Judicial Reform

All content from both predecessor volumes retained in full. Unified section numbering, cross-referenced formula families, extended liquidation protocols, POCA GDP-scale obligation framework, SAR correlation matrices, voidable contract analysis, multi-generational victim population mapping and remedial justice architecture.

This article examines the socio-economic possibilities of Bangladesh's physical and intangible cultural heritage. The nation possesses three UNESCO World Heritage Sites (Shat Gombuj Mosque, Somapura Mahavihara, and the Sundarbans), although the secondary circuit of "Living Heritage" remains underexploited. This study assesses the effectiveness of the 2025 National Cultural Tourism Policy using a heritage impact assessment (HIA) and contingent valuation method (CVM). It contends that "Community-Centric Heritage Management" is the sole feasible methodology to avert the commercialization of culture while facilitating local poverty reduction.

The frontier ranges in meaning between the literal—a zone of physical separation—and the abstract—a difference across a gradient of high-order cultural attributes. In medieval Poland, one such attribute was the law: drawn as a sharp distinction between “Polish” and “German” law, two comparable yet substantively different legal systems. This article explores this frontier through close examination of judicial cases, in what I designate here as “Polish” and “German” courts. The source material is hundreds of stories about what happened in courts, embedded in charters and in records of Kraków’s civic court, spanning the years 1280–1370. The article opens with a survey of these courts (as they appear in that source material), then closely compares the court cases along their full course on the two sides of the supposed ethnic divide. The result is a wide range of similarity, analogy, and difference in the working of those courts. Rather than two sharply distinct legal systems, “Polish” and “German” courts
comprised a complex, internally varied institutional universe. Within that universe, curiously invisible is transformative influence—diffusion—across the frontier from one side to the other—above all, from "German" to "Polish" courts.
******
This article is under Open Access; as is, in its entirety, the journal of legal history, published at the Jagiellonian University, where the article appears. The journal mixes publication in Polish with original (not translated!) publication in other languages, above all English. I cannot recommend it strongly enough, for quality as a source of literature, and as a publishing venue.

As artificial intelligence redefines the boundaries of legal logic, this paper documents a unique, real-time collaboration between a senior constitutional litigator and a multi-model AI ensemble. Operating on a cross-platform framework, the author utilizes Todd AI (an instance of OpenAI's ChatGPT) alongside two distinct deployments of Google's AI models: Ancestor AI (a dedicated, secure instance within Google Workspace) and Google's browser-based Gemini assistant. Together, this human-machine alliance constructs a rigorous defense against an administrative disbarment recommendation. By synthesizing historical precedents, Article III definitions, and the concept of the attorney-as-witness, this text illustrates how deep human experience and distributed machine intelligence can unite to transcend bureaucratic roadblocks, preserving an uncorrupted record for a global audience.

The rule against bias is an intrinsic component of the principles of natural justice. They are well settled rules, evolving from time immemorial and coursing from the common law of England, in order to put in check arbitrary actions of the state or its functionaries. Essentially, the principles apply to advance fair treatment in actions that are of administrative, quasi-judicial and judicial nature. This rule aim at securing justice and to avoid miscarriage of justice. Since the days of Lord Hewart, CJ, the rule against bias had formed a more fundamental bedrock of adjudication and just treatment of cases to give fair hearing to parties who appear before a tribunal and to ensure that no one goes away thinking that the judge favours one litigant against another, either for personal, pecuniary or familial gains. Incidentally, following a common law global norm, the Nigerian constitutional and administrative laws had gone a notch further to entrench this rule as a cardinal factor in deciding the fate of interested parties through strict fidelity to procedural compliance, with the sole aim of strengthening public confidence in the administration of justice. Using a doctrinal, library-based research methodologies and deploying both primary and secondary source materials, this seminar paper takes a dispassionate look at the scope of the bias rule within the framework of the doctrine of natural justice sagaciously embedded in the Constitution of Nigeria as well as her administrative processes, side by side with comparable common law jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom, the United States and India. The paper found that, in a preponderant of cases, where a decision-maker who serve in judicial, quasi-judicial or administrative capacity had been found to have interest in the subject-matter of the dispute, such an official is immediately or automatically disqualified. It is hoped that the suggestions and recommendations herein will serve as a call to action on the part of those who are saddled with administrative, judicial and quasi-judicial powers in ensuring that justice is not only done but manifestly and undoubtedly seen to have been done.

