Legal Architecture: Justice, Due Process and the Place of Law
Legal Architecture: Justice, Due Process and the Place of Law
复制标题
法律架构：正义、正当程序和法律地位
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
L. Mulcahy
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Mulcahy
法律的建筑解决了如何审判的环境可以被看作是我们与正义的理想关系的物理表达。它提供了对审判的另一种描述，描绘了正当程序和参与概念的混乱历史。与将司法空间视为中立的观点相反，琳达·马尔卡希认为，理解决定法院和法庭内部设计的因素对于更广泛、更细致地理解审判至关重要。将审判室划分为若干区域并限制在审判室内的行动是争夺地盘的结果，争夺的焦点是谁可以合法地参与法律的竞技场并要求司法部门承担责任。对公众的逐渐遏制，分配给倡导者的空间越来越多，以及为记者和陪审团创造专用空间，都有着复杂的历史，值得关注。但这些问题不仅具有历史意义。在各个司法管辖区，人们现在都在问法院和审判室的内部配置问题，以及标准设计是否符合现代参与式民主的需要：包括现代被告席的存在和设计问题;新技术如何威胁改变审判的动态，并导致我们对抗性做法的主要场所非物质化;以及法院的设计在多大程度上实现了其作为公共空间的公开地位。这种迷人的和原始的思考法律的建筑将感兴趣的社会法律的或关键的学者在法律的地理，法律的历史，犯罪学，法律的系统，法律的方法，证据，人权和建筑领域的工作。
Legal Architecture addresses how the environment of the trial can be seen as a physical expression of our relationship with ideals of justice. It provides an alternative account of the trial, which charts the troubled history of notions of due process and participation. In contrast to visions of judicial space as neutral, Linda Mulcahy argues that understanding the factors that determine the internal design of the courthouse and courtroom are crucial to a broader and more nuanced understanding of the trial. Partitioning of the courtroom into zones and the restriction of movement within it are the result of turf wars about who can legitimately participate in the legal arena and call the judiciary to account. The gradual containment of the public, the increasing amount of space allocated to advocates, and the creation of dedicated space for journalists and the jury, all have complex histories that deserve attention. But these issues are not only of historical significance. Across jurisdictions, questions are now being asked about the internal configurations of the courthouse and courtroom, and whether standard designs meet the needs of modern participatory democracies: including questions about the presence and design of the modern dock; the ways in which new technologies threaten to change the dynamics of the trial and lead to the dematerialization of our primary site of adversarial practice; and the extent to which courthouses are designed in ways which realise their professed status as public spaces. This fascinating and original reflection on legal architecture will be of interest to socio-legal or critical scholars working in the field of legal geography, legal history, criminology, legal systems, legal method, evidence, human rights and architecture.