The Culture of Dialogue and Relational Justice as a ‘Third Path’

The administration of justice in Western countries is showing clear signs of severe exhaustion. The underlying causes for such a diagnosis are multiple and heterogeneous.1 This paper sets out to propose a descriptive approach to the various methods of administration of justice known to societies and to the possible causes of the collapse of the judicial system in the West. It then formulates a general hypothesis
in light of the major multi-disciplinary – anthropological, ontological and legal – work carried out by the scientific community, and of the advances in artificial intelligence and information technology, in the form of a proposal: without renouncing its achievements, justice needs to recover the grass roots of dialogue, which has been compromised in recent times with the monopoly of the States in the field of justice. This change of paradigm, based on restoring a “relational” justice, requires an adequate substantive, formal and institutional fit of ADR/ODR, as alternative methods or processes (workflow) of the controversies that should come into play in the first instance of a conflict and acquire notable interoperability with the judicial system. In short, we need to move from an atomist vision to a holistic vision, a methodological and epistemological position that is more suited to the dynamism and complexity of reality, enabling it to be understood and organised in a context of multiple relations and interactions. To do this, there is a pressing need to systematise the universally recognised ethical and legal principles of ADR/ODR, identify models and draw up protocols favouring the harmonisation of processes and their acknowledgement. This work should be carried out simultaneously with electronic application development technical teams, since the consolidation of many formal issues depends in large part on advances and improvements of technical
aspects.

See more at: Vilalta, Aura Esther, The Culture of Dialogue and Relational Justice as a ‘Third Path’ (January 19, 2009). IDP Magazine on the Internet, Law and Policy, Vol. 8, pp. 1-12, March 2009. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1592452

Responder

Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de WordPress.com

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de WordPress.com. Cerrar sesión /  Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión /  Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión /  Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión /  Cambiar )

Conectando a %s