PARTICIPATION IN COURTS AND TRIBUNALS: NEW BOOK
The issue of participation in court proceedings is a very real one at the moment. Almost on cue yesterday the publication today of Participation in Courts and Tribunals: Concepts, Realities and Aspirations (editors: Jessica Jacobson and Penny Cooper). It is available as a fee open access e-book (see the link below) in addition to be a hardback. I will be reviewing the practitioner toolkit at a later date.
This book presents the findings of a unique, cross-jurisdictional study, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, which examined what it means to participate effectively in judicial proceedings, and why participation matters. It proposes a framework for understanding and supporting participation which, it is hoped, will guide and inform future policy, practice and research.
1. Introduction, by Jessica Jacobson
2. Policy and Practice Supporting Lay Participation, by Gillian Hunter
3. Conceptualising Participation: Practitioner Accounts, by Amy Kirby
4. Observed Realities of Participation, by Jessica Jacobson
5. Looking Ahead: Towards a Principled Approach to Supporting Participation, by Penny Cooper
The book is available from Bristol University Press as a hardback and as a free, open access e-book. Also available online are a policy briefing based on the research findings, and a practitioner toolkit.
The Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research (ICPR) at Birkbeck has developed a new framework to support participation by lay people in court and tribunal hearings, based on the findings of a unique cross-jurisdictional study.
WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING ABOUT IT
Author Jessica Jacobson, Director of the ICPR and Professor of Criminal Justice, commented:
“Although it is a long-established principle in English law that people should be able to participate effectively in the court and tribunal proceedings that directly concern them, the concept of participation is poorly defined in law and under-explored in legal research and analysis.
“Traditional hearings, with their complex language and processes, can be marginalizing and disempowering for court users. The framework we have developed highlights ten points of participation and aims to guide and inform future policy, practice and research.
“Our research points to the urgent need for greater understanding of effective participation. We note the vital importance of international cross-jurisdictional information-sharing about supporting court user participation, exploring court users’ perspectives on what it means to participate, and researching new, creative approaches to court hearings.”
Rob Street, Director of Justice at the Nuffield Foundation, said:
“Ensuring people can participate meaningfully in the justice system has become increasingly important over the past decade with court modernisation initiatives, cuts to legal aid, and an increase in litigants without legal representation. In addition, the COVID-19 crisis has accelerated moves towards remote justice. In this period of change, we warmly welcome this new study which, through its careful consideration of what effective participation in justice really means, has the potential to improve people’s access to and experiences of the justice system.”
Co-author, Penny Cooper, Visiting Professor at the ICPR, added:
“The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the existing trend towards the replacement of physical with virtual court attendance and has therefore heightened the need to consider what ‘participation’ means and what can be done to ensure it is genuinely effective for all court users. This is because remote hearings, if poorly configured, can provide further barriers to participating, such as connectivity issues and understanding what is going on and being understood over video or telephone.”
The research study was funded by the Nuffield Foundation. It combined a review of national and international policy with empirical research involving interviews with justice practitioners and observations of proceedings in the criminal courts, family courts and employment and immigration and asylum tribunals.