The Equalization of Effective Communicative Freedom: Democratic Justice in the Constitutional State and Beyond

Jurgen Habermas takes the realization of rights through the democratic self-organization of legal communities to be the normative core of emancipatory politics. In this article I explore the implications of this claim in relation to the requirements of justice. I argue that Habermas's discourse theory of democratic legitimacy presupposes a substantive principle of justice that demands the equalization of effective communicative freedom for all structurally constituted social groups in any constitutional state. This involves the elimination of a range of structural injustices rooted in the complex interrelationships between political, economic and cultural orders. In the final section I sketch briefly the implications of this analysis in the context of ongoing globalization processes. It is suggested that the most effective way to establish a just system of global governance is to equalize effective communicative freedom among nation-states.

‘Transforming justice’: challenges for restorative justice in an era of punishment-based corrections

Scholars of restorative justice have long debated its theoretical relationship with formal criminal justice. This analysis critically examines the range of sociostructural conditions in contemporary society that have halted the spread of restorative policies in practice and prevented them from realizing their transformative potential as an alternative system of justice. These factors are attributed largely to a punitive penal culture that is characterized by policy-making based on penal populism, the governance of risk and a managerialist criminal justice agenda; and the widespread co-optation of restorative programs by the state. This broad argument is explored in the context of two particular case studies – recent developments in youth justice and in sexual offending respectively in England and Wales and elsewhere. This examination ultimately highlights challenges for restorative justice in the current risk-driven penal climate and advocates a need to re-evaluate its relationship with formal state justice.

Justice as Improvisation:The Law of the Extempore

Justice as Improvisation: The Law of the Extempore theorises the relationship between justice and improvisation through the case of the New York City cabaret laws. Discourses around improvisation often imprison it in a quasi-ethical relationship with the authentic, singular ‘other’. The same can be said of justice. This book interrogates this relationship by highlighting the parallels between the aporetic conception of justice advanced by the late French philosopher Jacques Derrida and the nuanced approach to improvisation pursued by musicians and theorists alike in the new and emerging interdisciplinary field of Critical Studies in Improvisation (CSI). Justice as Improvisation re-imagines justice as a species of improvisation through the formal structure of the most basic of legal mechanisms, judicial decision-making, offering law and legal theory a richer, more concrete, understanding of justice. Not further mystery or mystique, but a negotiation between abstract notions of justice and the everyday practice of judging. Improvisation in judgment calls for ongoing, practical decision-making as the constant negotiation between the freedom of the judge to take account of the otherness or singularity of the case and the existing laws or rules that both allow for and constrain that freedom. Yes, it is necessary to judge, yes, it is necessary to decide, but to judge well, to decide justly, that is a music lesson perhaps best taught by critical improvisation scholars.

Unveiling Fairness for the Consumer:The Law, Economics and Justice of Expanded Arbitration

In recent years, the US Supreme Court has rather controversially extended the ambit of the Federal Arbitration Act to extend arbitration’s reach into, inter alia¸ consumer matters, with the consequence that consumers are often (and unbeknownst to them) denied remedies which would otherwise be available. Such denied remedies include recourse to class action proceedings, effective denial of punitive damages, access to discovery and the ability to resolve the matter in a convenient forum.

The court’s extension of arbitration’s ambit is controversial. Attempts to overturn this extension have been made in Congress, but to no avail. In contrast to American law, European consumer law looks at pre-dispute agreements to arbitrate directed at consumers with extreme suspicion, and does so on the grounds of fairness. In contrast, some argue that pre-dispute agreements in consumer (and employment) matters are consumer welfare enhancing: they decrease the costs of doing business, which is then passed on to the consumer. This Article examines these latter claims from both an economic and normative perspective.

The economic analysis of these arguments shows that their assumptions do not hold. Rather than being productive of consumer surplus, the use of arbitration is likely to have the opposite effect. The industries from which the recent Supreme Court cases originated not only do not exhibit the industrial structure assumed by the proponents of expanded arbitration, but are also industries which exhibit features that facilitate consumer welfare reducing collusion.

The normative analysis addresses the fairness concerns. It is explicitly based upon John Rawls’ notion of “justice as fairness,” which can provide a lens to evaluate social institutions. This Rawlsian analysis considers the use of extended arbitration in consumer matters in the light of the earlier economic results. It suggests that the asymmetries present in the contractual allocation of rights serve as prima facie evidence that such arbitration–induced exclusions are prima facie unjust/unfair. However, as asymmetry is only a prima facie test, a generalized criticism of the arbitration exclusions (of the sort found in Congress and underlying the European regime) is overbroad.

