Deliberative Democracy and the Politics of Recognition

It is commonly supposed that deliberative democracy and the politics of recognition are natural allies, as both demand a more inclusive politics. It is argued here that this impression is misleading and that the politics of recognition harbours significant anti-deliberative tendencies. Deliberative politics requires a public sphere which is maximally inclusive of diverse beliefs and perspectives, including those which dissent from orthodox understandings of group indentities. By contrast, the politics of recognition typically seeks to insulate such identities from challenge, both from within and without. Devices such as special group representation, while apparently inclusive, risk incentivising an anti-deliberative culture of deference to identity claims. An alternative model of inclusive politics, which involves a more contestatory political culture and a multiplication of deliberative opportunities, is sketched.     

The impact of Māori cultural values on forensic science practice in New Zealand

Forensic science aims to serve society by advancing justice. It is accepted that some actions taken by the state in the interests of advancing justice, such as postmortem examinations, may impinge on values held by members of groups within society. Such actions have the potential to cause cultural offense. It is important that forensic scientists are aware of these issues and that as a profession we should take actions, where possible, to reduce any potential offense and consequently reduce unnecessary distress. This paper examines the impact of these issues on forensic practice in New Zealand, and, in particular, in relation to the cultural values of Māori, the indigenous people of New Zealand. Interviews and workshops were used to identify forensic practices involving a risk of cultural offense. Particular issues were identified in regard to crime scene attendance and examination, postmortem attendance and sample storage, disposal, and return. This paper describes the response developed by the Institute of Environmental Science and Research Limited (ESR) to address these issues, including a cultural awareness training package and reference brochure.     

The effects of unfair procedure on negative affect and protest

The present study extends earlier research on procedural unfairness by assessing subjects' reactions to a procedural change before they learn about the outcome of the changed procedure. Subjects performed a series of four tests. After three tests, the procedure to calculate the test scores was changed into a procedure that was very inaccurate or slightly inaccurate compared to what subjects had experienced until then. The very inaccurate procedure was judged as more unfair as the slightly inaccurate procedure. As predicted, the unfair procedure raised negative affect and motivated subjects to protest. Implications of the results for procedural justice theory are discussed.     

The meaning of procedural fairness: A comparison of taxpayers’ and representatives’ views of their tax audits

This study compares how taxpayers and their representatives judge the procedural fairness of tax audits. Taxpayers (N=70) and their representatives (N=70) participated in interviews after the completion of their tax audits and were asked to describe their impressions of the audit and auditor and to rate how satisfied they were with the treatment and how hard the auditor tried to be fair. The study compares representatives oriented toward balancing truth and advocating for their client with representatives oriented toward primarily obtaining the best outcome for their client. Results showed that representatives and taxpayers were equally likely to mention the dignity and responsiveness of the audit. Representatives, however, were more likely to mention the quality of the decision, and taxpayers were more likely to infer prejudging than were representatives. Taxpayers and representatives oriented toward truth viewed the process as less fair than did representatives oriented toward obtaining the best outcome. Taxpayers and representatives oriented toward truth also viewed the auditor as less cooperative and less objective than did representatives oriented toward obtaining the best outcome. Representatives and taxpayers, however, generally use the same concerns to evaluate the fairness of the audit, although they disagreed about where the audit fell on these dimensions. Theoretical and practical implications of these results are discussed.     

Psycho-social, ethical and legal arguments for and against the retrospective release of information about donors to donor-conceived individuals in Australia

In the February 2011 report on its inquiry into the past and present practices of donor conception in Australia, the Australian Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee called for the introduction of legislation to regulate donor conception in all jurisdictions that do not have it in place "as a matter of priority". It further called for the establishment, "as a matter of priority", of a national register of donors to enable donor-conceived individuals to access identifying information about their donor. The Senate Committee left open the question as to whether the legislation and central register should have retrospective effect. This article focuses upon that question. It shows that arguments concerning the privacy, confidentiality and anonymity of some donors who may wish to remain anonymous are outweighed by the manifest injustice faced by donor-conceived individuals who are denied access to such information, as well as their families and donors who wish to exchange this information,