Lessons from Philosophy? Interdisciplinary Justice Research and Two Classes of Justice Judgments

More and more scholars of social justice have been calling for a closer collaboration between empirical and normative disciplines. Psychological and sociological research, as well as philosophical theories can, so they claim, learn from one another and work should be based on results obtained in the other fields of research. Some political philosophers do not share this view. They argue that, since most empirical research does not capture people's moral views on justice, its results cannot be of any value to their theories. Based on this critique I suggest in the first part of this paper that empirical research should distinguish between two classes of justice judgments: First, justice judgments in a narrow sense, which are made under conditions of impartiality and grounded in moral principles, and second, justice attitudes, which differ from other types of social attitudes only in their attitude objects. In the second part I present a quasi-experimental study that aimed at testing the two different classes of justice judgments empirically. The results show that justice judgments in the narrow sense can be obtained even under conditions in which complex experimental manipulations cannot be employed. In the third part of this paper I hypothesize that justice judgments which are based on the two formal criteria provided by political philosophy (impartiality and reference to moral principles) may serve as important intervening variables when trying to explain the impact of justice beliefs on different patterns of human behavior.     

Blinking Subjects; Blinking Justice? – Law,Medicine and the PVS Patient

This paper argues that in medical discourse, there is insufficient unanimity of opinion with regards to the time at which an accurate diagnosis of PVS can be made and that clearly, there is an incomplete medical knowledge of the PVS condition. The judiciary chooses neither to question medical opinion that patients can be considered to be in PVS despite a failure to satisfy the diagnostic criteria, nor medical opinion that patients in `near PVS' will never recover. It is apparent from an examination of the judgements given in PVS cases that the law does not ascribe such individuals with full human status. Such a legal position is particularly problematic in ethical terms when applied in cases involving patients who are in a `near PVS' position, and in the light of evidence that some PVS diagnoses are inaccurate. The application of the best interests test in PVS cases results in the adoption of a paternalistic, objective approach that fails to respect the former competent individuals whom PVS patients once were. If, alternatively, the substituted judgement test were to be adopted, the principle of individual autonomy would become central to the question of whether PVS patients' treatment should be withdrawn. Furthermore, the application of this test would also ensure that PVS patients continue to be viewed as `persons'.     

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.     

Litigation Costs and Before‐the‐Event Insurance: The Key to Access to Justice?

The cost of civil litigation is a key factor in determining the extent of access to justice. Following cuts in legal aid attention has focused upon finding alternative methods of assisting litigants without producing costs which are out of proportion to the damages obtained. The recent report by Lord Justice Jackson attempts to deal with concerns about increasing and disproportionate costs said to arise in part because of the encouragement of conditional fee agreements. This article considers the proposals made in the report, and argues that too little attention has been paid to before‐the‐event insurance as a means of securing access to justice for the great majority of claimants who suffer personal injury.     

Criminal Justice Reform and the System’s Efficiency

This article discusses key issues that affect the efficiency and credibility of criminal justice systems. It discusses the consequences of an ineffective criminal justice system, which include unnecessary delays within the court process, ‘cracked’ or ‘collapsed’ trials, and lack of public confidence. It notes that a successful system must contain strategic, integrated, and sustainable mechanisms that enhance the entire criminal justice process. The article examines a number of initiatives taken by various countries, noting the measurable and sustainable results, while also suggesting ways that these programs could be improved. Finally, the author notes the importance of measuring the outcomes and impact of the suggested initiatives in an effort to promote transparency and accountability, as well as effectively record successful strategies.     

Exploring the “Lost and Found” of Justice Theory and Research

Scientific interest in the nature of how people think about justice and fairness began approximately 70 years ago with Stouffer’s classic study on the American soldier. Since then there have been numerous theoretical frameworks and thousands of research studies conducted on what people perceive as fair and the consequences of making a fairness judgment. The goal of this article is to dig through the “lost and found” box of justice research in an attempt to re-examine where we have been, issues and ideas we may have forgotten, and to gain insight on directions we may want to go in the future. The key rediscovery of this review is that perspective matters. Specifically, how people interpret fairness depends critically on whether they are viewing a situation in terms of their material, social, or moral needs and goals. The implications of adopting a contingent theory of how people reason about fairness are discussed.

Subsidiarity in the Area of EU Justice and Home Affairs Law—A Lost Cause?

