Crime stories: posnerian pragmatism, Rawlsian pure procedural justice, and the fictional problem

There are many different ways in which law and truth may be said to be related. It is perhaps in the criminal trial that connections between them are of most significance. An orthodox way of describing a criminal trial is that the criminal procedure is seeking to establish the truth concerning some past event, and that success of the procedure is measured by how close its outcome converges with that truth. Criminal justice presents the community with challenging dilemmas in this regard, such as those arising from the notion of double jeopardy. This paper discusses the Rawlsian notions of 'imperfect', 'perfect' and 'pure' procedural justice, and suggests against Rawls that it is pure procedural justice that best represents what we want from a criminal justice system. Good procedure makes good criminal law. A comparison is made with the writings of Habermas and Posner, and given that pure procedural justice eschews transcendental truths, some brief comments are made on the convergence of that position with the realm of the fictional.

Public satisfaction with police : using procedural justice to improve police legitimacy

Policing research and theory emphasises the importance of supportive relationships between police and the communities they serve in increasing police effectiveness in reducing crime and disorder. A key reason people support police is that they view police as legitimate. The existing research literature, primarily from the United States, indicates that the most important factor in public assessments of police legitimacy is procedural justice. The present study is the first in an Australian jurisdiction to examine the effect of procedural justice and police legitimacy on public satisfaction with police. Using responses to a large postal survey (n = 2611), findings show that people who believe police use procedural justice when they exercise their authority are more likely to view police as legitimate, and in turn are more satisfied with police services. This study differs to US-based research in the greater importance of people's evaluations of instrumental factors in judgments of police legitimacy. The findings are important as they confirm that people's assessments of fair and effective policing in Australia will be enhanced by policing strategies that emphasise the use of procedural justice in encounters with the public.

Public satisfaction with police : the importance of procedural justice and police performance in police-citizen encounters

A large body of literature has demonstrated that when authorities use procedural justice with those they regulate, people will be more satisfied with those authorities and will be more willing to cooperate and comply with their directions and rules. In the context of policing, procedural justice has also been shown to be important for shaping citizens’ views about police legitimacy, their satisfaction with police and also in fostering cooperation with police. What remains largely unexamined, however, is whether the positive effect of procedural justice varies across different types of police–citizen encounters. Using survey data collected from a national sample of 1,462 Australians, the present study will examine the relative importance of procedural justice on overall ratings of police satisfaction across two types of police–citizen encounters (citizen-initiated contacts and police-initiated contacts). It will be shown that procedural justice is most important in police-initiated contacts, while police performance is most important in citizen-initiated contacts.

Procedural justice and affect intensity : understanding reactions to regulatory authorities

Why is it that some people respond in a more negative way to procedural injustice than do others, and why is it that some people go on to defy authority while others in the same situation do not? Personality theorists suggest that the psychological effect of a situation depends on how a person interprets the situation and that such differences in interpretation can vary as a function of individual difference factors. For example, affect intensity—one’s predisposition to react more or less emotionally to an event—is one such individual difference factor that has been shown to influence people’s reactions to events. Cross-sectional survey data collected from (a) 652 tax offenders who have been through a serious law enforcement experience (Study 1), and (b) 672 citizens with recent personal contact with a police officer (Study 2), showed that individual differences in ‘affect intensity’ moderate the effect of procedural justice on both affective reactions and compliance behavior. Specifically, perceptions of procedural justice had a greater effect in reducing anger and reports of non-compliance among those lower in affect intensity than those higher in affect intensity. Both methodological and theoretical explanations are offered to explain the results, including the suggestion that emotions of shame may play a role in the observed interaction.

Nurturing regulatory compliance: Is procedural justice effective when people question the legitimacy of the law?

Procedural justice generally enhances an authority's legitimacy and encourages people to comply with an authority's decisions and rules. We argue, however, that previous research on procedural justice and legitimacy has examined legitimacy in a limited way by focusing solely on the perceived legitimacy of authorities and ignoring how people may perceive the legitimacy of the laws and rules they enforce. In addition, no research to date has examined how such perceptions of legitimacy may moderate the effect of procedural justice on compliance behavior. Using survey data collected across three different regulatory contexts – taxation (Study 1), social security (Study 2), and law enforcement (Study 3) – the findings suggest that one's perceptions of the legitimacy of the law moderates the effect of procedural justice on compliance behaviors; procedural justice is more important for shaping compliance behaviors when people question the legitimacy of the laws than when they accept them as legitimate. An explanation of these findings using a social distancing framework is offered, along with a discussion of the implications the findings have on enforcement.

Procedural justice and tax compliance

Throughout the 1990s, tens of thousands of Australian taxpayers invested in mass-marketed tax effective schemes. They enjoyed generous tax breaks until the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) told them in 1998 that they abused the system. This study examines the circumstances surrounding taxpayers' decision to invest in scheme arrangements. It also explores investors' perceptions of the way the ATO handled the schemes issue and, perhaps more importantly, why such a large number of investors defied the ATO's demands that they pay back taxes. Data were taken from in-depth interviews conducted with 29 scheme investors. Consistent with the procedural justice literature, the findings revealed that many of the scheme investors interviewed defied the ATO's demands because the procedures the ATO used to handle the situation were perceived to be unfair. Given these findings, it will be argued that to effectively shape desired behaviour, regulators will need to move beyond enforcement strategies linked purely to deterrence. A strategy that aims to emphasise the procedural justice aspects of a regulatory encounter will be discussed.

Regulating more effectively : the relationship between procedural justice, legitimacy and tax non-compliance

In recent years, a significant number of middle-income taxpayers have been making use of aggressive tax planning strategies to reduce tax. In many cases, it is unclear whether these are designed and used by tax- payers to minimize tax legally or to avoid tax illegally. Those that are designed to exploit loopholes in tax law need to be dealt with in a way that restores faith and equity to the system. But how can tax authorities best manage taxpayers who may have inadvertently become involved in such illegal tax planning practices? Using longitudinal survey data, it will be shown that attempts to coerce and threaten taxpayers into compliance can undermine the legitimacy of the Tax Office's authority, which in turn can affect taxpayers' subsequent compliance behaviour. Responsive regulation, which is based on principles of procedural justice, will be discussed as an alternative enforcement strategy.

Procedural justice and Australian environment : the case of the Wonthaggi water desalination plant

Drier conditions in Australia have compelled governments to implement various projects to address current or impending water shortages. Such projects have not always been popular with the local community who are directly affected by this infrastructure, with 'procedural justice' emerging as a critical issue. This paper analyses issues of public perceptions of 'procedural justice' in implementing environmental projects in regional areas, in the context of the recently approved desalination plant in the regional Victorian town of Wonthaggi. Drawing on both qualitative and quantitative data from a survey of 316 Wonthaggi residents, we show that one of the major predictors of residents' resistance toward accepting the building of the desalination plant was explained by perceptions of procedural injustice. We further argue that inadequate attention to the particular political history of the region has compounded the sense that the plant implementation has been unfair. Attention to such political histories is vital to avoiding conflict with local stakeholders and to the successful and ethical implementation of development projects in regional areas.