Search

QUALIS is a research project that studies 'the other side of courts' by looking at the working conditions of judicial professions in Portugal and their impacts on the profession, health, family and personal life. The objective of this article is to provide an overview of the results obtained, based mainly on the interviews and the online questionnaire administered to the Portuguese judicial professions (judges, public prosecutors and court clerks). The questionnaire was sent to all professionals (more than 10,000) working in the courts and had a good response rate; the interviews were conducted among the three judicial professions. The article focuses on three main dimensions of working conditions, namely physical environment, working time and work intensity, and work/social environment of professionals working at first instance courts. It will make then a further analysis of their impacts in the health and well-being and in the work-family conflict of the judicial professionals.

Italy, as other European countries, saw a dramatic increase in international protection claims, heavily impacting the workload of Italian lower courts entitled to re-examine refusal decisions on asylum. The Court of Catania, in Sicily, was the most affected by this situation due to its geographical position, so that in 2016 it registered an increase of 514% in its new proceedings related to international protection. This surge in asylum claims affected the proper functioning of the judiciary and the whole asylum policy, as claims remained unsolved for a long time. In order to face these challenges, from 2015 to 2017 the project Migrantes, funded by the European Social Fund, was developed in the Court of Catania with the aim to better organise and speed up judicial procedures concerning asylum claims, the first and crucial stage of the refugee’s integration process. The present article offers an analysis of the project through the lens of the Social Innovation framework, adopting a multi-scalar perspective. In particular, it shows the innovative solutions adopted by the local court, the opportunity structures existing at local, regional, national and EU levels. Moreover, it focuses on the consolidation process that followed up-scaling dynamics and on the factors facilitating it.

Italy, as other European countries, saw a dramatic increase in international protection claims, heavily impacting the workload of Italian lower courts entitled to re-examine refusal decisions on asylum. The Court of Catania, in Sicily, was the most affected by this situation due to its geographical position, so that in 2016 it registered an increase of 514% in its new proceedings related to international protection. This surge in asylum claims affected the proper functioning of the judiciary and the whole asylum policy, as claims remained unsolved for a long time. In order to face these challenges, from 2015 to 2017 the project Migrantes, funded by the European Social Fund, was developed in the Court of Catania with the aim to better organise and speed up judicial procedures concerning asylum claims, the first and crucial stage of the refugee’s integration process. The present article offers an analysis of the project through the lens of the Social Innovation framework, adopting a multi-scalar perspective. In particular, it shows the innovative solutions adopted by the local court, the opportunity structures existing at local, regional, national and EU levels. Moreover, it focuses on the consolidation process that followed up-scaling dynamics and on the factors facilitating it.

According to many scholars, studying judicial systems means dealing with its structural and functional configurations. Differently, as some contemporary authors propose to do applying the approach of the political science and the organizational studies, the analysis of justice systems is devoted to fully grasp the interactions that connect the law to justice, as public service offered to the citizens. Overcoming the limits of a purely legal and formal approach, the political science driven approach to the organization of justice systems aims to trace the concrete and real interaction among actors, powers and resources that is crucial to understand the contemporary functioning of the justice systems. In this scenario, the article aims to reflect on the added value, both at theoretical and empirical level, of a shifting from a structural approach to a systemic-procedural one in the judicial studies. The article, based on direct experience in empirical research and on subsequent results, deals with three theoretical questions: 1. what does it mean to study justice systems as complex organizations? 2. Why is it necessary to move from the study of “judicial systems” to the analysis of the “justice systems”, overcoming the boundaries of judicial offices? 3. How could the integration of concepts and methods from both political science and organizational studies support the development of new research perspectives and topics?

