Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grand Fund Outcomes Report and FY2002 Juvenile Justice Youth Development Program Summary, January 2002

This document contains two related, but separate reports. The Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grant Fund Outcomes Report is a summary of outcomes from services and activities funded through the Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grant Fund in FY2001. The Juvenile Justice Youth Development Program Summary describes Iowa communities’ current prevention and sanction programs supported with funding from the Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP) during FY2002. The material in Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grant Fund Outcomes Report is presented in response to a legislative mandate to report specific prevention outcomes for the community Grant Fund. It includes a brief description of a Youth Development Results Framework established by the Iowa Collaboration for Youth Development. Outcomes are reported using this results framework, which was developed by a number of state agencies as a common tool for various state programs involving youth development related planning and funding processes. Included in this report is a description of outcomes from the prevention activities funded, all or in part, by the Community Grant Fund, as reported by local communities. The program summaries presented in the Juvenile Justice Youth Development Program Summary provide an overview of local efforts to implement their 2002 Juvenile Justice Youth Development plans and include prevention and sanction programs funded through the combined resources of the State Community Grant Fund and the Federal Title V Prevention, Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention Act Formula Grant and Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant programs. These combined funds are referred to in this document as the Juvenile Justice Youth Development (JJYD) funds. To administer the JJYD funds, including funds from the Community Grant Fund, CJJP partners with local officials to facilitate a community planning process that determines the communities’ priorities for the use of the funds. The local planning is coordinated by the Iowa’s Decategorization Boards (Decats). These local officials and/or their staff have been leaders in providing oversight or staff support to a variety of local planning initiatives (e.g. child welfare, Comprehensive Strategy Pilot Projects, Empowerment, other) and bring child welfare and community planning experience to the table for the creation of comprehensive community longterm planning efforts. The allocation of these combined funds and the technical assistance received by the Decats from CJJP is believed to have helped enhance both child welfare and juvenile justice efforts locally and has provided for the recognition and establishment of connections for joint child welfare/juvenile justice planning. The allocation and local planning approach has allowed funding from CJJP to be “blended” or “braided” with other local, state, and federal dollars that flow to communities as a result of their local planning responsibilities. The program descriptions provided in this document reflect services and activities supported with JJYD funds. In many cases, however, additional funding sources have been used to fully fund the programs. Most of the information in this document’s two reports was submitted to CJJP by the communities through an on- line planning and reporting process established jointly by the DHS and CJJP.

Long-Range Goals for Iowa's Criminal & Juvenile Justice Systems, February 2005

Iowa Code Section 216A.135 requires the Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning Advisory Council (CJJPAC) to submit a long-range plan for Iowa's justice system to the Governor and General Assembly every five years. The Criminal and Juvenile Justice Advisory Council directed that the 2005 plan be developed with input from the public. A public hearing was held in September 2004, utilizing the Iowa Communications Network at 5 sites across Iowa. Using the information gained, the Council developed new goals and strategies and modified others from the 2000 plan. The 2005 Long Range Goals for Iowa’s Criminal and Juvenile Justice Systems, organized as follows, are meant to facilitate analyses and directions for justice system issues and concerns in Iowa.

Audit report on the Black Hawk County Criminal Justice Information System for the year ended June 30, 2013

Audit report on the Black Hawk County Criminal Justice Information System for the year ended June 30, 2013

The role of just world beliefs and justice perceptions in explaining undesirable attitudes and behaviors at work

Perceiving injustice is a key antecedent of a large range of undesirable employee attitudes and behaviors at work. For example, research has shown that employees who perceive their workplace as unfair are less satisfied, less committed and engage in more counterproductive behaviors. In this study, we suggest that justice motives like the belief in a just world (BJW) contribute to explaining relations between justice perceptions and undesirable behaviors. Specifically, we propose that individual differences in BJW (i.e, the belief that the world is just, where everyone is rewarded for his or her behavior) are related to work-related behaviors and attitudes by coloring perceptions of workplace fairness. We investigated our hypotheses in a survey study with 176 employees of various organizations (36% women; mean tenure 12.3 yeares). Results showed that after controlling for other influencing factors (e.g., neuroticism) BJW was negatively related to self-reported work deviant behaviors and to cynical, disillusioned attitudes toward the current job. Moreover, BJW was positively related to overall job satisfaction. Consistent with our expectations, relations of BJW with deviant behaviors and with attitudes were mediated by perceptions of interactional and procedural justice. These results suggest extending models of justice and deviance by including motives such as BJW.

