DOCSLIB.ORG

Procedural Fairness a Manual

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Procedural Fairness a Manual PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS A MANUAL A GUIDE TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS IN THE COURT SYSTEMS OF THE JUDICIARY OF THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO 2 PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS A MANUAL PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS A MANUAL A GUIDE TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS IN THE COURT SYSTEMS OF THE JUDICIARY OF THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO PEOPLE FOCUSED. PEOPLE CENTRED. Any use of masculine nouns and pronouns in this book refers to all genders. This is a publication of the Judicial Education Institute of Trinidad and Tobago, with input from Justice Peter Jamadar JA, Kamla Jo Braithwaite, Trisha Dassrath and Elron Elahie. © Judicial Education Institute of Trinidad and Tobago, 2018 All rights reserved. Except for use in review, no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, any information storage or retrieval system, or on the internet, without permission in writing from the publishers. This publication is available in electronic format via the JEITT’s E-book Platform: www.ttlawcourts.org/jeibooks. Design and Artwork: Paria Publishing Company Limited Typeset in Scala PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS A MANUAL: A Guide to the Implementation of Procedural Fairness in the Court Systems of the Judiciary of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago E-book 978-976-8255-81-5 Softcover 978-976-8255-80-8 PROCEEDING FAIRLY: Report on the Extent to which Elements of Procedural Fairness Exist in the Court Systems of the Judiciary of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago E-book 978-976-8255-79-2 Softcover 978-976-8255-78-5 PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS A MANUAL 5 CONTENTS Introduction 7 Overview 7 What is Procedural Fairness? 8 Procedural Fairness in Trinidad and Tobago 8 Implementing Procedural Fairness in the Court Systems of the JRTT 9 Guide to this Manual 9 Procedural Fairness: Closing the Gaps 13 Conclusion 13 Foundational Principles 15 The Principles of Equality and Non-Discrimination 18 Procedural Fairness, Equality and Non-Discrimination 20 Best Practices Checklists and Self-Assessments 22 1. Voice 22 2. Respectful Treatment 26 3. Neutrality 31 4. Trustworthy Authorities 35 5. Accountability 39 6. Understanding 42 7. Access to Information 45 8. Availability of Amenities 48 9. Inclusivity 51 The JRTT Personnel Observation Form 54 Users of the Court Systems Feedback 57 Endnotes 63 Resources 63 Printables 65 6 PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS A MANUAL PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS A MANUAL 7 INTRODUCTION FAIR PROCESS MATTERS. EQUALITY AND RESPECT ARE FUNDAMENTAL. INTEGRITY IS ESSENTIAL. OVERVIEW In every society, there are prevailing cultural perceptions of, and feelings about how a Judiciary administers justice. These perceptions and feelings impact on the degree of public trust and confidence in, and therefore the legitimacy of the Judiciary. Perceptions of and feelings about a Judiciary, the courts and court processes are held by members of the general public whether or not they ever have to enter a court building or courtroom, or be involved in litigation or other business. These perceptions and feelings may be based on what is thought to prevail locally, from first-hand experience and/or from second-hand reports, and/or from what is, or what is thought to be the norm in other countries. As a result, shaping, managing and responding to these perceptions and feelings is one of the important roles and functions of the Judiciary of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. One effective way for the JRTT to JRTT: The Judiciary of the Republic of create a positive perception of, and Trinidad and Tobago engender positive feelings about JRTT Personnel: Judicial officers and itself is by making internal changes staff within the court systems of the (improvements), with Users of JRTT the Court Systems as a main and Internal Actors: JRTT personnel and central focus. By concentrating court administrators within the court on variables that are more or less systems of the JRTT within its control—ie the behaviour of judicial officers, staff and court Users of the Court Systems: People administrators; how these groups who use the court systems of the JRTT interact with each other, and how they are seen and experienced by Users of the Court Systems; how court processes operate, and the overall court building experience—the JRTT will be able to impact the perceptions and feelings of Users of the Court Systems. An effective and sustainable way of making this impact is by implementing Procedural Fairness practices that are tailored to Users of the Court Systems’ needs and concerns. 