A Time for Justice?

doi:10.1017/9781009297288.017

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

Marco Velicogna

Edited by

François-Xavier de Vaujany,

Robin Holt and

Albane Grandazzi

Show author details

François-Xavier de Vaujany: Affiliation:
Universite Paris Dauphine-PSL
Robin Holt: Affiliation:
Copenhagen Business School
Albane Grandazzi: Affiliation:
Grenoble Ecole de Management

Book contents

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 structuring legal performativity technological performativity regulative regimes justice court registers case filing court hearing

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Organization as Time
Technology, Power and Politics
, pp. 349 - 374
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009297288.017 [Opens in a new window]
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.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

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

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.