The Framework for Judicial Cooperation in the European Union: Unpacking the Ethical, Legal and Institutional Dimensions of ‘Judicial Culture’

Mak, Elaine; Graaf, Niels; Jackson, Erin

doi:10.5334/ujiel.452

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the subject of the study is the methodological limitations of sociocultural studies of law, the methods used are a kind of conceptual premises that provide a sufficient level of abstract-theoretical problematization in combination with specific characteristics of the sociocultural approach in the legal sciences. Studies of law as a cultural phenomenon are most convincing when implemented in a relatively limited social context [3][4][5][6]. Such studies draw a large amount of their explanatory potential from detailed historical and cultural material that characterizes social interaction.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodological limitations of sociocultural studies of law

Zinkovsky¹

2021

SHS Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the study is to identify the methodological limitations of sociocultural studies of law. The research methods center around the thesis that the sociocultural approach in legal scholarship is most persuasive when implemented in a relatively limited social context. This kind of research is empirical and shows no attention to the creation of explanatory theoretical constructs. The possibilities for comparative legal analysis are also limited because empirical research is primarily descriptive. The result of the study proved that the methods of considering law through the prism of culture are not always able to provide clear tools for analyzing the social factors that determine the features of institutional and procedural differences in law. In addition, the study concludes that the study of law as a cultural phenomenon requires the use of ideal constructions in the process of cognition. On the one hand, it allows operating with concepts whose content is not formally defined. On the other hand, it entails the impossibility of identifying the general principles of the organization of real legal phenomena, the cause-and-effect relationships between them. Foreign sociocultural studies of law often use the concept of “cultural community”, the scope of which allows asserting that the subject of research goes far beyond the scope of legal science. The study’s novelty lies in an attempt to assess whether the search for cultural foundations of law “blurs” the subject of legal science. The main reason for the “conceptual blurring” of sociocultural studies of law is the lack of a universal, generally recognized approach to defining the concept of culture in Russian and foreign legal science. However, the reductionism of the context of sociocultural studies of law, the use of legal and non-legal concepts and categories cannot always be characterized as unproductive. The revealed methodological limitations of sociocultural studies of law do not prevent the explanation of the actual nature of legal phenomena.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodological limitations of sociocultural studies of law

Zinkovsky¹

2021

SHS Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In some studies, it is used interchangeably. Mak et al have briefly mentioned the relation between judicial culture and legal culture [33]. They have noted that legal culture is a classic tool to 'describe patterns of legally oriented social behavior and attitudes.…”

Section: Difference Between Legal Culture Judicial Culture and Court Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on literature and logic characteristics of legal culture includes attitude and behavior of the people towards legal systems [19], 'established expectations from judges and attorneys' [11], 'practices of judges and attorneys' [11], 'informal rules of behavior of judges and attorneys' [11], 'attitude, values and opinions held in the society with regards to law, legal systems and its various parts' [19; 25], 'ideas, attitudes, values, and beliefs that people hold about the legal system' [20], 'ideas, attitudes, expectations and opinions about law, held by people in some given society' [21], acceptable way of resolving disagreements and disputes [25], 'practices and ideologies within the legal system' [37], attitude of public towards law [37], 'how people define their problems in legal terms' [37], 'how much individual sees him or herself as embedded in the law and entitled to its protections' [37], 'relatively stable patterns of judicially oriented social behavior and attitudes' [40], the way judges are appointed [40], litigation rate [40], 'the number and role of the lawyers' [40], prison rates [40], legally oriented social behavior and attitudes [33], how do people resolve their issues, how does the legislature get influenced to make a particular law, how is the law implemented, who forms the law, name of law implementation agencies, role of different agencies influencing law etc.…”

Section: Legal Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Judicial culture characteristics consist of hierarchy in the courts [6], eligibility of selection of judges [6], the selection process of judges [6], judicial autonomy [3], trust in the judiciary [3], staff numbers, judges salary and building infrastructure [3], mainly three dimensions of judicial culture; ethical, legal and institutional [33], the selection process of the employees in the judiciary, the procedure followed within the judiciary, responsible people to make rules within the judiciary, etc.…”

Section: Judicial Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Difference between Legal Culture, Judicial Culture, and Court Culture

Kumar

2021

Psychology and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The constructs legal culture, judicial culture and court culture have been used frequently in the literature but there is a lack of clarity between them. This study aims to identify the difference between them. The existing literature and dictionary definitions have been used to conceptually understand the differences between them. Characteristics of them are identified using the existing literature. The meaning of legal, judicial and court have been explored from the various popular dictionaries. Based on the comparative analysis of their characteristics and meanings, a conceptual model is developed. The conceptual model depicts legal culture as a macro construct, judicial culture as a meso, and court culture as a micro-level construct. This study is an initial attempt to make a distinction between these three constructs. The findings of this study will help the legal researchers to develop a clarity between legal culture, judicial culture, and court culture. This clarity will help in avoiding using these constructs interchangeably.

show abstract

“…The judicial cultures project concerns an independent academic study on judicial cooperation in the EU, involving ethical, legal, and institutional aspects of judicial functioning. 76 The final aim of this research is to establish whether a shared normative framework for the functioning of national judiciaries in the EU -in other words: a 'European judicial culture' -can develop, which will enhance effective judicial protection and ultimately will contribute to the progressive realisation of the ideal of the rule of law in the EU. In the framework of this study, a survey is used to collect information on the perceptions which judges have about the functions and effects of judicial ethical codes in EU member states.…”

Section: Judicial Cultures Projectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Researching judicial ethical codes, or: how to eat a mille-feuille?

Mak¹

2018

IJCA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Judicial ethical codes have become increasingly important in member states of the European Union as a point of reference for judges and as a means of securing public trust in judiciaries. In the ENCJ's survey on the independence, accountability, and quality of judicial systems in Europe, sub-indicators were included to measure the existence of judicial ethical codes and relating training and supervision. This survey and the critical scholarly discussion about it provide valuable lessons for further empirical research on the perceptions of judges in EU member states relating to professional-ethical codes and standards. This article explores the most important lessons for this envisaged research. The main methodological considerations which come to the fore are: 1) to clearly delineate the research aims and central terms which are used in the survey; 2) to avoid insularity by including a representative and diverse group of respondents; 3) to validate and contextualise the results through a multi-method approach and critical debates with scholars and stakeholders.

show abstract

The Framework for Judicial Cooperation in the European Union: Unpacking the Ethical, Legal and Institutional Dimensions of ‘Judicial Culture’

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Methodological limitations of sociocultural studies of law

Methodological limitations of sociocultural studies of law

The Difference between Legal Culture, Judicial Culture, and Court Culture

Researching judicial ethical codes, or: how to eat a mille-feuille?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About