8 PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS A MANUAL WHAT IS PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS? Procedural Fairness describes the kinds of behaviours and systems that inspire trust in, confer legitimacy on, and bestow authority upon court systems, and internal actors within these systems. It prescribes core, non-negotiable values and standards that are necessary for the legitimate and trustworthy exercise of legal authority within a community and society. Procedural Fairness therefore demands integrity of actions, behaviours, and systems in relation to its constitutive elements; an integrity that must be consistently experienced and perceived by all stakeholders in the court systems, users of the court systems, potential users of the court systems and the general public. Integrity meaning consistency between behaviour/actions and declared values and regulatory frameworks—on personal and institutional levels—in all circumstances, in a way that is transparent and accountable. PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS IN TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO To uncover these core, non-negotiable values and standards in the context of the court systems of the JRTT, the Judicial Education Institute of Trinidad and Tobago (JEITT) conducted a two-year research project on Procedural Fairness in Trinidad and Tobago. This research is detailed in the publication Proceeding Fairly: Report on the Extent to which Elements of Procedural Fairness Exist in the Court Systems of the Judiciary of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago.1 According to this research, there are 9 elements that must exist for Users of the Court Systems to experience Procedural Fairness. They are: VOICE RESPECTFUL TREATMENT NEUTRALITY TRUSTWORTHY AUTHORITIES ACCOUNTABILITY UNDERSTANDING ACCESS TO INFORMATION AVAILABILITY OF AMENITIES INCLUSIVITY PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS A MANUAL 9 The JEITT’s research further discloses that without Procedural Fairness and whole system integrity in relation to it, the court systems of the JRTT will likely be perceived and experienced as untrustworthy, illegitimate, and non-authoritative alienating spheres for the resolution of society’s legal conflicts and disputes. IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS IN THE COURT SYSTEMS OF THE JRTT The elements of Procedural Fairness uncovered by the JEITT’s research and the practices needed to properly implement them within the court systems of the JRTT are not entirely new concepts. However, the umbrella of Procedural Fairness and the local research provide specific grounding for the need for their implementation, from the perspectives of Users of the Court Systems. It is therefore highly recommended that JRTT personnel (and court administrators) read the Proceeding Fairly Report, along with Reflections of An Interested Observer,2 the ethnographic narrative based on the research, in order to develop a better understanding and appreciation of these needs and concerns. In addition, the JEITT has produced two publications that, on their face seem to apply only to judicial officers. However, the principles set out therein can apply to all JRTT personnel, and embody aspects of the elements of Procedural Fairness, as follows: 1. Exploring the Role of the CPR Judge:3 the principles of Transformational Servant Leadership, the section on Special Concerns and the need to act mindfully and with compassion; and 2. Statements of Principles and Guidelines for Judicial Conduct:4 principles and guide- lines for conduct that demonstrate practical approaches to the implementation of Procedural Fairness. Excerpts are cited throughout this publication and reference is made to specific principles, guidelines and commentaries as applicable. Procedural Fairness places a positive obligation on all JRTT personnel to take responsibility for the implementation of the 9 elements. GUIDE TO THIS MANUAL Having established the importance of placing Users of the Court Systems first, and the efficacy of Procedural Fairness in positively impacting their perceptions and feelings about the JRTT, this Manual serves as a guide to the implementation of Procedural Fairness—by setting out practical measures that should be continuously undertaken by JRTT personnel. The main focus of this manual is on JRTT personnel because judicial officers and staff are the internal actors that interact most with Users of the Court Systems. Court administrators have more of a role of oversight and, as a result, while they are impacted 10 PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS A MANUAL by the need to implement Procedural Fairness, the practical function of this Manual does not directly affect them. The Manual first sets out Foundational Principles that should underpin all of the actions of JRTT personnel. These principles remind us of the need to constantly, and consciously focus on Users of the Court Systems. It then goes on to address the importance of The Principles of Equality and Non-Discrimination and how they intersect with Procedural Fairness. Following this are 3 main sections that contain tips and tools for improving, measuring and evaluating attitudes, behaviours and practices—with the aim of improving Procedural Fairness: 1. Best Practices Checklists and Self-Assessments; 2. The JRTT Personnel Observation Form; and 3. Users of the Court Systems Feedback. BEST PRACTICES CHECKLISTS AND SELF-ASSESSMENTS This section is divided into 9 sub-sections, 1 for each element of Procedural Fairness. The definition of each element is set out, along with a practical breakdown of what it means. This is followed by a Best Practices Checklist, grouped according to core aspects of each element, and each sub-section ends with a Self-Assessment for that element.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Empirical Studies of Civil Procedure and Courts
