Search Results (20)

Sloman and Rabb found support for the existence of the community of knowledge (CK) effect, which occurs when individuals are more likely to report understanding and being able to explain even fake scientific information when told that an expert understands the information. To date, no studies have been conducted that attempted to replicate original findings, let alone test the presence of the CK effect in realistic, legal scenarios. Therefore, Study One replicated original CK effect studies in a jury-eligible M-Turk sample (N = 291) using both Sloman and Rabb’s experimental stimuli as well as new stimuli. Study Two then tested the presence of the CK effect using scientific testimony in a mock court hearing from a forensic evaluator (N = 396). Not only did the CK effect improve laypeople’s perceptions of the scientific information in court, but it also improved their perceptions of the expert witness’s credibility, increased the weight assigned to the scientific information, and increased the weight assigned to the expert testimony. This effect was mediated by participants’ perceived similarity to the expert, supporting the theory behind the CK effect. These studies have important implications for the use of scientific information in court, which are discussed. Full article

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed critical deficiencies in the United States’ legal system’s handling of emergency injunctions, particularly concerning religious freedom. This article examines the challenges courts faced in balancing public health measures with constitutional rights, focusing on the use of shadow dockets and the frequent dismissal of cases due to mootness. Analyzing key Supreme Court decisions and lower court rulings, we highlight the inconsistencies and delays that arose when addressing First Amendment challenges to pandemic-related restrictions. Arguments for procedural reforms, including expedited hearings and avoiding mootness dismissals in cases of national importance, are provided to protect fundamental rights during future public health crises. Full article

Inadmissible evidence generally biases jurors toward guilty verdicts; jurors who hear inadmissible evidence are more likely to convict than jurors not exposed to inadmissible evidence—even when admissible evidence is constant. When inadmissible evidence is introduced, the common legal remedy is judicial instructions to jurors to disregard it. Appeals courts repeatedly affirm instructions to disregard as a sufficient safeguard of defendants’ constitutional rights, despite research finding that jurors do not disregard when instructed. The goals of this research were to (1) test the main and interactive effects of four theory-driven candidate strategies to help jurors disregard inadmissible evidence (i.e., inducing suspicion, giving a substantive reason for disregarding, committing to disregarding, advising future jurors) and identify an optimized intervention package, and (2) evaluate whether adding the optimized intervention package showed more favorable effects than judicial instructions only. Study 1 used a 2⁴ full factorial randomized controlled trial to evaluate the four candidate intervention strategies. A synergistic interaction among the candidate components suggested an optimized intervention package comprising all four interventions. Study 2 used a parallel four-arm randomized controlled trial to compare conviction rates in the same hypothetical murder trial under four conditions: (1) no exposure to inadmissible evidence, (2) exposure to inadmissible evidence without objection, (3) exposure to inadmissible evidence + judicial instructions (“standard practice”), and (4) exposure + judicial instructions + optimized intervention package. Across both studies, mock jurors who received the optimized intervention package returned significantly lower conviction rates than comparison conditions. These findings show early promise that novel intervention strategies may assist jurors in disregarding inadmissible evidence. Interpretation, limitations, and calls to action are discussed. Full article