Negli ultimi decenni, la retorica dell’innovazione (Godin 2015) ha contribuito a ridefinire il baricentro della relazione dialettica tra struttura e agency individuale (Boudon 1986; Sibeon 1999; Archer 2002). La progressiva affermazione del “paradigma dell’azione” ha portato a incentivare l’imprenditorialità delle persone e a investire sulla diffusione di competenze non solo manageriali, ma anche imprenditoriali. Questi processi sono stati evidenti anche nel settore pubblico, come dimostra il dibattito sui c.d. public entrepreneurs (Schneider et al. 1995). Questa ricerca intende interrogarsi sul lato oscuro dell’imprenditorialità in ambito pubblico. L’ipotesi alla base del paper è che, se non adeguatamente governate, le politiche che incentivano l’imprenditorialismo dei dirigenti pubblici possono produrre degli effetti perversi e paradossali. L’emergere di innovazioni dal basso può, infatti, generare delle differenze territoriali, o ampliare quelle già esistenti, rispetto alle modalità con cui viene erogato un servizio pubblico ai cittadini, anche in termini di qualità ed efficienza dello stesso, con chiare ripercussioni sociali ed economiche. Il paper si concentra su un settore cruciale della pubblica amministrazione, come la giustizia, che fonda la sua attività sull’uguaglianza di trattamento di tutte le persone. La ricerca intende analizzare il caso della giustizia italiana, dove negli ultimi quindici anni, per effetto di alcune dinamiche organizzative, i magistrati con funzioni direttive hanno visto allargarsi il loro “margine di manovra”. Tutto ciò ha favorito la nascita di innovazioni virtuose – di diversa natura e portata (tecnologiche, organizzative, di processo, ecc.) – ma, allo stesso tempo, ha aggravato la situazione a “macchia di leopardo”, ossia ha contribuito ad allargare le differenze, in termini di prestazioni e comportamento, fra gli uffici giudiziari sparsi sul territorio. Lo studio, che si fonda sui risultati di un periodo pluriennale di

In the age of deep and wide digital transformation disrupting both democratic accountabilities and the administration-citizens nexus, there is a need for a methodological approach that allows for the establishment of trust between all the platform actors, and that can adapt to each particular context. It is also a question of integrating the legal and democratic issues inherent in the sustainable deployment of territorial digital trusted third parties. The objective is to propose, evaluate and experiment with a process of creation and sustainable operation of a trusted third party, i.e., the definition of a scientifically validated process of governance and the use of the platform, and the integration of specific modules into its digital architecture. It is a method that acts as a permanent catalyst for trust-in-context, going beyond abstract modeling and keeping the necessary transversality to consider applications that go beyond them.

L’articolo intende analizzare gli effetti perversi e paradossali dei processi di innovazione, che stanno caratterizzando i “sistemi giustizia” del Sud Europa. Il saggio, frutto di un periodo pluriennale di ricerca empirica, ricostruisce la lunga “stagione” delle riforme, adottate negli ultimi anni in Grecia, Italia, Portogallo e Spagna per migliorare la qualità, l’efficacia e l’efficienza degli apparati giudiziari, concentrandosi sull’allargamento del “margine di manovra” dei magistrati dirigenti e sulla promozione di innovazioni “dal basso”. L’articolo ambisce a inviare un messaggio ai policy maker, ai diversi livelli: per promuovere una governance responsabile e consapevole della giustizia, occorre abbandonare la ricerca di soluzioni apparentemente salvifiche per investire, invece, nella promozione di processi di apprendimento a livello sistemico.

In the last few years, Southern European countries have introduced a large number of reforms, on both the supply and the demand side, with the aim of improving the overall quality of justice and, in particular, the efficiency of the courts specialized in dealing with labour proceedings. Focusing on labour justice in Portugal, Spain and Italy, this chapter critically analyses the effects of the reforms adopted in the period 2005-2019, both at macro (national) and meso level (judicial districts). The research shows the persistence of significant territorial gaps within the three countries, in terms of performance of labour courts, which represent a serious threat to the ability of the Southern European societies to effectively achieve sustainable development in this regard.