    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2010 Process, People, Power and Policy: Empirical Studies of Civil Procedure and Courts Carrie Menkel-Meadow Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] Bryant Garth Southwestern Law School, [email protected] This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/181 Carrie Menkel-Meadow & Bryant Garth, Process, People, Power and Policy: Empirical Studies of Civil Procedure and Courts, in OXFORD HANDBOOK OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL RESEARCH (Peter Cane and Herbert Kritzer, eds., forthcoming). This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Civil Procedure Commons, Courts Commons, Law and Society Commons, and the Litigation Commons GEORGETOWN LAW Faculty Publications Georgetown Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 10-04 January 2010 Process, People, Power and Policy: Empirical Studies of Civil Procedure and Courts in OXFORD HANDBOOK OF EMPIRICAL LEGAL RESEARCH (Peter Cane and Herbert Kritzer, eds., forthcoming) Carrie Menkel-Meadow Bryant Garth Professor of Law Dean, Southwestern Law School Georgetown University Law Center Director, American Bar Foundation [email protected] [email protected] This paper can be downloaded without charge from: Scholarly Commons: http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/181 SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1537448 Posted with permission of the author Process, People, Power and Policy: Empirical Studies of Civil Procedure and Courts Carrie Menkel-Meadow and Bryant Garth For Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Research (Peter Cane and Herbert Kritzer, editors, Oxford University Press) I.
    [Show full text]
  • Legitimacy and Criminal Justice: the Benefits of Self-Regulation
    Legitimacy and Criminal Justice: The Benefits of Self-Regulation Tom R. Tyler*l In this lecture I arguefor the value of a self-regulatory approach to law and criminaljustice. I do so by first describing and critiquing the dominant approach to regulation in use today: deterrence. I suggest that in practice this model is costly and minimally effective in securing compliance with the law and motivating the acceptance of decisions made by police officers and judges. I then outline a different, self- regulatory model which focuses on engaging people's values as a basis for motivating voluntary deference to the law. I review empirical research suggesting that this strategy is both viable and more desirable than current sanction-based approaches. My argument is that this approach is particularly important when the goal is voluntary compliance with the law and/or willing cooperation with legal authorities. The traditional objective of the law and of the actions of legal authorities is to gain public compliance with the law. This includes compliance in the context of the particular decisions made by legal authorities such as judges and police officers and compliance with the law in everyday life. In both cases, a key societal objective is to bring people's behavior in line with the law (Tyler 2006d). And, in both cases, public compliance cannot be taken for granted. The problems involved in obtaining compliance with the law in everyday life are illustrated through compliance issues involving a wide variety of behaviors, ranging from traffic laws (Tyler 2006d) to drug laws (MacCoun 1993), illegal immigration (Cornelius and Salehyan 2007), and the payment of taxes (Braithwaite 2003; Kornhauser 2007; McGraw and Scholz 1991; Wenzel 2006).
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Effectiveness of Procedural Justice Training for Police Officers: Evidence from the Mexico City Police
    Assessing the Effectiveness of Procedural Justice Training for Police Officers: Evidence from the Mexico City Police ∗ RODRIGO CANALES MARINA GONZALEZ MAGAÑA Yale University Innovations for Poverty Action JUAN FRANCISCO SANTINI ALEXIS CHEREM MAUS Innovations for Poverty Action Innovations for Poverty Action September 29, 2020 DRAFT. PLEASE DO NOT CIRCULATE. COMMENTS WELCOME Abstract Organizations face the dilemma of how to ensure that their agents use discretion productively in complex situations while at the same time complying routinely and repeatedly with the organization’s standards and processes. No organization confronts this plight more strongly than policing institutions, where misconduct and bad decisions by their “street level bureau- crats” can have large negative consequences. This paper investigates if police officers can be trained effectively to incorporate the principles of procedural justice in their interactions with citizens. The procedural justice framework has been proven to increase citizen trust and build police legitimacy. In collaboration with the Mexico City police, we implemented a random- ized controlled trial with 1,854 officers to measure whether training changed their perceptions and behavioral intentions to policing, and the potential mechanisms behind any observed ef- fects. We find significant, substantive, and positive effects of the training across all measures of the procedural justice model. Our research yields insights into critical elements to consider in organizational training programs, including managerial alignment with the objectives of the training and a consideration of employees’ perceptions of the extent to which their work is understood by others. ∗Corresponding author: [email protected] 1 Introduction A fundamental question for any organization is how to ensure that its employees “do the right thing,” by always pursuing the organization’s interests and goals in their behaviors.