Access to Justice och domstolarnas roll i framtiden

Kirjoitus perustuu Suomalaisen Lakimiesyhdistyksen Lakimiespäivillä 5.10.2002 pidettyyn esitykseen

What is the value of forensic science? : an overview of the effectiveness of forensic science in the Australian criminal justice system project

Forensic science is increasingly relied upon by law enforcement to assist in solvingcrime and gaining convictions, and by the judicial system in the adjudication ofspecific criminal cases. However, the value of forensic science relative to the workinvolved and the outcome of cases has yet to be established in the Australiancontext. Previous research in this area has mainly focused on the science andtechnology, rather than examining how people can use forensic services/science tothe best possible advantage to produce appropriate justice outcomes. This fiveyearproject entails an investigation into the effectiveness of forensic science inpolice investigations and court trials. It aims to identify when, where and howforensic science can add value to criminal investigations, court trials and justiceoutcomes while ensuring the efficient use of available resources initially in theVictorian and the ACT criminal justice systems and ultimately across Australiaand New Zealand. This paper provides an overview of the rationale and aims ofthe research project and discusses current work-in-progress.

L'accès des consommateurs à la justice: de la résolution extrajudiciaire des conflits de consommation à la procédure collective : étude de droit suisse et droit comparé

INTRODUCTION : 1. L'OBJET ET L'INTÉRÊT DE LA THÈSE : DES BARRIÈRES D'ACCÈS À LA JUSTICE L'accès à la justice est un droit fondamental garanti par les art. 29a Cst. et 6 CEDH. Il s'agit d'un droit social mis en place par l'avènement de l'Etat providence qui accorde à chacun le droit à ce qu'un tribunal connaisse de toute contestation relative à ses droits et obligations de caractère civil. Aussi a-t-il pour effet de rendre efficace la législation mise en place par un Etat. Ainsi dans le cas particulier du droit de la consommation, l'élaboration des règles de droit matériel ne suffirait pas à concrétiser la protection des consommateurs voulue par le constituant et le législateur fédéral si une voie d'accès à la justice n'était pas ouverte afin de permettre aux consommateurs dont les droits sont violés d'en obtenir réparation. Si le droit formel permet à chacun de poursuivre la réalisation de ses droits par la voie judiciaire, y compris pour les consommateurs, il n'en demeure pas moins que ces derniers, dans la pratique, rencontrent plusieurs obstacles qui, souvent, les découragent de faire valoir leurs droits en justice. En effet, les tribunaux, victimes de leur succès, ont de plus en plus de peine à faire face à la masse des litiges qui leur sont soumis. L'engorgement de l'institution judiciaire est responsable de longs délais avant qu'une affaire soit jugée. A cela s'ajoutent des problèmes d'ordre financier : le coût de la justice comprenant le coût de la consultation juridique et de la représentation, des frais de consultation d'experts qui, parfois, peuvent dépasser le montant même du litige, sans oublier le risque, pour le consommateur, de devoir assurer, en cas d'échec du procès, les frais de l'autre partie. Puis on trouve des barrières d'ordre psychologique liées à la complexité et au formalisme qui accompagnent certaines procédures judiciaires civiles. Enfin, il y a la situation très complexe du litige revêtant un caractère intercantonal ou international (litiges transfrontaliers). S'agissant de litiges de faible valeur litigieuse (petits litiges ou small claims en anglais), ces barrières prennent une importance telle que de nombreux consommateurs renoncent tout simplement à faire valoir leurs droits en justice et subissent parfois la violation de ceux-ci. La valeur limitée de l'enjeu économique du litige peut rendre la durée de la procédure judiciaire démesurée et son coût disproportionné. En ce qui concerne le coût de la justice, nous illustrons ce propos par l'exemple reproduit sous l'annexe I ci-dessous. Il est également bon de signaler une étude couvrant 15 Etats membres de l'Union européenne réalisée en 1995 par la Commission européenne selon laquelle " le coût moyen (frais de justice + frais d'avocat, hors TVA) d'un règlement judiciaire d'un litige intracommunautaire portant sur un montant de 2'000 écus s'élève, dans la meilleure des hypothèses pour la partie demanderesse, à un montant d'environ 2'500 écus ". Après avoir relevé l'importance de l'accès à la justice pour le consommateur et les différents obstacles qui se dressent sur son chemin, nous allons nous intéresser aux solutions proposées pour minimiser voire supprimer ces barrières. A cet égard, on se posera la question de savoir dans quelle mesure les moyens extrajudiciaires, tels que des institutions d'ombudsmans et des organismes paritaires existant dans certains secteurs de la consommation, peuvent constituer des alternatives efficaces à la saisine des tribunaux. Puis on se demandera de quelle manière il faut alléger les formalités de procédure afin de permettre aux consommateurs non assistés de mandataires professionnels de saisir la justice et par-là même de diminuer le coût lié à celle-ci. Enfin, vu les difficultés qu'affrontent les consommateurs agissant individuellement, la question de l'opportunité de procédures collectives sera abordée. Comme ces interrogations touchent de près ou de loin les alinéas 2 et 3 de l'art. 97 Cst. nous avons jugé opportun d'exposer à titre liminaire la genèse de cette disposition. De plus, comme celui qui entreprend de traiter l'accès des consommateurs à la justice se doit de commencer par définir ce que l'on entend par consommateur, nous aborderons les notions de consommateur et de litige de consommation avant d'entrer dans le vif de la matière.