Various strands of research have focused on the applicability of GenAI and LLMs in the legal field. Some scholars have investigated the quality of legal translations performed by chatbots, although there is still a paucity of studies addressing the employment of legal chatbots for legal translation purposes. This paper wishes to address this epistemological lacuna. To this aim, an extract of an Italian contratto di mutuo (“loan agreement”) is translated automatically into English by employing three field-related GenAI tools, namely, AptusAI, ChatLaw, and FreeLawChat. A corpus-assisted translation of the same source text is used as a benchmark through which the automated translations are assessed. The findings bring to the fore a host of shortcomings in the automatic target texts, ranging from infrequent language patterns, literal translations of formulae, wrong collocations, informal language, and omissions of phrases. Therefore, the paper highlights the importance of human expert oversight to guarantee accuracy.

Judicial independence constitutes one of the fundamental pillars of constitutional democracy, ensuring that courts are able to administer justice impartially, free from political influence, executive interference, or external pressure. Within the constitutional framework of the United Kingdom, judicial independence has evolved through centuries of constitutional development, common law traditions, statutory reforms, and constitutional conventions. This study examines the relationship between judicial independence, democratic governance, and the rule of law through an interdisciplinary approach that incorporates constitutional law, political science, public administration, and democratic theory. The research explores how an independent judiciary contributes to the preservation of constitutional values by safeguarding fundamental rights, maintaining checks and balances among governmental institutions, and ensuring governmental accountability. Particular attention is given to the constitutional significance of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, which strengthened the institutional separation between the judiciary, the executive, and the legislature, thereby reinforcing public confidence in the administration of justice. The study further analyzes the role of courts in reviewing executive actions, interpreting legislation, and resolving constitutional disputes within the United Kingdom's uncodified constitutional structure. By examining landmark judicial decisions, constitutional principles, and contemporary constitutional challenges, the research evaluates the extent to which judicial independence promotes transparency, legal certainty, equality before the law, and democratic legitimacy. The interdisciplinary perspective highlights the interaction between legal institutions, political processes, and societal expectations in sustaining constitutional governance. Furthermore, the study investigates emerging challenges to judicial autonomy, including political criticism of judicial decisions, constitutional reforms, and evolving executive-legislative dynamics. The findings demonstrate that judicial independence remains indispensable to the effective functioning of democratic governance and the protection of the rule of law in the United Kingdom. An independent judiciary not only serves as a guardian of constitutional principles but also enhances public trust in state institutions and strengthens democratic resilience. Consequently, the study concludes that preserving judicial independence is essential for ensuring constitutional stability, accountable government, and the continued advancement of democratic values in modern constitutional states.

Extensive research has examined the interaction between judicial behaviour and federal dynamics. However, performing systematic comparative research in this field remains challenging. To address this, the article conducts a PRISMA scoping review to map the academic landscape of judicial politics in federal high courts. The study aims to evaluate the empirical literature on the field, identify dominant research trends, methodological biases, and theoretical gaps, and examine how federal high court adjudication shapes intergovernmental relations, thereby providing a methodological pathway and theoretical innovations to advance cross-national research. Following a three-stage protocol, we systematically searched the Web of Science. First, we defined eligibility using the PCC framework, focusing on national federal high courts and judicial politics (1900-2024). Second, a pool of 15,117 records was refined using Excel VBA for automated deduplication and keyword filtering, yielding 12,038 records. Third, a manual appraisal of titles and abstracts by two reviewers yielded a final dataset of 106 studies. These were categorised into five analytical dimensions: bibliometric and identification metadata; authorship and institutional profile; publication and editorial context; geographic and comparative scope; and theoretical and substantive content. The results reveal a significant U.S.-centric bias in academic journals, scholars' institutions, theoretical models, and case studies.