This article intends to highlight the concept of subsidiarity in the area of the third pillar and EU criminal law more generally. In doing so, the article tries to show that criminal law could and should be seen as imbued with 'subsidiarity' and, more specifically, that it could be viewed as an expression of the principle of ultima ratio—a minimalism approach—in criminal law. Accordingly, the article asks why subsidiarity appears to be forgotten in third pillar matters despite its important function in this area. Moreover, the article confronts such a desired application of subsidiarity in the context of established EC law doctrine, by questioning whether it is possible simply to transplant the supranational discussion into the terrain of criminal law. Further, the article explores the function of Article 47 EU as the watchdog of the supranational sphere and discusses also briefly the phenomenon of enhanced cooperation in relation to the principle of subsidiarity in the domain of EU Justice and Home Affairs.     

1981 Review—Current Criminal Justice Projects Here and Abroad

The study of transnational environmental harm demands appreciation of specific methodological and conceptual issues that impinge upon the data collection process. Some of these issues include the ethics and politics of ‘outsiders’ researching other people's territory, the differential availability and types of data in different jurisdictions, the ways in which state denial and corporate resistance impede the research process, and the importance of utilising a wide range of data sources as a means to substantiate claims about harms and the causes of harms. The paper presents an exploration of methodological issues in the study of harms that are global, cross‐national, and/or localised, but which are intrinsically transnational in nature regardless of scale and scope. By understanding the challenges presented to those working in this area, we are also able to identify directions for future methodological development.     

Human Rights in the Council of Europe and the EU: Towards ‘Individual’, ‘Constitutional’ or ‘Institutional’ Justice?

Abstract: The European Convention on Human Rights, promulgated by the Council of Europe in 1950, is widely regarded as the world's most successful experiment in the trans‐national judicial protection of human rights. The EU's much more recent judicial and political interest in human rights has also been widely welcomed. Yet, while the crisis currently afflicting the Convention system has not gone unnoticed, the same cannot equally be said of the difficulties presented by the increasing interpenetration of the two systems. Amongst the few who have shown some interest in these problems, the dominant view is that good will and common sense will provide adequate solutions. We disagree. Instead, we detect a gathering crisis which, unless properly analysed and effectively tackled, will only deepen as the EU's interest in human rights develops further. In our view, the problem is essentially conceptual and that, ultimately, it boils down to a much‐neglected question, simple to state but not so easy to answer: is the trans‐national protection of human rights in Europe a matter of ‘individual’, ‘constitutional’ or ‘institutional’ justice?     

The European Forum for Victim–Offender Mediation and Restorative Justice

The European Forum for Victim–Offender Mediation and Restorative Justice is a non-governmental organisation set up because European victim–offender mediation projects had seldom established contacts beyond national borders. Informal contacts revealed that practitioners, academics and policy makers were looking for a more regular exchange and mutual support in developing victim–offender mediation and other restorative justice practices. This article gives an overview of the background to restorative justice and victim–offender mediation, and pays attention to the development of the Forum, its current aims, objectives and activities, and other (policy) developments at a supranational level.     

Reluctant Participants in Restorative Justice? Youthful Offenders and Their Parents

This paper examines offender and parental involvement in the Vermont Juvenile Restorative Panels Program. In this program, juvenile offenders on probation appear before citizen‐run boards to negotiate the terms of their probation, which may include apologies, community service, restitution, and competency development tasks. Victims and parents of the offender also participate. This study reports findings from a qualitative analysis of 22 cases, including observations of panel meetings and interviews with program coordinators, offenders, parents, and victims. We find that offenders vary in level of participation as well as in their willingness to take responsibility. Parents do not understand the program well, worry about their child’s likelihood of compliance, but generally support the goals of the program. The implications of these findings for restorative practices with juveniles are explored in the concluding section.     

Hero or Villain? Cinematic Lawyers and the Delivery of Justice

This essay is concerned with two specific issues that have as their backdrop the heroic central figure, the trial lawyer. First it considers the role of screen lawyers in seeking to maintain public (in this sense the public is the community within the film) support for the due process of law. The issue is the link between the lawyer and the initiation of the formal legal process. Essentially it is the extent to which the lawyer defends the institution of law. The second part of the piece considers when screen lawyers are permitted to go outside the formal process of law to ensure that the right result is achieved. It examines instances of where lawyers have been prepared to go 'beyond law' to achieve justice. Such acts raise a number of questions concerning how such behaviour affects perception of the legitimacy of the law, professional ethics, and the relationship between law and justice     

Do Retributive and Restorative Justice Processes Address Different Symbolic Concerns?

