Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T18:35:41.205Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - A Time for Justice?

Reflecting on the Many Facets of Time and Temporality in Justice Service Provision

from Part IV - History and Duration: Making Things Last, Enduring Politics and Organizing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 June 2023

By
Marco Velicogna
Edited by
François-Xavier de Vaujany ,
Robin Holt  and
Albane Grandazzi
François-Xavier de Vaujany
Affiliation:
Universite Paris Dauphine-PSL
Robin Holt
Affiliation:
Copenhagen Business School
Albane Grandazzi
Affiliation:
Grenoble Ecole de Management
Get access

Summary

This chapter explores the concept of time in the delivery of justice, reflecting on its multiple dimensions, roles and functions. Building on Orlikowski and Yates notion of temporal structuring, it investigates how people, material artefacts and legal rules defining judicial procedures and their legal performativity contribute to orienting ongoing activities and shaping temporal structures and their evolution trajectories. It addresses a gap in the existing literature exploring the effects on time structures and structuring of the intertwining of legal and technological performative requirements. The chapter looks at two key events, the filing of a case and the hearing, and two objects of time, the case register and the case file. It also describes the emergence of new temporal structures as procedures are digitised, and remote hearings replace courtroom hearings. It reflects on the emergence of new and simultaneously experienced and enacted perspectives on time, as the temporalities of the single procedure, its legal terms, deadlines and legal performativity requirements are joined by aggregated viewpoints, with new concepts such as disposition time, reasonable timeframe, and case weighting.

