Exclusion in the interests of inclusion: who should stay offline in the emerging world of online justice?

Exclusion in the interests of inclusion: who should stay offline in the emerging world of online justice?
复制标题

为了包容而排斥:在新兴的网络正义世界中,谁应该保持离线状态?

DOI:
10.1080/09649069.2022.2136713
复制
发表时间:
2022
影响因子:
1.5
通讯作者:
Mulcahy L
Mulcahy L
中科院分区:
--
文献类型:
--
作者:
Mulcahy L

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

英格兰和威尔士正在进行一项雄心勃勃的法院改革计划,其中一个关键要素是在适当的案件中转向更多的在线听证会。这给司法机构提出了一系列新问题,其中最重要的是是否存在因关键参与者无法有效在线参与而不适合进行视频听证会的情况。本文考虑了当前对案件应从在线诉讼清单中排除的情况的思考,并将司法方法与我们从社会科学文献中了解到的数字劣势进行了比较。作者借鉴了有关能力门槛的新兴司法声明,以及对法院工作人员、法庭听证会的定期参与者和非专业用户的原创研究。有人认为,数字劣势的复杂动态经常被误解和低估。本文明确指出,需要更深入地考虑数字劣势在缺乏设备或技能之外表现出来的多种方式。在此过程中,它提出了一些关键问题,即我们所说的用户观点是什么以及如何听到用户的声音。
England and Wales are in the middle of an ambitious court reform programme, a key element of which is the shift to more online hearings in appropriate cases. This raises a series of new questions for the judiciary, not least of which is whether there are circumstances in which a video hearing is unsuitable because a key participant is not able to engage effectively online. This article considers current thinking about the circumstances in which a case should be excluded from the list of online proceedings and compares judicial approaches to what we know of digital disadvantage from the social science literature. The authors draw on emerging judicial statements about threshold competencies, and original research with court staff, regular participants in court hearings and lay users. It is argued that the complex dynamics of digital disadvantage are frequently misunderstood and underestimated. This article makes clear the need for a more in-depth consideration of the multiple ways in which digital disadvantage manifests itself beyond a lack of equipment or skills. In doing so it raises critical questions about what we mean by user perspectives and how the voices of users are being heard.
DOI: --
发表时间: 2019
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
L. Mulcahy;Emma Rowden
通讯作者: Emma Rowden
《民主法院:设计、正当程序和尊严的现代史》作者:Linda Mulcahy 和 Emma Rowden(伦敦:Routledge,2019 年,370 页,36.99 英镑)
DOI: --
发表时间: 2020
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
Margaret Moran;P. Schmidt
通讯作者: P. Schmidt
实施视频听证会(党对国):过程评估
DOI: --
发表时间: 2018
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
M. Rossner;M. McCurdy
通讯作者: M. McCurdy
像素化囚犯:监狱视频链接、法庭“出庭”和正义矩阵;《童年谋杀案:英国最臭名昭著的儿童凶手之一的内心深处》(25 周年纪念特别版)
DOI: --
发表时间: 2019
期刊: Probation Journal
影响因子: 1.5
作者:
C. McKay
通讯作者: C. McKay
COVID-19 大流行期间行政法院的司法审查
DOI: --
发表时间: 2020
期刊:
影响因子: --
作者:
Joe Tomlinson;J. Hynes;E. Marshall;Jack Maxwell
通讯作者: Jack Maxwell