Doctoral Dissertation Research: The Judicial Politics of Land Disputes

博士论文研究：土地纠纷的司法政治

• 批准号: 1560623
• 负责人: Marcus Kurtz
• 金额: $ 2.31万
• 依托单位: Ohio State University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2016
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2016-05-15 至 2018-04-30
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1560623&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Doctoral; Dissertation; Research; Judicial; Politics

General SummaryThe PI seeks to understand why citizens choose to utilize formal legal institutions as a mechanism for dispute resolution in authoritarian regimes through analysis of the emergence, litigation and resolution of land disputes. The PI argues that the decision to utilize formal legal mechanisms for dispute resolution is surprising given the authoritarian context in which personal ties heavily influence how the law works in practice. The co-PI uses survey data and court statistics to address three key questions: 1) what disputes exist; 2) which ones make it to the courts (and why); and 3) how these disputes are settled. The research addresses these questions by collecting, combining, and analyzing two types of data: original surveys of landholders and attorneys, and case statistics. Tracing these land disputes from their general incidence in the population through court rulings helps to illuminate how citizens in non-democracies mobilize law and courts in their interests. Given the large amount of aid earmarked for improving rule of law and citizens' access to justice in developing countries, developing a better understanding of this issue has broad policy implications.Technical Summary This project addresses an ongoing puzzle in comparative judicial politics: in authoritarian regimes with corrupt, dependent judiciaries, why do we see widespread use of civil courts, particularly for disputes involving state officials? In non-democracies, law is often applied selectively or subjectively. Where cases are non-political, there is some expectation that courts will fulfill their intended functions. However, if cases are political, informal influence is assumed to prevail. The PI examines this puzzle through analysis of the emergence, litigation and resolution of land disputes in Kazakhstan. The PI argues that the decision to utilize formal legal mechanisms for dispute resolution is surprising given the authoritarian context in which personal ties heavily influence how the law works in practice. The co-PI uses survey data and court statistics to address three key questions: 1) what disputes exist; 2) which ones make it to the courts (and why); and 3) how these disputes are settled. The research addresses these questions by collecting, combining, and analyzing two types of data: original surveys of landholders and attorneys, and case statistics. Tracing these land disputes from their general incidence in the population through court rulings helps to illuminate how citizens in non-democracies mobilize law and courts in their interests. Given the large amount of aid earmarked for improving rule of law and citizens' access to justice in developing countries, developing a better understanding of this issue has broad policy implications.

通过对土地纠纷的出现、诉讼和解决的分析，PI试图了解为什么公民选择利用正式的法律机构作为威权政权的争端解决机制。国际刑事法院认为，考虑到个人关系在很大程度上影响法律在实践中的运作方式的威权背景，利用正式法律机制解决争端的决定令人惊讶。联合PI使用调查数据和法院统计数据来解决三个关键问题：1)存在哪些纠纷；2)哪些纠纷诉诸法院(以及为什么)；以及3)这些纠纷是如何解决的。本研究通过收集、整合和分析两种类型的数据来解决这些问题：对土地所有者和律师的原始调查，以及案例统计。通过法院裁决追踪这些土地纠纷在人口中的普遍发生率，有助于阐明非民主国家的公民如何动员法律和法院维护他们的利益。鉴于指定用于改善发展中国家的法治和公民诉诸司法的大量援助，更好地理解这一问题具有广泛的政策意义。这个项目解决了比较司法政治中持续存在的一个难题：在司法腐败、依赖的威权政权中，为什么我们看到民事法院被广泛使用，特别是在涉及国家官员的纠纷中？在非民主国家，法律的适用往往是选择性的或主观的。在案件非政治性的情况下，人们期望法院能够履行其预期的职能。然而，如果案件是政治性的，则假定非正式影响占上风。国际和平研究所通过分析哈萨克斯坦土地纠纷的出现、诉讼和解决来审查这一谜题。国际刑事法院认为，考虑到个人关系在很大程度上影响法律在实践中的运作方式的威权背景，利用正式法律机制解决争端的决定令人惊讶。联合PI使用调查数据和法院统计数据来解决三个关键问题：1)存在哪些纠纷；2)哪些纠纷诉诸法院(以及为什么)；以及3)这些纠纷是如何解决的。本研究通过收集、整合和分析两种类型的数据来解决这些问题：对土地所有者和律师的原始调查，以及案例统计。通过法院裁决追踪这些土地纠纷在人口中的普遍发生率，有助于阐明非民主国家的公民如何动员法律和法院维护他们的利益。鉴于专门用于改善发展中国家的法治和公民诉诸司法的大量援助，更好地了解这一问题具有广泛的政策意义。