Hierarchy-Legitimizing Ideologies Reduce Behavioral Obligations and Blame for Implicit Attitudes and Resulting Discrimination

Three preregistered studies investigated people’s judgments of whether someone with implicit racial bias is obligated to change their bias and to avoid discrimination based on that bias. Two studies showed that hierarchy-legitimizing ideologies—Belief in a Just World, Social Dominance Orientation, and political conservatism—predict lower obligation judgments. One study showed that hierarchy-legitimizing ideologies predicted greater protection of a potential discriminator; in another, they also predicted lower protection of a person who may be discriminated against. Lastly, one study showed that greater obligation judgments predicted greater blame of a person who discriminated based on implicit bias. Taken together, these four studies address how people’s ideologies relate to their obligation judgments for implicit racial bias and how those obligation judgments are related to blame for discrimination resulting from implicit racial bias.     

Victims of Sexual Violence in the Canadian Criminal Courts

The literature on victims of sexual violence in the criminal justice system has overwhelmingly pointed to the negative impact of these encounters. This research project sought to explore various aspects that might contribute to harm by conducting in-depth qualitative interviews and collecting limited quantitative data on 31 victims who had encountered various processes in the justice system. Results indicated a wide range of experiences, indicating that no interactions within the system were universally harmful or helpful. Victim experience was shaped by the attitudes and behaviors of specific people within the system demonstrating the importance each individual plays in their official capacity. In the final analysis however, victim satisfaction with the jail term was key to understanding experiences of harm.     

Fairness, Efficiency and Effectiveness in Court-based Dispute Resolution Schemes in England

In recent years in England there has been renewed emphasis oncourt-based dispute resolution schemes (in-court conciliation)as a means to avoid the use of contested hearings in litigatedcontact cases. These alternative dispute resolution mechanismsare believed to be less likely to fuel parental conflict, morelikely to result in an outcome tailored to individual circumstancesand to be accepted by the parties as well as reducing delayand costs. Previous research has, however, raised questionsabout whether rapid negotiations in a highly pressurized courtenvironment can produce a fair, safe or sustainable solution.In this paper, we draw upon a recently completed research studyto explore the fairness, efficiency and effectiveness of disputeresolution schemes in litigated contact cases. Like others weraise concerns about some of the limitations of in-court conciliation.We conclude by arguing for the development of a more facilitativeor educational-therapeutic approach to litigated contact cases.     

Access to justice: a new approach using human rights standards

This article details a trial of a new approach to measuring access to justice that utilises human rights instruments as the reference point. It involves an examination of people's actual experience of the justice system using human rights standards as the benchmark. The research project selected the right to income security. The project trialled a range of methods gathering data about how people have been treated in the Australian social security system and how they would expect to be treated if there was a human right to social security in Australia. This data is assessed against the set of standards developed to measure the enjoyment of the right to social security. The trial suggests that without knowledge about human rights and legal rights, without the confidence to exercise those rights and without the capacity or capability to seek or find help it is unlikely that people will realise their rights and accordingly access to justice is placed in question. The research methodology has the potential to be a useful model to conduct further access to justice research.     

Rethinking Human Rights in York as a Human Rights City

Human rights is in crisis in the UK. It lacks significant political backing and public support. This ‘insider account’ of York becoming a human rights city suggests that there is a need to rethink approaches to human rights. The article looks at the strategies adopted in the city; the annual city‐based indicator report which provides the key reference point for all local activities; and the declaration of York as a ‘human rights city’ in 2017 alongside its subsequent impact. The discussion is linked to two debates within human rights: how to define and build a culture of human rights, and what it means for human rights to be truly relevant at a local level. The new approach advocated can be summarised as participatory, locally informed, and related to everyday concerns.