精简司法:网络法院如何解决自辩诉讼的挑战

Q2 Social Sciences Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy Pub Date : 2016-08-23 DOI:10.31228/osf.io/dumsq
Ayelet Sela
{"title":"精简司法:网络法院如何解决自辩诉讼的挑战","authors":"Ayelet Sela","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/dumsq","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The tide of pro se litigation in the American justice system imposes significant constraints on self-represented litigants’ (SRLs) access to justice and courts’ ability to administer justice. Mitigating the challenges requires a systemic institutional and procedural reform. Advancing this approach, the Article proposes that online courts would alleviate many of the challenges associated with pro se litigation, and puts this proposition to an empirical test. Specifically, the article introduces a model for a Judicial Online Dispute Resolution (JODR) system for pro se litigation, and reports the findings of a study testing its effect on SRLs’ procedural justice experiences. \nSection I describes the realities of pro se litigation in the United States; the unique characteristics and challenges associated with it from the perspective of both SRLs and courts and the measures employed to address them. Section II introduces the field of ODR and reviews key JODR implementations. Section III proposes a framework for a JODR system for pro se litigation, focusing on non-prisoner civil and administrative proceedings between government agencies and self-represented individuals—whether in court or administrative trial-like hearings. Section IV reports the results of an experiment comparing the effect of JODR system designs that rely on asynchronous online text and video communication on SRLs’ procedural justice experiences. Its two main findings are a) that the judicial officer’s (judge) medium of communication has a consistent main effect on SRLs’ procedural experiences (regardless of whether SRLs used text or video communications); and b) that a system design whereby the judicial officer (judge) communicates via video messages and the SRL communicates via text messages is advantageous in terms of SRLs’ procedural justice experiences compared to both the prevalent ODR system design of two-way text communication as well as the theoretically celebrated two-way video communication. Finally, section V concludes the article, discussing implications and directions for future research. \n“Held to appropriate process and technology design standards, online judicial dispute resolution systems can improve the quality of SRLs’ participation, their procedural justice experiences, and the overall fairness of the process. Technology is at our fingertips; justice may very well be too.”","PeriodicalId":39833,"journal":{"name":"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy","volume":"26 1","pages":"331"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Streamlining Justice: How Online Courts Can Resolve the Challenges of Pro Se Litigation\",\"authors\":\"Ayelet Sela\",\"doi\":\"10.31228/osf.io/dumsq\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The tide of pro se litigation in the American justice system imposes significant constraints on self-represented litigants’ (SRLs) access to justice and courts’ ability to administer justice. Mitigating the challenges requires a systemic institutional and procedural reform. Advancing this approach, the Article proposes that online courts would alleviate many of the challenges associated with pro se litigation, and puts this proposition to an empirical test. Specifically, the article introduces a model for a Judicial Online Dispute Resolution (JODR) system for pro se litigation, and reports the findings of a study testing its effect on SRLs’ procedural justice experiences. \\nSection I describes the realities of pro se litigation in the United States; the unique characteristics and challenges associated with it from the perspective of both SRLs and courts and the measures employed to address them. Section II introduces the field of ODR and reviews key JODR implementations. Section III proposes a framework for a JODR system for pro se litigation, focusing on non-prisoner civil and administrative proceedings between government agencies and self-represented individuals—whether in court or administrative trial-like hearings. Section IV reports the results of an experiment comparing the effect of JODR system designs that rely on asynchronous online text and video communication on SRLs’ procedural justice experiences. Its two main findings are a) that the judicial officer’s (judge) medium of communication has a consistent main effect on SRLs’ procedural experiences (regardless of whether SRLs used text or video communications); and b) that a system design whereby the judicial officer (judge) communicates via video messages and the SRL communicates via text messages is advantageous in terms of SRLs’ procedural justice experiences compared to both the prevalent ODR system design of two-way text communication as well as the theoretically celebrated two-way video communication. Finally, section V concludes the article, discussing implications and directions for future research. \\n“Held to appropriate process and technology design standards, online judicial dispute resolution systems can improve the quality of SRLs’ participation, their procedural justice experiences, and the overall fairness of the process. Technology is at our fingertips; justice may very well be too.