Animal law has the potential to initiate improvements for animal wellbeing. However, this largely depends on how effectively the law bridges the legal chasm between animal welfare and animal suffering, a chasm the authors refer to as the welfare gap. When the law does not adequately address this gap, where regulation subordinates animal interests to human interests, it results in weak animal protection that does little more than regulate to a standard that avoids a life not worth living. The authors analyse a series of cases involving the RSPCA and Brighton, in which Brighton was charged with serious animal cruelty pursuant to s 530 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). He stabbed a dog with a pitchfork; after failing to kill the dog, he suspended it from a tree branch by a leash attached to its collar and struck the dog several times on the head with a mallet, finally killing him. Brighton was found guilty in the NSW Local Court and appealed to the NSW Supreme Court, where Rothman J allowed the appeal, holding that Brighton had exterminated a pest animal. This led to protracted litigation, including to the NSW Court of Appeal, a second hearing in the Local Court and a further appeal to the Supreme Court. In August 2020, Sophie Riley published a case note and commentary on the litigation up to the Rothman J appeal. This paper evaluates the litigation that followed, identifying how regulatory failures have entrenched the welfare gap. Regulatory failures include inadequate and aged legislative protections for a confined subset of animals. In NSW, animal sentience is not enshrined in legislation; the law limits the types of animals protected by anti-cruelty law; fundamental statutory language remains undefined, for example terms such as “pest animal” and “exterminate”; and challenges abound for adducing sufficient evidence to prove subjective criminal intent. These deficiencies pose significant challenges for practitioners and judicial officers, particularly when complex statutory interpretation is required in the busy and fast-paced summary jurisdiction. This paper concludes that legislators should consider modernising the law, removing ambiguity, and settling minimum standards for a good life for animals, taking into account the welfare aspects described in Mellor’s Five Domains model. Full article

In this paper, we seek to define the Portuguese Electronic Jurisdictional Administrative Procedure and characterize the scope and success of its implementation in terms of access to justice and court efficiency. It encompasses different perspectives on the judicial system and the electronic administrative procedure, reflecting the diversity of its authors, and combines a theoretical approach and discussion with statistics produced with official judicial data. Therefore, it introduces the issue and its background and discusses the models and principles of electronic judicial procedure and its representation in the Portuguese judicial procedure and law. It also presents the Portuguese exceptional and temporary regime for conducting judicial hearings in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, discussing its merits and presenting the corresponding judicial statistics. The paper concludes that the advent of electronic judicial procedure, driven by technological advancements and aiming to achieve procedural effectiveness and efficiency, represents a paradigm shift and a change in the nature of the legal process, i.e., an ontological transformation in the theory of the process that requires a robust conceptual framework, to ensure consistent interpretation and application of procedural law and to guarantee respect for equality and legal certainty. Full article

The number of disputes related to water that reach courts in Chile has increased in the last decades, the topics of these disputes have become more complex, and the current conflict resolution system has not been able to adjust to this situation. This study analyzes colonial texts from water-related conflicts that were addressed at the Royal Hearings in Santiago (1691–1800) and from the Cabildo gatherings (1541–1802), using an adaptation of the Institutional Analysis and Development framework. The research shows a strong institutional system surrounding conflict resolution during colonial times, with nested schemes and empowered figures appointed in leading roles. However, a lack of equity and inclusion of all actors is also visible, reducing its legitimacy. At present, the increasing value of water and a sense of distrust in the institutional system have led to longer and more complex conflict resolution processes. Here, learning from past times about the empowerment of the institutional system for solving water disputes could be useful. An increased support towards initial conflict resolution mechanisms, giving space for local knowledge and generating stronger participation in these initial steps, is a lesson for the future. Full article

For asylum seekers to be granted asylum, they must convince immigration officials that they have been persecuted or that they fear they will be persecuted if returned to their home country. This article discusses the reluctance of asylum seekers to be forthcoming about sexual assault as a form of persecution and the ways in which traumatic memory can affect narratives of persecution for rape survivors. Many asylum seekers, particularly those who have been sexually assaulted, show symptoms consistent with trauma survivors. Consequently, their narratives of persecution are often shaped by partial and incomplete memory recall. The result is that how asylum seekers who have been sexually assaulted tell their stories of persecution is the antithesis of the expectations of credibility. This article is based on qualitative research in Los Angeles, California, and New York City, New York, in the United States. It includes interviews with asylum seekers, immigration attorneys, immigrant service providers, asylum officers, and immigration judges; observations of immigration court hearings; and content analysis of asylum applications. I use these sources to argue that the harm of rape and its long-lasting effects evidenced by symptoms of traumatic memory impacts how asylum seekers articulate stories of persecution. How these stories are told can have devastating effects for asylum seekers that may jeopardize their ability to gain asylum if immigration officials do not view them as credible applicants. Full article