Sob forte cobrança da Decisão-Quadro n. 2001/200/JAI, de 15 de março de 2001 e na esteira de outras reformas promovidas em seu sistema de justiça penal, o Estado de Portugal, por meio da Lei n. 21/2007, introduziu em seu ordenamento jurídico a mediação penal como forma alternativa de solução de litígios. Passada pouco mais de uma década, no entanto, os números indicam que algo não anda bem na implementação do instituto. Nesse contexto, por meio da oitiva de alguns dos atores envolvidos na realização da mediação penal em Portugal, da análise dos dados estatísticos existentes, bem como das pesquisas anteriormente realizadas sobre a temática, buscamos compreender as causas desse aparente insucesso e, principalmente fazer um diagnóstico sobre as possibilidades de recondução do instituto aos trilhos, o que evitaria que a mediação penal em Portugal alcançasse o seu fim., Under heavy demand from Framework Decision n. 2001/220/JAI, of March 15, 2001, and in the wake of other reforms promoted in its criminal justice system, the State of Portugal, through Law n. 21/2007, introduced criminal mediation in its legal system as an alternative way of resolving disputes. A little more than a decade later, however, the numbers indicate that something is not going well in the institute’s implementation. In this context, by listening to some of the actors involved in carrying out criminal mediation in Portugal, analyzing existing statistical data, as well as research previously carried out on the subject, we seek to understand the causes of this apparent failure and, above all, make a diagnosis on the possibilities of bringing the institute back on track, which would prevent criminal mediation in Portugal from reaching its end.

L'articolo si interroga sul ruolo dei tecnici nelle società contemporanee, sia in situazioni d'emergenza sia di normalità. Il testo ricostruisce i contorni del dibattito democrazia-tecnocrazia e propone quattro esempi: il caso delle politiche di austerity; il caso del COVID-19; il caso degli indicatori di governance; il caso dell'intelligenza artificiale applicata alla giustizia. La tesi dell'articolo è che, per raggiungere un effettivo bilanciamento fra poteri, sia necessario favorire un'ibridazione delle razionalità, ossia la combinazione di razionalità politiche, tecniche e scientifiche., The article reflects on the technicians' role in contemporary societies, both in emergency and normal situations. The text retraces the democracy-technocracy debate and proposes four examples: the case of austerity policies, the case of COVID-19, the case of governance indicators, the case of artificial intelligence applied to justice. The article's thesis is that, in order to achieve an effective balance between powers, it is necessary to favor a hybridization of rationalities, i.e. the combination of political, technical, and scientific rationalities.

Over the last fifteen years, and especially following the economic crisis, the Southern European states have introduced a large number of reforms, on the one hand, to increase their competitiveness and encourage economic development and, on the other, to rationalize the «state’s side» of the welfare state, so as to reduce their public spending, as required by the austerity policies. Justice is certainly one of the state sectors which has been deeply impacted by the reforms adopted in response to the influences exercised by European Council, Commission’s Directorate-general for competition, Troika, European Court of Human Rights, and European judicial networks. The paper, which focuses on labour justice in Portugal, Spain, and Italy, analyses, from a quantitative point of view, the effects of this long «season of reforms» both at the macro (national) and meso level (judicial districts). This choice is driven by the desire to compare three states characterized by a high internal and external independence of the judiciary – the so-called Southern European Model – and, at the same time, to highlight the impact of different levels of organizational autonomy enjoyed by the local territories. The fundamental hypothesis of this paper is that the reforms introduced in recent years – both on the supply and demand side of justice – have, on the whole, increased the efficiency of the judicial systems, but have not been able to reduce the inequalities, in terms of citizens’ opportunities to access to justice. The article, which fills a gap in the literature on these topics, discusses the variables that may explain the persistence of the territorial differences and proposes to re-define the very way of conceiving and practicing the governance not only of the justice systems, but of all the public structures.

In the last 20 years and, in particular, following the economic crisis, the Southern European countries have introduced a large number of reforms, with the aim of improving the quality, effectiveness and efficiency of their judicial systems. Following this long “season of reforms”, despite the fact that on a formal level all the procedural guarantees of due process do exist, justice in southern Europe is still not particularly transparent, effective or efficient, limiting the opportunity for citizens to access justice and protect their rights. However, using the metaphor of a geographical map, if we change the scale of reference, we realize that some courts in southern Europe have become "arenas of innovation", where many local interventions are designed, trialled and implemented. The hypothesis of this paper is that, on one hand, despite the investments made in recent years, the reforms carried out in the southern Europe have only rarely achieved effective, lasting and, above all, widespread results and, on the other, the propensity for innovation of some judicial offices has helped bring out great differences in the ways in which justice is provided in the territory. The paper's arguments are based on the results of a 5-year research project, focused on the 4 main Southern European judicial systems: Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain.

