Website proposal: ‘Courts and Policy’

1. Goals

• Courts & Policy is inspired by the belief that judicial studies can and should improve public policy making in relation to the roles and responsibilities of the judiciary and courts, but that too little scholarly literature is available in this important area (although we aim only to publish material that is readily comprehensible to a wide audience – see below). Contributions will be accepted in English and may relate to all member states of the European Union.
• We aim to create opportunities for judges, court officers, lawyers, policy makers and journalists to connect.
• We aim to foster the understanding required to develop good policies.

2. What we are

• Courts & Policy promotes knowledge transfer by publishing high-quality research freely accessible online.
• We are a non-partisan and independent forum for the expression of multidisciplinary perspectives on today’s policy issues relating to courts. The views expressed in Courts & Policy publications are those of the authors concerned.
• Judicial Studies & Policy welcomes contributions from academics and practitioners based on their peer-reviewed research in particular on judiciaries across the European Union.

3. Who we are

The proposal is made by Dr Sophie Turenne, who recently co-wrote Judges on Trial (2^nd edn, CUP, 2013) and has keen research interests in judicial independence. She will act as an editor of all the collected materials and will co-ordinate reviews of contributions. She aims to recruit other editors, hopefully including Daniella Cavallini (Bologna University) who has written extensively about judicial organisation and judicial governance.

4. What we are looking for

• A Website Host such Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law.
• We would expect the web manager to upload our papers on a designated section on the website. In return, we would contribute to the greater visibility of the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law website, and would aim to become a ‘one-stop shop’ for anyone researching information on courts around Europe.

5. Known functional requirements

The functional requirements for the Host web manager are minimal:

1. To put a separate logo and message indicating that the views expressed are those of the authors concerned, and that the editorial responsibility belongs to ‘Courts and Policy’.
2. To allow for one page identifying the goals, the editor(s) and the editorial policy, with room for the editor(s) to regularly write and publish an editorial.
3. To include a ‘search function’ by author or keyword
4. To upload papers on the website on a regular basis
5. To set a website tracker service (number of visitors/most popular pages)

 

6. Website content – Editorial guidelines

Our papers will share a number of key characteristics:

• Policy papers must reflect upon legal principles and their practice within (at least) one national legal system.
• They must also have clear policy relevance, and intended to inform debate about current policy. There are two main ways of achieving this. Policy papers can emphasise constructive policy proposals or recommendations for government or other policy makers. Alternatively, they can focus on ‘lessons from the past/lessons from other countries’: these may be challenging for policy makers, but should not be defeatist in their implications.
• Policy papers should be accessible, in a style appropriate for a non-academic audience. They should be between 2,000-4,000 words long and written in several sections, with clear sub-headings and short paragraphs. Papers will not include unexplained technical terms or concepts, nor will they be footnoted (i.e, any references must be included within the text)
• In the interests of accessibility, all Courts and Policy papers have an executive summary in bullet points. There should also be a short list of further reading at the end.

7. Editorial responsibility, process and launch of website

• Dr Turenne would take editorial responsibility and would liaise with the Host Website.
• We would however welcome ideas and suggestions from the Host Website Advisory Council and Director regarding topics which could be explored on that website.
• Editing and preparing a paper is generally expected to take from six to eight weeks.
• We will contact possible authors once a Host Website has been found, with the aim of having 20 papers ready for publication by March 2016, when the website would go live. We would then aim to have at least 20 papers published annually.

8. Risk avoidance and website monitoring

• The fact that papers are hosted on a judicial website might lead to an impression of endorsement by the Host Website. As indicated above, there will be a systematic message indicating that the views expressed are only those of the authors.
• In addition, we would suggest the following

1. Annual review of the website or more frequently as appropriate, with the aim of assessing the quality of the papers/the impact of the website/ways to strengthen contents.
2. A small board of reviewers to assess the quality of papers when appropriate.

Annex. Suggested commissioned Authors

Australia: Pamela Schulz (eg the use of social media by courts in Australia: the future and challenge of change for courts; Anne Wallace (eg Judicial Workload: Time, Tasks and Work Organisation; Gabrielle Appleby (eg the Separation of Judicial Power in Australia); Belgium: Benoit Allemeersch; Canada: Robert Leckey, Devlin; Peter Solomon; Finland: Pia Letto-Vanamo; France: Loic Cadiet and Frederique Ferrand; Czek Republik: Michal Bobek; Germany: Anja Seibert-Fohr; Hungary: Zoltan Fleck and Balasz Fekete; Italy: Carlo Guarnieri, Daniela Piana and G Di Federico; Netherlands: Leny E. de Groot – van Leeuwen, Ton Hol; Philip Langbroek, Elena Mak; Poland: Adam Bodnar; Spain: Aida Perrez-Torre and Victor Ferreres Comella; UK: John Bell; Andrew Le Sueur, Kate Malleson; David Feldman; Alan Patterson, Hazel Genn, Neil Andrews; USA: Laurence Baum (USA); Erik Voeten (International Courts).