2 - Trust in Administrative Justice

Summary

Introduction

Questions of consent, cooperation and compliance have confronted the police and courts for many years. The ability to generate trust and command legitimacy is central to the functioning of legal institutions, their provision of services and delivery of outcomes (Tyler and Nobo 2023). On the one hand, people are more likely to use legal services, come forward with information, report crimes to the police and give evidence in court when they believe that justice institutions are trustworthy, appropriate and entitled to be obeyed. On the other hand, authorities that are seen as untrustworthy and illegitimate find it difficult to garner cooperation, gain acceptance of their decisions and enforce rules.

Scholars have produced a rich amount of academic research on the foundations, predictors and potential outcomes of legitimacy and ‘trust in justice’ (Tyler 2006b; Tyler and Huo 2002), especially in the context of the police, although this work is increasingly being applied in administrative justice and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) settings (Creutzfeldt and Bradford 2016; Bradford et al 2023; Hough 2020). In addition to highlighting ‘downstream’ implications for motivating and enabling engagement between two parties, this work has accumulated an increasing amount of evidence that trust and legitimacy are partly a product of people's experiences, judgements of and responses to their direct and indirect contacts with the police, courts and other legal entities. Justice system encounters represent ‘teachable moments’, whereby people update their attitudes towards the trustworthiness and legitimacy of legal authorities (can officials be trusted to do what they are supposed to do? Does the institution have the right to power and authority to govern?) based on how they perceive the official to behave, specifically the fairness exercised by legal authorities (Geller et al 2014).

Procedural justice scholars have focused on how courts, tribunals, police and other authorities treat people and make decisions (Mazerolle et al 2013) and have considered some of the potential implications for compliance (Tyler 2006b), cooperation (Tyler and Fagan 2008), empowerment (Sunshine and Tyler 2003) and community cohesion (Tyler and Jackson 2014) arising from the experience of procedural justice and the trust and legitimacy it does or does not generate.