Judicial alignment and criminal justice: evidence from Russian courts

This paper investigates the effect of informal ties between judges (as represented by regional court chairpersons) and prosecutors on the repressive implementation of criminal justice in Russia in the area of fraud convictions. The authors utilize criminal law statistics of Russian regional courts for 2006–2010 to determine the alignment between chairpersons and prosecutors by measuring the length of their mutual career paths. The informal ties have a strong impact on trial outcome, which, however, changes over time. During periods of high bureaucratic risks and uncertainty, regions with a higher extent of informal ties between judges and prosecutors exhibit more repressive law enforcement. If external risks decrease, informal coalitions seem to increase the independence of the courts, insulating them from bureaucratic pressures and limiting their repressiveness.     

Authoritarian constitutionalism in Putin's Russia: A pragmatic constitutional court in a dual state

This article analyzes the successful adaptation of the Russian Constitutional Court (RCC) to an increasingly authoritarian regime under President Vladimir Putin. It argues that the key to its success lay in its pragmatic approach, whereby the Court decides cases that matter to the regime in a politically expedient way, while giving priority to legal and constitutional considerations in other cases, thereby recognizing the reality of a dual state. Over the years the RCC has taken a pragmatic approach in its reaction to changes in the rules of its operations, in its personnel, and in the policies of the popular political leader, including reducing the country's subordination of European legal norms. In so doing, the Court and its skillful chairman Valerii Zorkin achieved considerable autonomy in pursuing its own legal vision on many issues and even improved the implementation of its decisions by other judges and political bodies alike (previously a big problem). In short, the RCC developed its own version of “authoritarian constitutionalism”, which may serve as a model for constitutional judicial bodies in other authoritarian states.     

US Women Federal Court Judges Appointed by President Carter

There is considerable disagreement as to whether any gender differences on the bench are symbolic, substantive, or both. This paper, based on never-before published surveys and personal interviews conducted in the early 1980s, contributes to that discussion by describing what women appointed to the federal bench by President Carter between 1976 and 1980 had to say about gender differences in their first years in office. I conclude that these early experiences and comments by women on the bench are still relevant today and presage much of the research on judicial gender which has followed.

General courts,specialized courts,and the complementarity effect

Among the major decisions any legal system must make is deciding whether to establish general courts with broad jurisdiction, or specialized courts with limited jurisdiction. Under one influential argument—advanced by both judges and legal theorists—general courts foster coherence within the legal system. This Article identifies a distinct effect of establishing general courts: the “complementarity effect.” In the case of complementarity, general courts strategically apply different principles in different fields, such that litigants losing in one sphere (e.g., public law) are compensated in another (e.g., private law). We support this conjecture by analyzing three case studies.     

Judicial Self-Governance Index: Towards better understanding of the role of judges in governing the judiciary

The aim of this article is to introduce a novel view on how to evaluate the share of power held by judges in judicial governance. Its contribution to court administration and the regulation of judges is three-fold. First, it provides a novel empirically tested conceptualization of judicial governance that includes 60 competences grouped into eight dimensions (ranging from selection and education of judges to case allocation and publication of judicial decisions). Second, it proposes a new Judicial Self-Governance (JSG) Index that measures how much power domestic judges hold in these eight dimensions of judicial governance. Third, by applying the JSG Index to the longitudinal data for Germany, Italy, Czechia, and Slovakia this article demonstrates that the Judicial Council model is not the only institutional model of judicial governance leading to the empowerment of judges. This means that judges can hold many powers without the existence of judicial councils and even in the Ministry of Justice model.     

Political competition and de facto judicial independence in non‐democracies

This article investigates the role of political competition in explaining de facto judicial independence in non‐democratic regimes. It argues that the electoral, political insurance explanation popular in the study of courts in democracies also offers explanatory power in the autocratic context, despite popular wisdom otherwise: due to the relatively greater risks of losing power in non‐democracies, electoral competition is highly salient when present. This is examined via hierarchical and fixed effects models that show competition strongly associated with increased levels of independence. This relationship is robust to alternative model and data specification, and has strong out‐of‐sample predictive accuracy.     

新刑诉法实施后简易程序开展现状、存在问题、原因及完善对策——以四川省M市Q县为例

基层法院审理全国80%~90%的案件,新刑诉法将适用简易程序案件范围扩大到基层法院管辖的案件,可以预见,未来审判程序将逐步由普通程序为主转变为以简易程序为主。因此,在新刑诉法实施半年多之际,关注简易程序开展现状,发现其存在的问题,分析问题存在的原因,寻求解决问题之道,对于下一步更好地开展简易程序有重要的意义。     

Evolution of the Russian Judicial System in 2014

After the mass protests that took place in 2011–12 and the annexation of Crimea in 2014, all of the negative tendencies that have existed in Russia's judicial system became more prominent, while the few positive tendencies have largely disappeared. Acquittal has become even rarer than it already was, even as the courts' tendency to hand down sentences short of incarceration has been reversed.     

Domestic violence case processing: a matter of local legal culture

As one enters a courthouse, its culture is communicated to its listening visitors. The manner in which the security guards speak; the length of time victims are kept waiting; the amount of bail a defendant is assessed; communicate messages to those who are paying attention. Domestic violence cases have long suffered from lenient treatment and dismissals in our criminal courts. This paper examines a unique explanation for this problem: the court’s local legal culture. The elements of two courts’ local legal culture that most profoundly impacted their processing of domestic violence cases are examined. Over a six month period, 23 in depth interviews were conducted with court workgroup members in two courts, one with a specialized domestic violence session and one without. Court room observations were used to supplement these interviews. The results were insightful and telling about how a court’s culture can, at times, be more influential on case processing than the law itself.     

Judges as therapists and therapists as judges: the collision of judicial and therapeutic roles in drug treatment courts

This paper explores the implications of the expansion of judicial and therapeutic roles in a drug treatment court (DTC) in Canada. Issues that are raised are: how the courtroom is framed as a therapeutic space where public appearances by participants are part of the therapeutic process; how judges have taken on therapeutic practices, effectively compromising their traditional role as neutral arbiter; how certain women resisted therapeutic interventions by judges and felt they received harsher punishments than men; and how treatment counselors in DTCs are given powers of enforcement over their clients. The collision of judicial and therapeutic roles in the DTC results in negative consequences for individuals in the specialized courts. Specifically, DTC participants are expected to engage in a therapeutic relationship with their treatment counselors and the court; however, their right to confidentiality is withheld, and their treatment counselors act as agents for the court.