Experiences of youth justice: Youth justice discourses and their multiple effects

Interventions within youth justice systems draw on a range of rationales and philosophies. Traditionally demarcated by a welfare/justice binary, the complex array of contemporary rationales meld different philosophies and practices, suggesting a mutability that gives this sphere a continued (re)productive and felt effect. While it may be increasingly difficult to ascertain which of these discourses is dominant in different jurisdictions in the UK, particular models of justice are perceived to be more prominent (Muncie, 2006). Traditionally it is assumed that Northern Ireland prioritises restoration, Wales prioritises rights, England priorities risk and Scotland welfare (McVie, 2011; Muncie, 2008, 2011). However, how these discourses are enacted in practice, how multiple and competing rationales circulate within them and most fundamentally how they are experienced by young people is less clear. This paper, based on research with young people who have experienced the full range of interventions in the youth justice system in Northern Ireland examines their narratives of ‘justice’. It considers how different discourses might influence the same intervention and how the deployment of multiple rationalities gives the experience of ‘justice’ its effect.

The EU Constitution of Social Governance in an Economic Crisis: in Defence of a Transnational Dimension to Social Europe

Conventional wisdom has it that the EU is unable to promote viable social integration, which contrasts with its commitments to improving working and living conditions and to social values and goals such as solidarity, social protection and social inclusion. This
article challenges two diff erent standpoints: on the one hand, competitive neoliberalism demands that the EU focuses on economic integration through legally binding internal market and competition rules even if Member States can only maintain a limited commitment to social inclusion, while authors defending the social models unique to the continent of Europe demand that the EU rescinds some of its established legal principles in order to make breathing space for Member States to maintain market correcting social policies. Both positions convene that there should be no genuine social policy at EU level.
This article uses scenarios of widely discussed rulings by the Court of Justice to illustrate that legally enforceable economic integration would prevent most Member States from achieving sustainable health services, labour relations and free university education on the basis of national closure. Since the EU has limited legislative competences to create EU level institutions to balance inequalities, it derives a Constitution of Social Governance from the EU’s values, proposing that the Court of Justice develops its urisprudence into an instrument for challenging European disunion induced by new EU economic governance

‘Harmonising the precaution out of the precautionary principle? The need for maintaining flexibility and an interpretative role’

The precautionary principle has the potential to act as a valuable tool in food law. It operates in areas of scientific uncertainty, calling for protective measures where there are potential threats to human health (or the environment). However, the manner of the principle’s incorporation and implementation within legislation are key to its effectiveness and general legitimacy. Specific considerations include the role and nature of risk assessments, assessors, sources of evidence, divergent opinions, risk communication, other legitimate factors and the weighting of interests. However, more fundamentally, the crystallisation of approaches and removal of all flexibility would undermine the principle’s central tenets. Firstly, principles crucially play a guiding and interpretative role. Secondly, reflexive modernisation and continuing scientific uncertainty call for the precautionary principle’s continued application – precautionary measures do not end the precautionary principle’s relevance. This can be partially achieved through the legislation so as to facilitate later precautionary measures, e.g. through temporary authorisations, derogations and safeguard clauses. However, crucially, it requires that the legislation also be interpreted in light of the precautionary principle. This paper investigates the logic behind the Court of Justice of the EU’s judgments and the circumstances that enable or deter the Court in taking, or permitting, stronger precautionary approaches. Although apparently inconsistent, a number of contextual factors including the legislative provisions and actors involved influence the judgments substantially. The analysis provides insight into improving the principle’s incorporation to facilitate its continued application and maintenance of flexibility, whilst bearing in mind the general desirability of objectivity and legal certainty.

Law’s spatial turn: geography, justice and a certain fear of space

This is a critical reading of the current literature on law and geography. The article argues that the literature is characterized by an undertheorization of the concept of space. The focus is either on the specific geography of law in the form of jurisdiction, or as a simple terminological innovation. Instead, the article suggests that law’s spatial turn ought to consider space as a singular parameter to the hitherto legal preoccupation with time, history and waiting. This forces law into dealing with a new, peculiarly spatial kind of uncertainty in terms of simultaneity, disorientation, materiality and exclusionary corporeal emplacement. The main area in which this undertheorization forcefully manifests itself is that of spatial justice. Despite its critical potential, the concept has been reduced by the majority of the relevant literature into another version of social, distributive or regional justice. On the contrary, if the peculiar characteristics of space are to be taken into account, a concept of justice will have to be rethought on a much more fundamental level than that.

Capacity to Attend to the Needs of Persons with Dual Diagnoses in the Criminal Justice System: Views of Mental Health and Criminal Justice Professionals

Currently, individuals with intellectual disabilities are overrepresented within the Criminal Justice System (Griffiths, Taillon-Wasmond & Smith, 2002). A primary problem within the Criminal Justice System is the lack of distinction between mental illness and intellectual disabilities within the Criminal Code. Due to this lack of distinction and the overall lack of identification procedures in the Criminal Justice System, individuals with disabilities will often not receive proper accommodations to enable them to play an equitable role in the justice system. There is increasing evidence that persons with intellectual disabilities are more likely than others to have their rights violated, not use court supports and accommodations as much as they should, and be subject to miscarriages of justice (Marinos, 2010). In this study, interviews were conducted with mental health (n=8) and criminal justice professionals (n=8) about how individuals with dual diagnosis are received in the Criminal Justice System. It was found that criminal justice professionals lack significant knowledge about dual diagnosis, including effective identification and therefore appropriate supports and accommodations. Justice professionals in particular were relatively ill-prepared in dealing effectively with this population. One finding to highlight is that there is misunderstanding between mental health professionals and justice professionals about who ought to take responsibility and accountability for this population.

