Reformation Of Justice Of The Peace Courts

It is hardly a revelation to say that in the Soviet Union, law served not as the foundation of government but as an instrument of rule, or that the judiciary in that country was highly dependent upon political authority. Yet, experience shows that effective democracies and market economies alike require courts that are independent and trusted. In Courts and Transition in Russia, Solomon and Foglesong analyze the state and operation of the courts in Russia and the in some ways remarkable progress of their reform since the end of Soviet power. Particular attention is paid to the struggles of reformers to develop judicial independence and to extend the jurisdiction of the courts to include constitutional and administrative disputes as well as supervision of pretrial investigations. The authors then outline what can and should be done to make courts in Russia autonomous, powerful, reliable, efficient, accessible and fair. The book draws upon extensive field research in Russia, including the results of a lengthy questionnaire distributed to district court judges throughout Russian Federation.Written in a clear and direct manner, Courts and Transition in Russia should appeal to anyone interested in law, politics, or business in Russia ? scholars and practitioners alike ? as well as to students of comparative law, legal transition, and courts in new democracies.

The authors analyse the state and operation of courts in Russia and the progress of their reform since the end of Soviet power before outlining what can and should be done to make courts in Russia autonomous, powerful, reliable, efficient, accessible and fair.

"Professional analysis of essential elements of judicial reform, as provided in any country-specific review by the World Bank. As political and economic development continue, greater attention needs to be given to judicial reform. Basic elements of judicial reform include: guaranteeing judicial independence through changes in judicial budgeting, judicial appointment, and disciplinary systems; adopting procedural reforms; enhancing public access to justice; incorporating gender issues in the reform process; and redefining/expanding legal education and training"--Handbook of Latin American Studies, v. 57.

An urgent, informed, intimate condemnation of the Canadian state and its failure to deliver justice to Indigenous people by national bestselling author and former Crown prosecutor Harold R. Johnson. "The night of the decision in the Gerald Stanley trial for the murder of Colten Boushie, I received a text message from a retired provincial court judge. He was feeling ashamed for his time in a system that was so badly tilted. I too feel this way about my time as both defence counsel and as a Crown prosecutor; that I didn't have the courage to stand up in the court room and shout 'Enough is enough.' This book is my act of taking responsibility for what I did, for my actions and inactions." --Harold R. Johnson In early 2018, the failures of Canada's justice system were sharply and painfully revealed in the verdicts issued in the deaths of Colten Boushie and Tina Fontaine. The outrage and confusion that followed those verdicts inspired former Crown prosecutor and bestselling author Harold R. Johnson to make the case against Canada for its failure to fulfill its duty under Treaty to effectively deliver justice to Indigenous people, worsening the situation and ensuring long-term damage to Indigenous communities. In this direct, concise, and essential volume, Harold R. Johnson examines the justice system's failures to deliver "peace and good order" to Indigenous people. He explores the part that he understands himself to have played in that mismanagement, drawing on insights he has gained from the experience; insights into the roots and immediate effects of how the justice system has failed Indigenous people, in all the communities in which they live; and insights into the struggle for peace and good order for Indigenous people now.

The Youth Criminal Justice Act replaces the Young Offenders Act to provide the legislative framework for a fairer & more effective youth justice system.

Recent revisionist history has questioned the degree of social change attributable to the French Revolution. In Balancing the Scales of Justice, Anthony Crubaugh tests this claim by examining the effects of revolutionary changes in local justice on the inhabitants of one region in rural France. Crubaugh illuminates two poorly understood institutions in eighteenth-century France: seigneurial justice and the revolutionary justice of the peace. He finds that justice was typically slow and expensive in the lords' courts, thus making it difficult for rural inhabitants to benefit from official channels of justice. By contrast, revolutionary reforms gave people the opportunity to submit quarrels to trusted and elected justices of the peace who adjudicated disputes quickly and inexpensively. By juxtaposing seigneurial justice in the ancien régime with the institution of the justice of the peace after 1789, Crubaugh highlights how revolutionary changes in the system of dispute resolution profoundly affected members of rural French society and their relations with the French state. Over time rural dwellers came to accept the primacy of the state in resolving disputes, and the state thereby partially achieved its long-standing goal of penetrating rural areas.

This first critical examination of informal dispute processing links the institutionalization of alternatives to the court process and the ideology of informalism with the evolution of the American court system. The author connects dispute processing reform to the broader social and political context in which it developed, including the rise of judicial management in the Progressive period and the reconstruction of court unification in the 1970s. Harrington defines legal resources and their distribution in alternative dispute resolution policy before focusing on the institutionalization of this reform in a case study of a federally sponsored Neighborhood Justice Center. In conclusion, Harrington finds that the symbols of informalism and its institutions are a mere shadow of conventional legal practices.