    [Show full text]
  • Impressing Organizational Justice Rules Based on Information Technology (Case Study: Telecommunication Company)
    International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences Vol. 3, No. 4, October 2013, pp. 197–207 E-ISSN: 2225-8329, P-ISSN: 2308-0337 © 2013 HRMARS www.hrmars.com Impressing Organizational Justice Rules Based on Information Technology (Case study: Telecommunication Company) Mashala Valikhani DEHAGHANI1 Faeze Sadat MIRHADI2 1 Islamic Azad university, Dehaghan Branch, Isfahan, Iran, Tel:+98-913-321-6535; Fax:+98-3222627311 2Department of Administration Management, Islamic Azad University, Dehaghan Branch, Isfahan, Iran, E-mail: [email protected] Tel:+98-913-553-0153;Fax:+98-3222627311 Abstract In today's competitive world, information technology is a wide field and has enabled organizations across the world to work in an efficient manner. Organizations are constantly seeking new ways to maximize the effect of organizational justice between their employees. Main purpose of this study is to study the effect of information technology in organization for making procedural justice. In this research, we used field research technique and for gathering data collection used questionnaires. Statistical population was employees of Telecommunication Company of Isfahan that they are 600 employees. Then, distributed 234 questionnaires based on convenience sampling. Method of research was T-value for analyzing, we used spss software. The result of this research indicates the meaningful and direct relationship between information technology and procedural justice in Telecommunication Company of Isfahan. Key words Information technology, organizational justice, Procedural Justice, Telecommunication Company, Iran DOI: 10.6007/IJARAFMS/v3-i4/391 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARAFMS/v3-i4/391 1. Introduction Justice or fairness refers to the idea that an action or decision is morally right, which may be defined according to ethics, religion, fairness, equity, or law.
    [Show full text]
  • Applying the Principles of Procedural Justice to Protect the Rule of Law from Within: the Case of High-Ranking Judicial Appointments in Bulgaria
    Title: Applying the Principles of Procedural Justice to Protect the Rule of Law from Within: The Case of High-Ranking Judicial Appointments in Bulgaria Author: Nedyalka Grozeva, [email protected]. Acknowledgments: I would like to express my deep appreciation to Nelly Koutzkova, Justice at the Sofia Court of Appeals, for allowing me to include her experience in this case study. Keywords: judiciary, election, appointments, judicial reform, procedural justice. Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to analyze the application of procedural fairness in high-ranking judicial appointments in Bulgaria and their alignment with the rule of law. The analysis takes into account the work of Tom R. Tyler, Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology at Yale Law School, who has written extensively on procedural justice. The theory of procedural justice will therefore be interpreted through a case from the senior judicial appointments practice of the Supreme Judicial Council of the Republic of Bulgaria. The author proposes that in young and evolving democracies institutional decision-makers (e.g. Supreme Judicial Council) may be committed to the rule of law by virtue of their very creation but nevertheless fail to uphold it on a daily basis. Such institutional decision-makers can realize their potential for positive transformation when, inter alia, they begin to apply the key principles of procedural justice, especially in the exercise of their authority to appoint magistrates in leadership positions in the judiciary. 1 I. When the system compromises itself: a highly illustrative example. Operating in a hostile environment, the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) had another key decision to make.1 After two unsuccessful attempts, the Council—the high body called on to defend judicial independence in Bulgaria—launched a third procedure for the election of a President the Sofia Court of Appeals (SCA).
