诉诸司法和法律诊所:发展反思性律师空间——意大利经验的一些启示

Marzia Barbera, V. Protopapa
{"title":"诉诸司法和法律诊所:发展反思性律师空间——意大利经验的一些启示","authors":"Marzia Barbera, V. Protopapa","doi":"10.2979/indjglolegstu.27.1.0249","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As stated in the introduction to this special issue, the right to access to justice is critical in a liberal state: it allows individuals to defend their interests in court and to achieve full inclusion in the political community. Nonetheless, epistemological, class, and market inequalities have historically hindered its realization. Worldwide, poor and marginalized individuals and groups do not have access to the tools they need to effectively access the judicial system. Modern liberal democracies have developed two main approaches to ensure better access to justice. The first approach focuses on providing legal services to those unable to afford a lawyer, and is identified as the “legal aid solution.”1 The second approach goes beyond the need for legal services of specific individuals, and aims to address the problem of legal representation of group and collective interests; this is identified as the “representation for diffuse interests solution.”2 Despite significant variations, the solutions that, according to each approach, have been","PeriodicalId":39188,"journal":{"name":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","volume":"27 1","pages":"249 - 271"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Access to Justice and Legal Clinics: Developing a Reflective Lawyering Space Some Insights from the Italian Experience\",\"authors\":\"Marzia Barbera, V. Protopapa\",\"doi\":\"10.2979/indjglolegstu.27.1.0249\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As stated in the introduction to this special issue, the right to access to justice is critical in a liberal state: it allows individuals to defend their interests in court and to achieve full inclusion in the political community. Nonetheless, epistemological, class, and market inequalities have historically hindered its realization. Worldwide, poor and marginalized individuals and groups do not have access to the tools they need to effectively access the judicial system. Modern liberal democracies have developed two main approaches to ensure better access to justice. The first approach focuses on providing legal services to those unable to afford a lawyer, and is identified as the “legal aid solution.”1 The second approach goes beyond the need for legal services of specific individuals, and aims to address the problem of legal representation of group and collective interests; this is identified as the “representation for diffuse interests solution.”2 Despite significant variations, the solutions that, according to each approach, have been\",\"PeriodicalId\":39188,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"249 - 271\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2979/indjglolegstu.27.1.0249\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2979/indjglolegstu.27.1.0249","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

正如这一特殊问题的导言所述,诉诸司法的权利在自由国家至关重要:它使个人能够在法庭上捍卫自己的利益,并充分融入政治社会。尽管如此,认识论、阶级和市场的不平等在历史上一直阻碍着它的实现。在世界范围内,贫困和边缘化的个人和群体无法获得有效利用司法系统所需的工具。现代自由民主国家制定了两种主要方法来确保更好地诉诸司法。第一种方法侧重于向无力聘请律师的人提供法律服务,被确定为“法律援助解决方案”。1第二种方法超越了对特定个人法律服务的需求,旨在解决群体和集体利益的法律代表问题;这被称为“分散利益的代表性解决方案”。2尽管存在重大差异,但根据每种方法,解决方案
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Access to Justice and Legal Clinics: Developing a Reflective Lawyering Space Some Insights from the Italian Experience
As stated in the introduction to this special issue, the right to access to justice is critical in a liberal state: it allows individuals to defend their interests in court and to achieve full inclusion in the political community. Nonetheless, epistemological, class, and market inequalities have historically hindered its realization. Worldwide, poor and marginalized individuals and groups do not have access to the tools they need to effectively access the judicial system. Modern liberal democracies have developed two main approaches to ensure better access to justice. The first approach focuses on providing legal services to those unable to afford a lawyer, and is identified as the “legal aid solution.”1 The second approach goes beyond the need for legal services of specific individuals, and aims to address the problem of legal representation of group and collective interests; this is identified as the “representation for diffuse interests solution.”2 Despite significant variations, the solutions that, according to each approach, have been
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Managing Digital Resale in the Era of International Exhaustion The Digital Transformation of Tax Systems Progress, Pitfalls, and Protection in a Danish Context Blockchain and the Right to Good Administration: Adding Blocks to or Blocking of the Globalization of Good Administration? The Risk of Digitalization: Transforming Government into a Digital Leviathan Guilty of Probable Cause: Public Arrest Records and Dignity in the Information Age
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1