Although the concept of vulnerability has become increasingly prevalent in both domestic and international migration policy in recent years, its precise meaning and implications remain ambiguous and under-examined. Without a coherent understanding of what makes individuals vulnerable, the concept can either act as a justification for additional consideration or reinforce stereotypes of disempowerment. To address this lack of clarity, this article presents the results of an extensive review of Canadian case law. Drawing on data from over 750 cases primarily from the Immigration and Refugee Board and the Federal Court of Canada, this study sought to examine how the concept of vulnerability is used by both decision-makers and parties to cases involving migrants seeking legal status and various forms of protection (including, but not limited to, asylum) under national or international law in Canada. Although an analysis of case law necessarily produces only a partial image of the landscape, this review identified two understandings of vulnerability at play: a procedural one associated with the need to ensure access to justice and a fair hearing, and a substantive one where vulnerability is linked to the categorization of particular groups. In both instances, the recognized importance of the concept is offset by its narrow and inconsistent application and a failure to acknowledge the role that the institutions and mechanisms of “protection” play in creating and perpetuating vulnerability. Full article

In the article, the authors present the specificity of the Polish retail electricity market, shaped to a considerable extent by the provisions of European Union law. The main feature of this market is granting special legal protection to individual final customers (referred to by the legislator as “household customers”) who have obtained the status of consumers in the Polish legal system. The essence of the study is not only to analyze the subjective and quantitative aspects of this market, but, above all, to analyze the civil law measures protecting these electricity consumers. These aspects constitute a unique legal structure, which is a continuation of the administrative proceedings before the President of the Energy Regulatory Office (regulatory entity). The Court of Competition and Consumer Protection (hereinafter referred to as the Court of Protection) is a specialized civil court that hears appeals against decisions of the regulatory entity, the subjects of which are actions or omissions of professional participants of the retail electricity market, which infringe the collective interests of consumers (“household customers”) as individual final customer on this market. Full article

In 2020, men in Turkey murdered 300 women, and 171 women were found suspiciously dead. The dominant narrative around suspicious death cases involves a faulty assumption that women are prone to committing suicide. Women’s organisations and cause lawyers unite against all kinds of violence to challenge this dominant narrative, which grants impunity to perpetrators. Drawing on resource mobilisation theory, this article investigates how women’s organisations become involved in femicide and suspicious death cases to articulate counter-narratives and advance women’s access to justice. It focuses on Şule Çet’s case, which raised intense public reactions due to the lack of procedural fairness at the investigation stage. It relies on semi-structured interviews with Şule’s lawyer and the members of the We Will Stop Femicide Platform (Kadın Cinayetlerini Durduracağız Platformu) and the Gelincik Centre (Gelincik Merkezi) to illustrate how women’s organisations made Şule’s story visible and countered the dominant narrative surrounding suspicious death cases. The findings illustrate that women’s organisations’ ongoing struggle to encourage courts to hear women’s stories demands co-operation between different social and legal mechanisms. It includes a combination of several strategies, such as following femicide cases and forming public opinion through social media. The article concludes by arguing that women’s organisations’ use of counter-narratives transforms femicide cases from being only a statistic to a public cause, contributing to women’s struggle in accessing justice. Full article

Many young Christian men faced a moral dilemma when selective military conscription was introduced in Australia during the Vietnam War from 1964–72. The legislation was the National Service Act in 1964 (NSA). Some believed that their Christian conscience did not allow them to kill or serve in the army. Most of them sought exemption as a conscientious objector decided at a court hearing. Others chose non-compliance with the NSA. All exercised nonviolent Holy Disobedience in their individual opposition to war and conscription for it. Holy disobedience stresses the importance of nonviolent individual action, which was an idea of A.J. Muste, a great Christian pacifist. The research reported here is strongly influenced by his approach. It is believed to be the first study which explicitly considers Christian conscientious objectors. A data set was compiled of known Christian conscientious objectors during the Vietnam War years from authoritative sources. Analysis allowed identification of these men, the grounds on which their conscientious beliefs were based and formed and how they personally responded to their moral dilemma. Many of their personal stories are told in their own words. Their Holy Disobedience contributed to ending Australia’s participation in the Vietnam War and military conscription for it. Full article

