Juvenile Justice Advocacy: Practice in a Unique Court

The defense attorney must remember that the Juvenile Court is a court and not a social agency. But the fact that it is a court should not obscure the fact that it is a court with social objectives and social techniques. Thus, he must have the knowledge and ability to suggest alternative treatments to court adjudication.     

国际法院司法实践中的反诉问题研究

反诉是国际法院诉讼程序中的一种附带程序。20世纪90年代,国际法院涉及到反诉的案子突然增多,其基本上是被作为一种诉讼策略在使用。国际法院在处理反诉过程中的系列做法彰显了反诉的诸多法理。为了加强对反诉程序的控制,国际法院对反诉规则进行了相应的修改。     

Creating Justice Through Balance: Integrating Domestic Violence Law into Family Court Practice

Freedom from domestic violence is a central right that will be realized through a transformation of culture. Law, embedded within the evolving cultural transformation, plays a necessary, though not sufficient, role in social change. This article reviews the development of family and domestic violence law. It compares and contrasts the core precepts of family and domestic violence jurisprudence with resulting practice and policy ramifications arising from the inherent substantive tensions. Finally, critical civil legal system actors, courts, and attorneys are challenged to apply and practice domestic violence law in the struggle to afford justice for all.     

Interdisciplinary Practice in Family Court: A Judicial Perspective

This commentary emphasizes the windows of judicial opportunity to proactively manage family law cases, to empower families, and to encourage interdisciplinary conferencing and settlement.     

“保护的责任”：国际法院相关司法实践研究

“保护的责任”自提出以来,迄今已在政治层面获得了广泛的国际共识。在法律层面特别是可操作性层面,国际法院通过对《灭种罪公约》及《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》的解释和适用,提出了“作为一种义务存在的干涉”这样一种新观念,强调了所有公约当事国所应承担的“预防责任”,间接地回应了《国家对国际不法行为的责任》条款草案第48条,也从法律实践的角度回应了“保护的责任”,特别是其中的“预防责任”。通过这种回应,就使国家基于“保护的责任”而采取的某些干涉行动具有合法性。这种回应,将会深刻地影响到国家的行为模式。面对这种新发展所带来的挑战,中国有必要调整自身外交策略。     

Therapeutic Jurisprudence in Practice: Changes in Family Treatment Court Norms Over Time

Family treatment court (FTC) is an example of an increasing number of problem‐centered courts currently operating in the United States. Problem‐centered courts such as FTC encompass the ideas of therapeutic jurisprudence but operate within the broader court system. Presented are the results of an FTC case study that seeks to understand the evolution of courtroom norms and practice over time. Observations of courtroom interactions and interviews with courtroom personnel show that initial observations are consistent with the ideals of therapeutic jurisprudence. However, over time, daily demands and pressures on the courtroom undermine the therapeutic approach.     

Improving Outcomes for a Juvenile Justice Model Court: A Realist Evaluation

The main purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the Erie County, New York, Juvenile Justice Model Court on court improvement and improved case outcomes for youth and families. A quasi‐experimental design was used within a realist evaluation paradigm, with four independent groups in four years. Court improvement was measured by the number of days between appearance and disposition, and improved case outcomes by the extent to which penetration into the juvenile justice system was reduced. Both outcomes were significantly improved, and it was found that the Model Court intervention was the main predictor for their improvement. Youth with reduced penetration had lower levels of recidivism.     

The International Criminal Court and Africa: Exemplary Justice

This is a theoretical and empirical investigation into the causal link (if any) between international criminal trials and preventing violence through exemplary prosecutions. Specifically how do representative trials of persons accused of having the greatest responsibility for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, supposedly bind recurrent violence? The argument pursued is that by using an accused as an example, a court engages in an indirect and uncertain substitution of personal rights for social harmony and order. These prosecutions combine a peculiar rhetoric, logic and aesthetic, all which substitute the responsibilities for a society in general to a particular individual in order to redeem that society by transferring its communal responsibility onto the individual punished as a form of atonement or expiation. International and domestic trials, as well as truth and reconciliation commissions, are part of a suite of options addressing communal mass violence that can work in tandem. However, because those convicted do not have a monopoly on criminality, nor do those merely reconciled have a monopoly on virtue, exemplification through punishment only targets a few on behalf of the many. Indeed such a redemptively sacrificial economy distinguishes legal justice from mere vengeance.     

Family Court Enhancement Project: Improving Access to Justice

In 2013, Minnesota's Fourth Judicial District was one of four courts in the country selected by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women to receive a Family Court Enhancement Project (FCEP) grant, a multiyear demonstration initiative designed to build the capacity of court systems and partner stakeholders to improve child custody decision making in cases involving domestic violence. The FCEP enabled the project sites to explore, implement, and assess new and innovative court and noncourt procedures and practices. This article is an exploration of the outcomes of this project.     

The Court of Justice and the Union Citizen

Abstract Over a decade since the conception of the Union citizen, the aim of this article very simply is to measure his growth and maturity with a sustained analysis of the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice in this regard. After all, it was Advocate General Lèger who stated that it was for the Court to ensure that its full scope was attained. The article focuses predominantly on three areas of study: Member State nationality law and citizenship, the effect and meaning of Article 18 EC, and the ever‐evolving right to equal treatment for the Union citizen. It is fully updated in the light of recent case law, the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, and the newly adopted Directive 2004/58 EC.     

Argumentation and Legal Interpretation in the Criminal Decisions of the Polish Supreme Court and the German Federal Court of Justice: A Comparative View

The subject of this study are the argumentation strategies applied by the Polish and German apex courts competent in criminal matters, namely the Supreme Court and the Federal Court of Justice, respectively. The investigation encompasses a total of 200 rulings issued by the criminal panels of these bodies. Particular focus was put on examining which arguments both courts apply to solve interpretation problems, and secondly, how these courts systematize the interpretation process. Methodologically, the examination utilizes, inter alia, the principles of qualitative research, without neglecting the legal dogmatic perspective. A crucial theoretical foundation underlying this study is the distinction between formalistic and substantive legal cultures. The examination reveals that neither the Polish nor the German legal culture is purely formalistic or value-oriented. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court of Poland shows greater affinity for formalistic arguments, whereas the substantive interpretation methods are more widespread in the judicature of the German Federal Court of Justice. In particular, the Polish Court prefers the linguistic interpretation, whereas the German Court favours the purposive approach.

     

Mutual Bonds: Media Frames and the Israeli High Court of Justice

This study examines the coverage of the Supreme Court of Israel functioning as the High Court of Justice (HCJ) in the popular and elite press over a period marked by growing activism of the Israeli Supreme Court and an increasingly adversarial and critical media. Our results show that more prominent coverage of the HCJ over time, especially in the elite press, accentuates the salience of the Supreme Court in public life. In addition, the topics, the stages of the HCJ proceedings, the petitioners, and the outcome of the cases covered by the press, as well as the generally uncritical reporting of the Court decisions help create the frame of an autonomous, powerful Court that frequently opposes and restrains the government. We suggest that this pattern of media coverage of the HCJ benefits both the Court and the media: it reinforces the image of the media as a critical watchdog of the government, while at the same time it legitimates the Court's expansion of power and strengthens its image as an apolitical and independent institution.     

Principle of Community exhaustion upheld by Court of Justice

The European Court of Justice confirmed that Article 4(2) ofthe Information Directive did not permit member states to introduceor retain a rule of international exhaustion of the distributionright and rejected a challenge to the validity of that provision.