司法构造超越民事诉讼外文翻译.docx

司法构造超越民事诉讼外文翻译.docx

《司法构造超越民事诉讼外文翻译.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《司法构造超越民事诉讼外文翻译.docx（7页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

司法构造超越民事诉讼外文翻译

外文翻译SpringerNewYork, 2008:

257-272

原文：

ConstructsofJustice:

BeyondCivilLitigationOf：

AlanJ.TomkinsandKimberlyApplequist

Itisthecasethatciviljusticeproblemsconstitutethebulkofcourts’workin

boththestateandfederallegalsystems（see,e.g.,CourtStatisticsProject,2006;U.S.Courts,2007）.Nevertheless,adecisionrenderedbyajury（orajudge）takesplaceinonlyarelativelysmallpercentageofcivildisputes.Thereareexponentiallymorecivildisputesresolvedoutsideofcourtthanareresolvedviajuryverdicts（see,e.g.,Galanter,1983,1993,1996;Miller&Sarat,1980–1981;Trubek,Grossman,Felstiner,Kritzer,&Sarat,1983）,astateofaffairstruefortheUKaswellastheUS（Pleasence,2006）.Hersch’s（2006）analysisofnearly3,800federalcivilcasesshowsevenalitigant’srequestforajurytrialratherthanabenchtrial（regardlessofwhetheritemanatesfromtheplaintifforthedefendant）intrial-eligiblecasesismorelikelytoresultintheparties’out-of-courtsettlementthanitistoresultinajuryverdict.

Theempiricalreality,thus,isthatjuriesplayonlyalimited—itisfairtosay,arelativelyminor—roleincivildisputeresolution.Yetjuryresearchhasdominatedthescholarshipofthepsychologyandlawcommunityvirtuallysincetherevivalofpsych-olegalresearchinthe1970s,andthepatternoffocusingonjurymatterscontinuestoday.Thischapterisacallforpsycholegalscholarstostudyciviljusticemattersbeyo-ndthecontextoflitigationandthecourts,bothtoallowustobetterunderstandtheresolutionofcivilissuesinthelitigation/courtcontextsandtobetterunderstandthelargerinstitutional（andsometimessocietal）contextsinwhichcivildisputesmaterializeandaremostoftenresolved（seeFelstiner,Abel,&Sarat,1980–1981;Galanter,1983,1993,1996;Kritzer,Vidmar,&Bogart,1991;Trubeketal.,1984;Trubek,Sarat,Felstiner,Kritzer,&Grossman,1983）.

Anareaofpsycholegalresearchthathasprovidedsignificantinsightsintocivildisputesisthedifferentconceptualizationsof‘‘justice.’’Overthelastfiftyyearsorso,therehasbeenagreatdealofcommentaryandresearchintovariouspsychosocialconstructsofjustice.InthischapterwefocusonthemoreProminentjusticetheories,thatis,distributive,procedural,restorative,andretributivejustice.

Briefly,distributivejusticeisconcernedprimarilywiththeperceivedfairnessoftheoutcomeofagivenproceeding,whetherthatproceedingisjudicial,quasijudicialorentirelynon-judicialinnature.Proceduraljustice,incontrast,isconcernedwithwhethertheproceduresusedinagivenprocessareconsideredfairbytheparticipants,andissimilarlynotrestrictedtojudicialsettings.Restorativejusticeisconcerned,asthenameimplies,withrestoringaninjuredpartytohisorherpre-injurystateandhelpingtheinjuringpartyrecognizeandredresstheinjuriousnatureofhisorheracts.Finally,retributivejusticelooksatthepsychologyofrespondingtoharmsthathavebeeninflicted.Recentresearchindicatesthatretributiveandrestorativejusticeprinciplesare,aswiththedistributiveandproceduraljusticecontexts,applicableoutsidethejudicialcontext.

Justiceconstructsaswellasthenumbers,theirboundaries,etc.ForpurposesofthisrelyontheconstructsofjusticeusedbyTomTyler,byfarthemostprolificandimportantofmodernjusticescholars,andhiscolleaguesintheirbook,SocialJusticeinaDiverseSociety.

ConstructsofJustice:

BeyondCivilLitigation259distributionofresourcesamongcompetingparties,whileaneed-basedallocationmightresultinapreviouslydisadvantagedpartyreceivingalargershareoftheresources,andanefficiency-basedallocationmightcallfordistributingalargersharetothosepartiesthatproducethemost.Inagivensituation,then,howmightonedecidewhichprinciple（s）shouldbeappliedtomakeanappropriateallocationdetermination?

Thereis,perhapsnotsurprisingly,somedisputeaboutthis.Rawlshimselffeltthattheprinciplesapplyinsomesortoforderlyhierarchy,butothershavearguedthatpeoplemayusemostoralloftheprinciplestosomedegree,dependingonthegivensituation.Researchintheareaofdistributivejusticealsosuggeststhattheremaybedifferencesinpriorityforpeopleofdifferentdemographicgroups.Gender,race,andculturalbackgroundcanallaffectdistributionprioritization,ascancognitiveprocessessuchasattributions.

Giventheprinciplesthatappeartobeatworkinthedistributivejusticeconstruct,then,itisnotdifficulttoseehowresearchinthisareacouldtellusmuchnotonlyaboutciviljusticeincourtroomsettings,butalsoaboutlegislativedecisionsthatregulatecourtroomoutcomesorallocateresourcesdirectly.Distributivejusticeprincipleswouldbeparticularlyvaluablet