    [Show full text]
  • Final Version Changes to Criminal Justice in Scotland Post-Devolution
    A Report for AUDIT SCOTLAND Changes to Scotland’s Criminal Justice System Post -Devolution: Main legislative developments, major reviews of policy and procedure, and the introduction of ‘new’ bodies Yarin Eski, Paul McGuinness and Michele Burman University of Glasgow June 2011 SCOPE OF WORK ................................ ................................................................ ................................ 1 MAIN LEGISLATIVE CHA NGES TO SCOTLAND’S C RIMINAL JUSTICE SYST EM SINCE DEVOLUTION ................................ ................................................................ ................................ ....... 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................................................ ................................ ..... 1 OFFENDERS ................................ ................................................................ ................................ .......... 2 PROCEDURES AND COURTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................... 8 POLICING AND CONTROL ................................ ................................................................ .......................... 12 MIXED THEMED LEGISLATION ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 14 MAJOR REVIEWS AND RE FORMS ................................................................ ............................... 16 SUMMARY JUSTICE REFORM (M CINNES
    [Show full text]
  • Procedural Justice Lawrence B
    University of San Diego Digital USD University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Law Faculty Scholarship Theory Research Paper Series February 2004 Procedural Justice Lawrence B. Solum University of San Diego, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digital.sandiego.edu/lwps_public Part of the Administrative Law Commons, and the Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons Digital USD Citation Solum, Lawrence B., "Procedural Justice" (2004). University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series. 2. http://digital.sandiego.edu/lwps_public/art2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Faculty Scholarship at Digital USD. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series by an authorized administrator of Digital USD. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Solum: Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series Spring 2004 Procedural Justice Lawrence B. Solum Published by Digital USD, 2004 1 University of San Diego Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series, Art. 2 [2004] PROCEDURAL JUSTICE* ** LAWRENCE B. SOLUM TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction .................................................................................................................1 A. Where to Begin? Ex Ante and Ex Post Perspectives ............................................ 2 B. A Roadmap to the Argument ................................................................................ 8 II. Substance and Procedure
    [Show full text]
  • The U.S. Supreme Court's Selection of Petitions In
    THE U.S. SUPREME COURT’S SELECTION OF PETITIONS IN FORMA PAUPERIS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Wendy L. Watson, M.P.P., J.D. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2004 Dissertation Committee: Approved By Professor Lawrence Baum, Adviser Professor Elliot Slotnick ____________________________________ Professor Dean Lacy Adviser Political Science Graduate Program Copyright by Wendy Lyn Watson 2004 ABSTRACT This dissertation explores the question of whether, how, and how much the U.S. Supreme Court’s selection of paid petitions differs from its selection of petitions in forma pauperis, or IFP petitions -- those petitions filed by individuals who are financially unable to pay the Court’s filing fee. In addition to expanding upon existing scholarship on the U.S. Supreme Court’s agenda-setting function, the study also examines the accessibility of the Court to the poor and the Court’s attention to issues affecting low- income people. In examining the Court’s agenda-setting function, existing studies have identified certain case characteristics, called “cue characteristics,” that increase the likelihood that the Supreme Court will select a petition for review: reference to a conflict between circuits or state courts of last resort; an allegation of a novel or important legal issue; a dissent on the court below; a reversal in the case’s procedural history; filing of a sua sponte responsive brief, as opposed to the absence of a responsive brief or a responsive brief filed only at the request of the Court; and cert-stage participation by amici curiae.
    [Show full text]
  • Administrative Decision Making in the Machine-Learning Era
    University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law 6-2017 Regulating by Robot: Administrative Decision Making in the Machine-Learning Era Cary Coglianese University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School David Lehr University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Computer Law Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Law and Economics Commons, Law and Society Commons, Policy Design, Analysis, and Evaluation Commons, Public Administration Commons, Robotics Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Repository Citation Coglianese, Cary and Lehr, David, "Regulating by Robot: Administrative Decision Making in the Machine- Learning Era" (2017). Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law. 1734. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/1734 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law by an authorized administrator of Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES Regulating by Robot: Administrative Decision Making in the Machine-Learning Era CARY COGLIANESE* AND DAVID LEHR** Machine-learning algorithms are transforming large segments of the economy as they fuel innovation in search engines, self-driving cars, product marketing, and medical imaging, among many other technolo- gies. As machine learning’s use expands across all facets of society, anxiety has emerged about the intrusion of algorithmic machines into facets of life previously dependent on human judgment. Alarm bells sounding over the diffusion of artificial intelligence throughout the pri- vate sector only portend greater anxiety about digital robots replacing humans in the governmental sphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Due Process in the World Trade Organization: the Need for Procedural Justice in the Dispute Settlement System John P