Il saggio prende le mosse dalle criticità che caratterizzano il procedimento di responsabilità disciplinare dei magistrati, con l'obiettivo di individuare le ragioni che possono giustificare un intervento costituzionale sulla materia nel rispetto dei canoni del giusto processo. In questa prospettiva si approfondisce la natura giuridica della Sezione disciplinare del CSM, anche al fine di valutare la praticabilità della proposta di introdurre un'Alta Corte disciplinare. Le considerazioni sviluppate mirano a delineare un modello di giustizia disciplinare più coerente con le garanzie costituzionali in materia di responsabilità dei magistrati.
Title: The disciplinary accountability of the judiciary: an unresolved question.
Abstract [En]: This article examines the main critical issues affecting disciplinary proceedings against members of the judiciary, with the aim of identifying the reasons for a constitutional reform of the system, in accordance with the guarantees of due process. In this perspective it explores the legal nature of the Disciplinary Section of the High Council of the Judiciary, to evaluate the feasibility of establishing a Disciplinary High Court. Overall, the contribution aims to outline a model of disciplinary justice more consistent with constitutional guarantees on judicial accountability.

SOMMARIO: 1. Introduzione e descrizione della Macroarea 3 (linea 1.1.): le Università partner e gli Uffici giudiziari di competenza (A.R. Rizza); 2. Il quadro normativo tra aspetti operativi e funzioni dell'Ufficio del Processo e dei suoi addetti (A.R. Rizza); 3. Moduli organizzativi emersi, risorse assegnate agli Uffici giudiziari al momento della costituzione e risorse attuali: programmazione e reclutamento (V. Battiato); 4. Le tecnologie a supporto dell'Ufficio del Processo: quelle in uso e quelle prospettabili (I. Addolorato); 5. Sintesi dell'offerta formativa prevista a favore del personale giudiziario negli Uffici giudiziari: modalità di erogazione e formazione di tirocinanti, Giudici onorari e personale amministrativo (I. Addolorato); 6. Segue. Punti di forza e di debolezza nei contesti giuridici e geografici di riferimento (A. Mosca); 7. Sintesi degli obiettivi del Progetto ai fini della rendicontazione del Piano di formazione (A. Mosca); 8. Segue. La sintesi degli obiettivi specifici degli Uffici del Processo nell'area civile e in quella penale (M.R. De Lucia -S. Fapperdue); 9. Le best practices rilevate negli Uffici giudiziari per il perseguimento degli obiettivi del legislatore (D. Marchesini -S. Fapperdue); 10. Segue. Principali criticità emerse nel concreto funzionamento del modello (D. Marchesini -S. Fapperdue); 11. Segue. Modelli organizzativi proposti per migliorare l'efficienza degli Uffici del Processo (P. Bushipaka -E: Toccafondo); 12. Programmazione di massima nell'ultimo semestre del Progetto: dal 1° aprile 2023 al 30 settembre 2023 (P. Bushipaka -E. Toccafondo). 2.) 1 , i modelli organizzativi ed operativi più diffusi (infra par. 3.) 2 , le tecnologie, anche informatiche, più diffuse (infra par. 4. e par. 13) 3 , il piano dell'offerta formativa che è stata messa a disposizione dai singoli Tribunali per colmare i gap più frequentemente segnalati sia con riguardo alla posizione degli Addetti all'Ufficio per il Processo sia con riguardo al diverso personale ivi impiegato, quali i Giudici Onorari (infra par. 5.) 4 , non mancandosi, poi, di mettere in luce quelle che -a valle del presente lavoro, di sintesi -possono reputarsi le best practices più apprezzabili e come tali suscettibili, nel breve periodo, di condivisione presso gli Uffici giudiziari (ad es. infra par. 10.) 5 o, in un orizzonte temporale più ampio, di considerazione da parte del legislatore anche con riferimento alle guidelines adottate dagli operatori del settore (specie protocolli d'intesa) ed evidenziate nei Report dei singoli Uffici giudiziari (infra par. 6.) 6 . Nel presente lavoro si metteranno altresì in luce i profili di maggiore criticità emersi i quali, allo stato e nel 1 Ad oggetto "Il quadro normativo, gli aspetti operativi e le funzioni dell'Ufficio del Processo e dei suoi addetti". 2 Intitolato "Moduli organizzativi emersi, risorse assegnate agli Uffici giudiziari al momento della costituzione e risorse attuali: programmazione e reclutamento". 3 Rispettivamente rubricati "Le tecnologie a supporto dell'Ufficio del Processo: quelle in uso e quelle prospettabili" e "Sintesi dei modelli e dei prototipi informatici prospettabili". 4 Si veda a tal proposito "Sintesi dell'offerta formativa prevista a favore del personale giudiziario negli Uffici giudiziari: modalità di erogazione e formazione di tirocinanti, Giudici onorari e personale amministrativo". 5 "Le best practices rilevate negli Uffici giudiziari per il perseguimento degli obiettivi del legislatore". 6 Il paragrafo di riferimento è "La soft law all'interno degli Uffici del processo, tra normativa regionale, protocolli d'intesa e provvedimenti organizzativi interni".