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":39833,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"331\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/dumsq\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/dumsq","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

美国司法体系中的自辩诉讼浪潮对自辩诉讼当事人(srl)诉诸司法和法院执行司法的能力造成了重大限制。缓解这些挑战需要系统性的体制和程序改革。在推进这一方法的同时,本文提出,在线法院将减轻与自辩诉讼相关的许多挑战,并将这一主张进行实证检验。具体而言,本文介绍了一个司法在线争议解决(JODR)系统的模型,并报告了一项研究的结果,该研究测试了它对srl程序正义经验的影响。第一节描述了美国法律诉讼的现实;从SRLs和法院的角度来看,与之相关的独特特点和挑战,以及为解决这些问题所采取的措施。第2节介绍了ODR领域,并回顾了关键的JODR实现。第三节提出了一个关于自我诉讼的JODR制度框架,重点是政府机构和自我代表的个人之间的非囚犯民事和行政诉讼——无论是在法庭上还是在行政审判中——类似听证会。第四节报告了一项实验结果,该实验比较了依赖异步在线文本和视频通信的JODR系统设计对srl程序公正体验的影响。它的两个主要发现是a)司法官员(法官)的沟通媒介对特别代表的程序经验具有一致的主要影响(无论特别代表使用文本还是视频沟通);b)司法官员(法官)通过视频信息沟通,SRL通过短信沟通的系统设计,与流行的双向文本沟通的ODR系统设计以及理论上著名的双向视频沟通相比,在SRL的程序正义经验方面都是有利的。最后,第五部分对本文进行了总结,讨论了未来研究的启示和方向。“在适当的流程和技术设计标准下,网上司法纠纷解决系统可以提高srl参与的质量,提高他们的程序正义体验,提高整个过程的公平性。”技术触手可及;正义很可能也是如此。”
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
Streamlining Justice: How Online Courts Can Resolve the Challenges of Pro Se Litigation
The tide of pro se litigation in the American justice system imposes significant constraints on self-represented litigants’ (SRLs) access to justice and courts’ ability to administer justice. Mitigating the challenges requires a systemic institutional and procedural reform. Advancing this approach, the Article proposes that online courts would alleviate many of the challenges associated with pro se litigation, and puts this proposition to an empirical test. Specifically, the article introduces a model for a Judicial Online Dispute Resolution (JODR) system for pro se litigation, and reports the findings of a study testing its effect on SRLs’ procedural justice experiences. Section I describes the realities of pro se litigation in the United States; the unique characteristics and challenges associated with it from the perspective of both SRLs and courts and the measures employed to address them. Section II introduces the field of ODR and reviews key JODR implementations. Section III proposes a framework for a JODR system for pro se litigation, focusing on non-prisoner civil and administrative proceedings between government agencies and self-represented individuals—whether in court or administrative trial-like hearings. Section IV reports the results of an experiment comparing the effect of JODR system designs that rely on asynchronous online text and video communication on SRLs’ procedural justice experiences. Its two main findings are a) that the judicial officer’s (judge) medium of communication has a consistent main effect on SRLs’ procedural experiences (regardless of whether SRLs used text or video communications); and b) that a system design whereby the judicial officer (judge) communicates via video messages and the SRL communicates via text messages is advantageous in terms of SRLs’ procedural justice experiences compared to both the prevalent ODR system design of two-way text communication as well as the theoretically celebrated two-way video communication. Finally, section V concludes the article, discussing implications and directions for future research. “Held to appropriate process and technology design standards, online judicial dispute resolution systems can improve the quality of SRLs’ participation, their procedural justice experiences, and the overall fairness of the process. Technology is at our fingertips; justice may very well be too.”
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Founded in 1991, the Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy (JLPP) has quickly risen to become one of the leading public policy journals in the nation. A fixture among the top 10 policy journals, JLPP has consistently been among the top 100 student-edited law journals. JLPP publishes articles, student notes, essays, book reviews, and other scholarly works that examine the intersections of compelling public or social policy issues and the law. As a journal of law and policy, we are a publication that not only analyzes the law but also seeks to impact its development.
期刊最新文献
Environmental Law and Policy Civil Rights Law and Policy A Historic Introduction to Law and Public Policy Security Law and Policy Institutions and Power—Congress, the Courts, and the President
×
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