Keywords

Temporal structuringlegal performativitytechnological performativityregulative regimesjusticecourt registerscase filingcourt hearing
Type
Chapter
Information
Organization as Time
Technology, Power and Politics
 , pp. 349 - 374
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adam, B. (2002). Perceptions of Time. In Companion Encyclopedia of Anthropology (2nd ed., pp. 537–60). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Adam, B. (2013). Timewatch: The Social Analysis of Time. Cambridge: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Birth, K. (2012). Objects of Time: How Things Shape Temporality. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Blyton, P., Hassard, J., Hill, S. & Starkey, K. (2017). Time, Work and Organisation.London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bolter, J. D. & Grusin, R. (1999). Remediation: Understanding New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Borsari, G. (2020). E-Justice in Italy. National Conference on Technology in the Justice Sector. Kingston, Jamaica, 27–29 February.Google Scholar
Brannen, J. (2005). Time and the negotiation of work–family boundaries: Autonomy or illusion? Time & Society, 14(1), 113–31.Google Scholar
Canguilhem, G. (1991). The Normal and the Pathological. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
Carnevali, D. & Resca, A. (2014). Pushing at the Edge of Maximum Manageable Complexity: The Case of “Trial Online” in Italy. In Contini, F. & Lanzara, G. F. (eds), The Circulation of Agency in e-Justice (pp. 161–83). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
CEPEJ (2015). Study on Council of Europe Member States Appeal and Supreme Courts’ Lengths of Proceedings Edition 2015 (2006–2012 data). CEPEJ Studies No. 17. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
CEPEJ (2016). Towards European Timeframes for Judicial Proceedings – Implementation Guide (p. 5). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
CEPEJ (2020). Case Weighting in Judicial Systems – CEPEJ Studies No. 28. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Cerillo, C. & Fabra, P. (2009). E-Justice: Information and Communication Technologies in the Court System. Hershey, PA: IGI-Global.Google Scholar
Church, T., Carlson, A., Lee, J. L. & Tan, T. (1978). Justice Delayed: The Pace of Litigation in Urban Trial Courts. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.Google Scholar
Contini, F. & Fabri, M. (eds) (2003). Judicial Electronic Data Interchange in Europe: Applications, Policies and Trends. Bologna: Lo scarabeo.Google Scholar
Contini, F. & Lanzara, G. F. (eds) (2009a). ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Contini, F. & Lanzara, G. F. (2009b). Introduction. In ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Contini, F. & Lanzara, G. F. (eds) (2014). The Circulation of Agency in E-Justice. Interoperability and Infrastructures for European Transborder Judicial Proceedings Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Contini, F. & Lanzara, G. F. (2018). The elusive mediation between law and technology. Undetectable errors in ICT–based judicial proceedings. In Branco, P., Hosen, N., Leone, M. & Mohr, R. (eds), Tools of Meaning (pp. 39–66). Rome: Aracne.Google Scholar
Contini, F. & Mohr, R. (2014). How the Law Can Make It Simple: Easing the Circulation of Agency in e-Justice. In The Circulation of Agency in E-Justice (pp. 53–79). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
de Vaujany, F-X., Mitev, N., Laniray, P. & Vaast, E. (eds) (2014). Materiality and Time: Historical Perspectives on Organisations, Artefacts and Practices. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
de Vaujany, F-X., Mitev, N., Lanzara, G. F. & Mukherjee, A. (2015). Introduction: Making Sense of Rules and Materiality: The New Challenge for Management and Organization Studies? In Materiality, Rules and Regulation (pp. 1–29). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, R. I., Langbroek, P. M., Bozorg Zadeh, K. & Türk, Z. (2017). The Evaluation and Development of the Quality of Justice in the Netherlands. In Contini, F. (ed.), Handle with Care: Assessing and Designing Methods for Evaluation and Development of the Quality of Justice (pp. 227–76). Bologna: IRSIG-CNR.Google Scholar
ECHR (2020). Guide on Article 6 of the Convention – Right to a Fair Trial (criminal limb). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.Google Scholar
Fabri, M. (2021). Will COVID-19 accelerate implementation of ICT in courts? International Journal for Court Administration, 12(2), 1–13.Google Scholar
Fabri, M. (2022). Judicial proceedings cannot only be counted, they must be weighted: The situation in the European judiciaries (unpublished manuscript). Bologna: IGSG-CNR.Google Scholar
Fabri, M. & Langbroek, P. M. (eds) (2000). The Challenge of Change for Judicial Systems: Developing a Public Administration Perspective. Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. (1993). New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies (2nd ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Glucksmann, M. A. (1998). “What a difference a day makes”: A theoretical and historical exploration of temporality and gender. Sociology, 32(2), 239–58.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, M. (2008). Legal and technological normativity: More (and less) than twin sisters. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 12(3), 169–83.Google Scholar
Kallinikos, J. (2009). The Regulative Regime of Technology. In ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector (pp. 66–87). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lanzara, G. F. (2009a). Reshaping practice across media: Material mediation, medium specificity and practical knowledge in judicial work. Organisation Studies, 30(12), 1369–90.Google Scholar
Lanzara, G. F. (2009b). Building Digital Institutions: ICT and the Rise of Assemblages in Government. In ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector (pp. 9–48). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lanzara, G. F. (2015). How Technology Remediates Practice: Objects, Rules, and New Media. In Materiality, Rules and Regulation (pp. 195–220). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lanzara, G. F., de Vaujany, F-X., Mitev, N. & Mukherjee, A. (eds) (2015). Materiality, Rules and Regulation: New Trends in Management and Organisation Studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lanzara, G. F. & Patriotta, G. (2001). Technology and the courtroom: An inquiry into knowledge making in organisations. Journal of Management Studies, 38(7), 94–171.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1992). Where are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a few Mundane Artifacts. In Bijker, W. E. & J. Law (eds), Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change (pp. 225–58). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ng, G. Y. (2007). Quality of Judicial Organisation and Checks and Balances. Utrecht: Utrecht University.Google Scholar
Onţanu, E. A. & Velicogna, M. (2021). The challenge of comparing EU Member States judicial data. Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 11(2), 446–80.Google Scholar
Onţanu, E. A., Velicogna, M. & Contini, F. (2017). How many cases: Assessing the comparability of EU judicial datasets. Comparative Law Review, 8(2), 1–39.Google Scholar
Orlikowski, W. J. & Yates, J. (2002). It’s about time: Temporal structuring in organisations. Organisation Science, 13(6), 684–700.Google Scholar
Osborne, P. (2011). The Politics of Time: Modernity and Avant-Garde. London: Verso Books.Google Scholar
Peckham, R. F. (1981). The federal judge as a case manager: The new role in guiding a case from filing to disposition. California Law Review, 69(3), 770–85.Google Scholar
Reiling, D. (2010). Technology for Justice: How Information Technology Can Support Judicial Reform. Leiden: Leiden University Press.Google Scholar
Reilly, J. A. (1987). Sharī‘a court registers and land tenure around nineteenth-century Damascus. Review of Middle East Studies, 21(2), 155–69.Google Scholar
Sanders, A. (2021). Video-hearings in Europe before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal for Court Administration, 12(2), 1–21.Google Scholar
Sobers-Khan, N. (2014). Slaves without Shackles: Forced Labour and Manumission in the Galata Court Registers 1560–1572. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag GmbH.Google Scholar
Steelman, D. C. & Fabri, M. (2008). Can an Italian court use the American approach to delay reduction? Justice System Journal, 29(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
Steelman, D. C., Goerdt, J. & McMillan, J. E. (2000). Caseflow Management: The Heart of Court Management in the New Millennium (pp. 137–43). Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.Google Scholar
Summers, R. S. (2006). Form and Function in a Legal System: A General Study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers.Google Scholar
Thompson, E. P. (1967). Time, work-discipline, and industrial capitalism. Past & Present, 38(1), 56–97.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. R. (2003). Procedural justice, legitimacy, and the effective rule of law. Crime and Justice, 30, 283–357.Google Scholar
Velicogna, M. (2007). Justice systems and ICT: What can be learned from Europe? Utrecht Law Review, 3(1), 129–47.Google Scholar
Velicogna, M. (2013). The EU Justice Scoreboard and the challenge of investigating the functioning of EU justice systems and their impact on the economy of the Member States. Paper presented at the SISP Conference.Google Scholar
Velicogna, M. (2014). Legal, material, spatial and temporal dimensions in EU Cross-Border e-Justice procedures. OAP proceedings.Google Scholar
Velicogna, M. (2021). Cross-border civil litigation in the EU: What can we learn from COVID-19 emergency national e-Justice experiences? European Quarterly of Political Attitudes and Mentalities, 10(2), 1–25.Google Scholar
Velicogna, M. & Contini, F. (2009). Assemblage-in-the-Making: Developing the e-Services for the Justice of the Peace Office in Italy. In ICT and Innovation in the Public Sector (pp. 211–43). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Velicogna, M., Errera, A. & Derlange, S. (2011). e-Justice in France: The e-Barreau experience. Utrecht Law Review, 7(1), 163–87.Google Scholar
Velicogna, M., Errera, A. & Derlange, S. (2013). Building e-justice in Continental Europe: The TéléRecours experience in France. Utrecht Law Review, 9(1), 38–59.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Whipp, R., Adam, B. & Sabelis, I. (eds) (2002). Making Time: Time and Management in Modern Organisations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yates, J. (2014). Time, History, and Materiality. In Materiality and Time (pp. 17–32). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Zerubavel, E. (1982). The standardisation of time: A sociohistorical perspective. American Journal of Sociology, 88(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
Zerubavel, E. (1985). Hidden Rhythms: Schedules and Calendars in Social Life. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×