Mining dam failures have increased worldwide since the 1980s. Two large mining dam failures occurred recently in Mariana and Brumadinho, both in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. We hypothesize that there were significant differences in legal post-disaster decisions. The aim of this article is to understand the similarities and differences of post-disaster actions and controversies in Mariana and Brumadinho. We reviewed 686 news reports about court decisions and settlement agreements from the websites of state and federal courts and judicial institutions. After classifying the reports using an adapted protocol from a media health observatory, we conducted a thematic analysis. Our analysis suggests that there were significant differences in legal post-disaster decisions in the cases of Mariana and Brumadinho. In Mariana, there was privatization of post-disaster management, with the creation of the Renova Foundation, a mediated indemnity program, lack of access to information for those affected, and uncertainties in health and resettlement issues. In Brumadinho, there was faster implementation of the recovery and compensation measures, faster recognition of affected parties, and stronger participation of the population since the first hearings. Even though there were particularities in post-disaster management, the ultimate goal of the corporations responsible for the disasters was to protect their profits. Full article

Prior literature on judicial decision-making post-sentencing is relatively scarce, yet with the growth of problem-solving courts and offenders placed on probation, judges are responsible for overseeing compliance of offenders beyond traditional decision-making points. More recently, scholars have called for more nuanced methods of examining judicial decision-making, disparity, and attribution than traditional quantitative methods. This study examines the factors that influence judicial sanctioning of probationers for non-compliance in a domestic violence court. The following research questions are examined: Which factors predict whether a probationer is sanctioned for non-compliance? What are the discourses utilized to frame these violations? Are there differences in discourses utilized based upon a probationer’s race? This study combines participant observation of probation review hearings with agency records for a mixed-methods examination of which factors influence the decision to sanction non-compliant probationers, and whether differences emerge based on race. The sample included 350 cases of probation review hearings with 100 cases selected for critical discourse analysis. Results demonstrated that drug use, missed treatment sessions, gender, race, and family status influenced sanctioning decisions. Qualitative results demonstrated that judges evaluate probationers based upon contextual information, which at times relies on racial discourses of drug use and responsibility. Full article

This paper answers the question: has the Colombian Congress been effective at addressing relevant water conflicts and making them visible? While courts and social movements have been key for the advancement of social rights in Latin America, the role of legislators remains unclear. We conduct content analysis of all water-related bills, proposed bills, and constitutional amendments filed in Colombia from 1991 to 2020; we also analyzed Congress hearings of political control related to water, and the statutes of political parties who hold majority of seats in Congress; we also conducted interviews with key actors on water governance in Colombia. We find that only three bills have passed in the 30-year time frame and that relevant water conflicts have not been addressed by Colombian legislators. We find that water conflicts are not reaching the political agenda of Congress, yet through political control hearings, it has given some late visibility to critical territorial conflicts in which water is a key element. We analyze our data in light of literature on legislative politics and legal mobilization in Latin America. This study adds to global research on the role of legislators in advancing the human right to water, particularly in Latin America. Full article

The minority in Western Thrace, Greece, has long enjoyed a special status where family and inheritance matters were subject to Sharia law and religious jurisdiction (Mufti). After judicial controversy for many years over the compulsory character of this “minority privilege”, the matter has been brought before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). In view of the hearing of the case of Molla Sali v. Greece before the Grand Chamber, the Greek Parliament voted for the possibility for the members of this minority to choose either religious or civil law and jurisdiction—a right for them to exit the minority community. Although a step forward, this right raises a serious challenge to the rule of equality before the law and the right to a fair trial. Therefore, the paper seeks its possible legal foundations in the international obligations of the Greek state to protect religious freedom and the minority community and stresses the need to be accompanied by the “right to voice”, meaning a true reform of the procedure before the Mufti and an effective constitutionality control of his decisions. Full article