In support of a unitary conceptualization of retributive justice (justice through the imposition of punishment) and restorative justice (justice through dialogue aimed at consensus), three studies using hypothetical and recalled experiences of victimization found that people’s endorsement of, and satisfaction with, either justice notion depends on the symbolic meaning of the transgression. In Study 1, perceiving the transgression as a status/power violation was uniquely related to the endorsement of retributive justice, whereas perceiving it as a violation of shared values was uniquely related to restorative justice. In Study 2, motivation to restore status/power was related to retributive responses, whereas motivation to restore value consensus with the offender was uniquely related to restorative responses. In Study 3, a scenario experiment, respondents called for greater additional sanction when the applied justice process (retributive vs. restorative) did not fit the salient meaning of the transgressions compared to when it did (status/power vs. values).     

More on Ultimate and Immanent Justice: Results from the Research Project “Justice as a Problem within Reunified Germany”

In earlier studies it was shown that two domain-specific variates of belief in a just world, namely belief in immanent justice and belief in ultimate justice concerning severe illness, differ systematically and significantly. Only immanent justice leads to accusation and derogation of innocent victims while ultimate justice is concordant with positive evaluations of victims and helping behavior. With regard to the research project Justice as a Problem within Reunified Germany (GiP, from the German Gerechtigkeit als innerdeutsches Problem), two new scales were developed for purposes of measuring general belief in immanent and ultimate justice. Using a sample of 929 West Germans and 1,275 East Germans, some of the correlation patterns found in earlier studies could be replicated. For example, immanent justice did correlate with draconian judgments (the proneness to strict and severe judgments), while ultimate justice was associated with mildness. Only ultimate justice correlated with existential guilt about the underprivileged. Beside this confirmation of earlier findings, new correlation patterns were revealed. For example, only immanent justice correlated with the equity principle, whereas ultimate justice corresponded to the need and equality principles.     

“Fair and Balanced?” Justice Issues on Political Talk Shows

Like their news program predecessors, many political talk shows focus a considerable amount of their coverage on justice issues. Although numerous past studies have examined justice issue presentation in news programs, infotainment, and crime drama, to date only one forthcoming study has examined crime and justice coverage on political talk shows. Political talk shows often present issues in a debate format, as well as emphasize the balanced nature of the content in advertising, with one program even using the slogan “fair and balanced.” Building upon the format of previous media studies, we analyzed a composite month of videotaped footage of three popular political talk shows appearing on cable networks: CNN’s Lou Dobbs Tonight, MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Mathews, and The O’Reilly Factor from the Fox News Channel. Using content analysis techniques, this study examines balance in the form and content of these programs in terms of presentation of justice issues, political party identification of hosts and guests and realistic presentations of race and gender in the context of crime and justice. Results indicate that these programs tend to adopt an advocacy tone rather than an objectivist one. Furthermore, we demonstrate that racial and gender portrayals of crime and justice on these shows are significantly distorted from reality, with a priority afforded to white female victims of violent crime and minority male offenders.     

Political Culture and Post-Communist Transition—A Social Justice Approach: Introduction

Social Justice Research -     

Justice for All? Factors Affecting Perceptions of Environmental and Ecological Injustice

Moving beyond the typical focus on individual injustices, we examine individual-level and contextual factors affecting perceptions of justice with regard to the environment. Specifically, we examine decision-making procedures pertaining to environmental resource use and harms across groups of people; the distribution of environmental harms; and the direct treatment of the natural environment (i.e., procedural environmental justice, distributive environmental injustice, and ecological injustice, respectively). To test our hypotheses, we use data from a survey administered to a cohort of first-year college students at a southeastern university. Results demonstrate that environmental identity and perceptions of the extent to which the university context encourages sustainability consistently enhance perceptions of all three types of justice. Other factors differentially affect each type of justice. We discuss the importance of the patterns that emerge for environmental and sustainability education and speculate on the implications of moving from thinking about (in)justice related to the environment as an individual issue to one of the collectivity.