inflexible, mechanistic and universalistic notion of rationality that these works employ leads to serious misinterpretations and unjustified criticism regarding the role the ECJ takes in the course of integration. Within the frameworks of contemporary approaches, the Court is perceived as just one more political player among other actors and institutions, able to shape the EU in the pursuit of its own rational interests. By outlining the theoretical concept of context rationality, this article shows that the logics of law and judicial lawmaking are based on a non‐trivial and non‐political rationality and cannot be understood appropriately without paying attention to the context of European law.     

International Commercial Arbitration in the People''''s Republic of China

IntroductionArbitrationhasbeenconsideredasanalternativetolitigationforalongtime.Comparedwithlitigation,itiswidelyrecognisedthatarbitrationhastheadvantagesofneutrality,flexibilityandconfidentialityanditisanefficientandlessexpensivemethodofresolvinginternational commercialdisputes.①Overthepastdecades,arbitrationhasbecomeanimportantandfrequentlyused methodforsettlinginternationalcommercialdisputesintheworld.ThelasttwentyyearshavewitnessedthedramaticexpansionoftheeconomyinChina.Meanwhile,dispute…     

The Compulsory Jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice: How Compulsory Is It?

The "compulsory jurisdiction" of the International Court ofJustice is not truly compulsory. The Court's jurisdiction isbased on the consent of the parties. States have the optionto accept or not to accept the Court's jurisdiction and cando so under terms and conditions they determine themselves.However, once a State has granted its consent, and when a disputethat falls within the scope of that consent is submitted tothe Court, the State must subject itself to the Court's jurisdiction.It is that legal obligation that is at the root of the term"compulsory".