The article intends to reflect on the application of the ethnographic technique called “shadowing” in the field of sociology of law. While adopting an empirical approach, this tool is particularly appropriate to understand social actors’ behaviour and to re-construct the complex network of interconnections between law and society. Starting from an analysis of the distinctive features of “shadowing”, this paper will present a summary of the findings resulting from a period in the shadow of a labour judge in an Italian court. The article aims to enhance an extended debate about the most appropriate qualitative research techniques to study the legal operators’ activities.

Negli ultimi vent’anni, i sistemi giudiziari del sud Europa sono stati oggetto di svariate riforme, in alcuni casi imposte dalla Troika, in altri adottate in risposta alle influenze esercitate da Consiglio dell’Unione Europea, Direzione generale per la competizione della Commissione, Corte Europea dei Diritti dell’Uomo e network giudiziari europei, promossi da Consiglio d’Europa e Unione Europea. Tuttavia, a valle di questa lunga stagione di interventi, la giustizia nell’Europa meridionale risulta ancora, nel complesso, al di sotto degli standard europei. Se però cambiamo la scala di riferimento e ci avviciniamo idealmente agli uffici giudiziari sul territorio, possiamo osservare fenomeni sorprendenti. A dispetto dell’opinione diffusa, infatti, molti tribunali del sud Europa sono delle “arene di innovazione”, dove negli ultimi anni sono stati sviluppati molteplici interventi, volti a risolvere problemi interni di funzionamento, migliorare le condizioni di lavoro degli operatori e accrescere la qualità dei servizi erogati ai cittadini. Paradossalmente, tutto ciò fa sì che i sistemi giudiziari dell’Europa meridionale, da un lato, fatichino ad attuare le riforme promosse a livello centrale e, dall’altro, incontrino grandi difficoltà nel diffondere le innovazioni, che rimangono di sovente una sorta di “patrimonio locale”. L’articolo intende creare un “ponte immaginario” fra sociologia, scienza politica e diritto, per analizzare i percorsi di innovazione giudiziaria in Italia, Spagna, Portogallo e Grecia. Il saggio presenterà i primi risultati di una ricerca empirica quinquennale, mai condotta in precedenza, che ha impiegato quattro principali tecniche qualitative: interviste semi-strutturate, analisi documentale, osservazione partecipante e shadowing, coinvolgendo magistrati, capi ufficio, dirigenti amministrativi, funzionari, avvocati, vertici dei ministeri, membri dei consigli superiori e delle scuole della magistratura dei quattro paesi. L’articolo persegue due, Although in recent years the Southern European judicial systems have been subjected to several reforms – in some cases, imposed by the Troika and, in other cases, adopted under the influence exerted by Council of the European Union, Directorate-General for Competition, European Court of Human Rights and judicial networks, promoted by European Union and Council of Europe – many empirical evidences show that the quality of justice is still, on the overall, below the European standards. But if we change the scale of reference, we can see that many judicial offices of Southern Europe are “arenas of innovation”. However, one the one hand, the Southern European judicial systems struggle to implement the reforms promoted at the central level, and on the other hand, they have great difficulty in spreading the innovations, which often remain a sort of “local heritage”, intrinsically linked to the courts and their practitioners. All this represents a paradox that characterizes the Southern European judicial systems. This article wants to build an “ideal bridge” among sociology, political science and law, to analyse the paths of judicial innovation in Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece. The paper is the result of a five-year empirical research and aims to promote an extended debate on the perverse and paradoxical effects of the continuous promotion of innovation, both in the judicial systems and in other sectors of the public administration.

Questo articolo ambisce a favorire la nascita di un dibatto allargato, capace di superare gli steccati disciplinari, sugli effetti collaterali e disfunzionali del continuo ricorso all’innovazione, con l’obiettivo di colmare il vuoto esistente in letteratura. Il saggio intende, da un lato, ricostruire l’ampia letteratura in materia di innovazione, evidenziando le questioni più significative e, al contempo, più controverse e, dall’altro, presentare e discutere un modello interpretativo per analizzare quelli che possiamo definire ‘paradossi dell'innovazione’., This article aims to promote the beginning of a broad debate on the perverse, dysfunctional and paradoxical effects of the continuous resort to innovation, in order to overcome the disciplinary barriers and fill the existing literature gap. The paper wants, on the one hand, to map the extensive literature on innovation, highlighting the most significant and, at the same time, most controversial issues and, on the other, to present and discuss an interpretative model to analyse what we can define as the "paradoxes of innovation".