    American University International Law Review Volume 14 | Issue 4 Article 6 1999 Due Process in the World Trade Organization: The Need for Procedural Justice in the Dispute Settlement System John P. Gaffney Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/auilr Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Gaffney, John P. "Due Process in the World Trade Organization: The eN ed for Procedural Justice in the Dispute Settlement System." American University International Law Review 14, no. 4 (1999): 1173-1221. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University International Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DUE PROCESS IN THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION: THE NEED FOR PROCEDURAL JUSTICE IN THE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM JOHN P. GAFFNEY' INTRODUCTION ............................................. 1174 I. THE MEANING OF DUE PROCESS ...................... 1175 A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS ..... 1179 B. PROCEDURAL JUSTICE IN INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS ..... 1180 II. THE NEED FOR PROCEDURAL JUSTICE ............... 1182 A. ESTABLISHING NEED FOR LEGITIMACY OF THE WTO SYSTEM .................................................. 1183 B. SOVEREIGN EQUALITY OF LITIGANTS N THE WTO ........ 1183 III. THE NORMATIVE BASIS OF PROCEDURAL JUSTICE IN THE WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT SYSTEM ........ 1185 A. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY WTO LAW ................... 1187 B. GENERAL INTERNATIONAL LAW AS A SOURCE OF PROCEDURAL RIGHTS AND PRINCIPLES .................... 1189 C. CREATING DETAILED PANEL WORKING PROCEDURES ...... 1193 IV. THE APPLICATION OF PROCEDURAL JUSTICE TO THE W TO ................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Offensive Drug Offenses: Applying Procedural Justice Theory to Drug Sentencing in the United States and United Kingdom
    NOTE OFFENSIVE DRUG OFFENSES: APPLYING PROCEDURAL JUSTICE THEORY TO DRUG SENTENCING IN THE UNITED STATES AND UNITED KINGDOM ∗ Alexandra B. Bonneau INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1485 I. THE FOUNDATIONS OF ANGLO-AMERICAN SENTENCING .................. 1488 A. The Theory of Retribution ......................................................... 1489 B. Current Sentencing Theory in the United States and the United Kingdom......................................................................... 1491 1. Legislative Embodiment of Sentencing Principles .............. 1491 2. Implementation of Sentencing Principles ............................ 1494 II. PUNISHING DRUG OFFENSES ............................................................. 1498 A. A Brief History of Anglo-American Drug Sentencing ............... 1498 B. Calls for Reform ........................................................................ 1502 C. Implementing Drug Sentencing Reform..................................... 1503 III. LESSONS LEARNED: APPLYING PROCEDURAL JUSTICE THEORY TO RECENT DRUG SENTENCING REFORMS ............................................. 1509 A. Process Matters ......................................................................... 1510 B. Actors Matter ............................................................................. 1512 C. Evaluating Drug Sentencing Reforms Through the Lens of Procedural Justice ..................................................................... 1514
    [Show full text]
  • Administrative Law: Confining and Controlling Administrative Discretion Within the Seventh Circuit Charles H
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 1977 Administrative Law: Confining and Controlling Administrative Discretion Within the Seventh Circuit Charles H. Koch Jr. William & Mary Law School Repository Citation Koch, Charles H. Jr., "Administrative Law: Confining and Controlling Administrative Discretion Within the Seventh Circuit" (1977). Faculty Publications. 612. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/612 Copyright c 1977 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs CHICAGO-KENT LAW REVIEW VOLUME 54 1977 NUMBER 2 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW CONFINING AND CONTROLLING ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION WITHIN THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT CHARLES H. KOCH* A study of administrative law is largely an examination of the confin­ ing and controlling of administrative discretion. Until fairly recently, this study was limited to examination of quasi-judicial procedures and control of quasi-judicial decisions through judicial review. Yet much of the exercise of discretion falls outside the quasi-judicial agency functions. Consequently, scrutiny of a wider range of discretionary processes is essential. In the past, movement in this direction was inhibited by an unrealistic assumption against the propriety of administrative discretion. Great strides in dealing with discretion were possible only after theorists recognized that discretion is necessary to the successful functioning of our system. Efforts to completely eliminate discretion are fruitless and must fail. We now recog­ nize that to cope with discretion we must first admit the need for it and try to understand its exercise so that it can be confined and controlled where doing so will in fact, not in theory, improve the services the government renders its citizens.
    [Show full text]