Searching for Accommodations within the Ontario Criminal Justice System for Persons with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder: Views of Social Service Agency and Justice Professionals

Although persons with intellectual disabilities have been conceptualized as having rights to equality in Canada and internationally, there continue to be gaps in the delivery of justice when they are involved within the criminal process. The literature consistently reported that individuals with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASDs) often experienced challenges within the justice system, such as difficulty understanding abstract legal concepts (Conry & Fast, 2009). In the Canadian legal system, accommodations are available to enable persons with disabilities to receive equal access to justice; however, how these are applied to persons with FASDs had not been fully explored in the literature. In this study, in-depth interviews were conducted with social service agency workers (n=10) and justice professionals (n=10) regarding their views of the challenges persons with FASDs experience in the justice system and their suggestions on the use of accommodations. The findings showed that while supports have been provided for individuals with intellectual disabilities, there has been a lack of specialized accommodations available specifically for individuals with FASDs in accessing their right to justice.

Driedger's 'Modern Principle' at the Supreme Court of Canada: Interpretation, Justification, Legitimization

Un résumé en français est également disponible

La justice globale et son rapport aux pratiques internationales : deux approches pour l’éradication de la pauvreté

Cette recherche a bénéficié du soutien de plusieurs organismes. D’abord, je remercie le Conseil de recherche en sciences humaines du Canada (CRSH) de m’avoir accordé la bourse J.A. Bombardier – bourse de recherche pour la maitrise. Je remercie également le département de philosophie pour les quelques bourses de recherche et de voyage qui m’ont été offertes au cours de mes études de deuxième cycle au département. Je tiens finalement à exprimer ma gratitude envers le Groupe de recherche interuniversitaire en philosophie politique (GRIPP) pour son soutient financier ainsi que pour l’expérience enrichissante qu’il m’a promulgué. Une partie de ce mémoire a été présentée en avril 2012 à la Graduate Conference on Global Justice, tenue à la Gallatin School, New York University.

Cyberjustice in Brazil : the use of technology to enhance access to justice and procedural celerity

Dans une société mondialisée, où les relations sont intégrées à une vitesse différente avec l'utilisation des technologies de l'information et des communications, l'accès à la justice gagne de nouveaux concepts, mais elle est encore confrontée à de vieux obstacles. La crise mondiale de l'accès à la justice dans le système judiciaire provoque des débats concernant l'égalité en vertu de la loi, la capacité des individus, la connaissance des droits, l'aide juridique, les coûts et les délais. Les deux derniers ont été les facteurs les plus importants du mécontentement des individus avec le système judiciaire. La présente étude a pour objet d'analyser l'incidence de l'utilisation de la technologie dans l’appareil judiciaire, avec l'accent sur la réalité brésilienne, la voie législative et des expériences antérieures dans le développement de logiciels de cyberjustice. La mise en œuvre de ces instruments innovants exige des investissements et de la planification, avec une attention particulière sur l'incidence qu'ils peuvent avoir sur les routines traditionnelles des tribunaux. De nouveaux défis sont sur la voie de ce processus de transformation et doivent être traités avec professionnalisme afin d'éviter l'échec de projets de qualité. En outre, si la technologie peut faire partie des différents aspects de notre quotidien et l'utilisation de modes alternatifs de résolution des conflits en ligne sont considérés comme un succès, pourquoi serait-il difficile de faire ce changement dans la prestation de la justice par le système judiciaire? Des solutions technologiques adoptées dans d'autres pays ne sont pas facilement transférables à un environnement culturel différent, mais il y a toujours la possibilité d'apprendre des expériences des autres et d’éviter de mauvaises voies qui pourraient compromettre la définition globale de l'accès à la justice.

Doctrine of Estoppel

The object of every law is to render justice. But sometimes the strict implementation of low may result in injustice. Under such circumstances equity will step in to prevent the injustice. Estoppel is one such concept evolved by equity for rendering justice even deviating from strict legal principles. This study is an analysis of the essence of the principle of estoppel, its scope, circumstances and application. The related principles known as estoppel by record, estoppel by deed, estoppel by representation, promissory estoppel, estoppel against public authority is also considered. Estoppel, originated from the sense of justice, equity and good consciousness has since developed through various judicial pronouncements. Further section 115 of the Evidence Act has statutorily recognized and laid down the principles of estoppel. But Section 115 of the Evidence Act or any other statute does not cover the modern development of estoppel in the form of promissory estoppel.