Questo articolo propone un'analisi comparativa sul funzionamento e la gestione dei sistemi giudiziari europei. Il testo ambisce a realizzare una "fotografia in movimento", che tenga conto delle trasformazioni in atto negli apparati di giustizia. L'articolo utilizza gli indicatori definiti dalla Rete europea dei Consigli di Giustizia per valutare i sistemi giudiziari, in termini di grado di indipendenza e accountability, sia della magistratura nel suo complesso sia del singolo giudice. I paesi analizzati (Italia, Francia, Ungheria, Svezia e Olanda) presentano caratteristiche peculiari e sono rappresentativi delle diverse aree geografiche europee., This article proposes a comparative analysis on the functioning and management of the European judicial systems. The paper aims to create a "moving photograph", which considers the transformations taking place in the judicial apparatuses. The article uses the indicators defined by the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary to assess the judicial systems, in terms of degree of independence and accountability of both the judiciary as a whole and the individual judge. The analysed countries (Italy, France, Hungary, Sweden and Netherlands) present specific features and are representative of the different geographical areas of Europe.

Several studies have demonstrated that there is a correlation between the number of Ital-ian lawyers and the litigation rate in the field of civil law. Yet, there are no empirical stud-ies about the functioning of law firms and the connection between the latter and courts of justice. This experimental article intends to "follow the actors”, that is, to metaphorical go inside the Italian law offices to analyse their specific logics of action. This research’s main hypothesis is that the "business idea" that steers every law firm – which is, the spe-cific combination of market, product and structure – can influence the activities of the judicial offices. As a matter of fact, courts and law firms are interdependent as far as some organizational features are concerned, and these features must be analysed to understand and tackle the problems that afflict the judicial systems and influence their ability to “do justice” for citizens. This article’s reflections are based on a three-year empirical research, carried out in three Italian law firms dealing with labour and employment.

This paper aims to present and discuss a comparative picture of the functioning and management of several European judicial systems on the basis of the indicators identified by the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ) in order to assess European judicial systems in terms of the degree of independence and accountability, both of the judiciary and the individual judge. The judicial systems subject to analysis (Italy, France, Hungary, Sweden and the Netherlands) present specific features and are representative of the diverse geographical areas of Europe., Este trabajo pretende presentar y discutir un cuadro comparativo del funcionamiento y gestión de varios sistemas judiciales europeos a partir de los indicadores definidos por la Red Europea de Consejos de Justicia (RECJ) para valorar los sistemas judiciales europeos en relación con el grado de independencia y de rendición de cuentas (accountability), tanto de la magistratura como del juez individual. Los sistemas judiciales analizados (Italia, Francia, Hungría, Suecia y Países Bajos) presentan características particulares y son representativos de las diversas regiones geográficas de Europa.

This Special Issue is centered on a fundamental research question that characterizes the comparative studies on these topics: where are the legal professions heading? The focus is therefore on past, present, and, especially, future of the legal professions, both in Europe and outside Europe, in civil law and common law systems, in the north and south of the world. The legal professions, in fact, are facing important challenges, as expecially the issue of their internal heterogeneity — e.g., the gap between the now dominant business lawyers and the judicial bar, each one with different interests, ethics and regulations. This Special Issue aims to contribute to the current interdisciplinary debate on the legal professions, which represent the pivotal “protagonists” of interpretation and application of law, delivery of justice and protection of people’s rights.

The Italian judicial system has been living a long season of strong criticality. Over the past 30 years, several factors have aggravated the difficulties of the system operation. To solve this situation, in the period 2005-2013, Italian Governments have developed 12 major reforms of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure. Paradoxically, the succession of continuous reforms has ended to slow the activity of the practitioners, called constantly to adapt to the change of the “rules of the game”, with obvious repercussions on the functioning of the courts and, indirectly, on citizens’ rights. The constant changes of the Italian Code of Civil Procedure have pushed many “actors” to establish opportunities to meet, in a more or less formalised and structured way, in order to discuss the possible “practical translation” of the regulatory norms. In this sense, the article intends to present and critically discuss the phenomenon of the “Observatories of civil justice”, which represents a unique experience in the European panorama.