Este trabajo analiza críticamente la propuesta de reforma judicial impulsada en Argentina en 2020 a partir de dos iniciativas centrales: el proyecto de Ley de Organización y Competencia de la Justicia Federal y la creación del Consejo Consultivo para el Fortalecimiento del Poder Judicial y del Ministerio Público. El punto de partida es el diagnóstico de una profunda crisis de legitimidad del Poder Judicial, originada en problemas de carácter institucional, funcional y cultural que afectan su independencia, transparencia, eficiencia y capacidad de respuesta frente a las demandas ciudadanas.

Desde esta perspectiva, el artículo examina las principales medidas orientadas a desconcentrar el poder acumulado en la justicia federal penal de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, fortalecer la justicia federal en las provincias, completar la transferencia de competencias penales ordinarias a la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires y mejorar los mecanismos de resolución de conflictos de competencia. Asimismo, analiza las propuestas relativas al funcionamiento de la Corte Suprema, el Consejo de la Magistratura, el Ministerio Público y el juicio por jurados, evaluando su potencial para incrementar la independencia judicial, la rendición de cuentas, la transparencia institucional y la participación ciudadana en la administración de justicia.

La tesis central sostiene que la reforma judicial debe concebirse como un proceso de democratización pendiente del Poder Judicial. En esa línea, se argumenta que la desconcentración del poder, la ampliación de los mecanismos de control institucional y ciudadano, la incorporación de criterios de diversidad y federalismo, y el fortalecimiento del acceso a la justicia constituyen condiciones indispensables para recuperar la legitimidad del sistema judicial. Más allá de las medidas concretas debatidas, el trabajo defiende la necesidad de una transformación estructural orientada a construir una justicia más independiente, transparente, cercana a la ciudadanía y comprometida con la efectividad de los derechos, especialmente de los sectores más vulnerables.

The globalization of financial networks has engendered unparalleled interdependence among nations. Although this interconnection promotes commerce, investment, and economic expansion, it simultaneously creates the risk of weaponized interdependence, in which states exploit their power over global financial systems to exert coercive influence on other nations. This study analyzes the ethical and legal aspects of employing global financial infrastructuressuch as cross-border payment systems, international banking networks, and sanctions frameworks-as tools of geopolitical strategy. The study assesses the legitimacy, proportionality, and ramifications of financial coercion through the lenses of international law, political theory, and economics. The paper contends that, although financial instruments can fulfill valid national security aims, their militarization poses considerable issues related to sovereignty, global fairness, and the stability of the international system, underscoring the necessity for normative frameworks and multilateral governance structures to oversee coercive financial practices.

The COVID-19 pandemic presented unparalleled problems to public health and administration, leading to extensive dependence on presidential emergency powers. This study analyzes how emergency powers, first justified by the theory of necessity, might transform into a "permanent exception," thus compromising constitutional protections and the separation of powers. This research examines legal frameworks, executive decrees, and biosecurity governance during the pandemic to identify patterns of overreach, assess the risks of institutional normalization of emergency authority, and propose normative and legal mechanisms to protect democracy in post-pandemic biosecurity regimes.

Rozdział analizuje potrzebę opracowania nowej strategii cyfryzacji polskiego sądownictwa, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem potencjału i ryzyk związanych z wdrażaniem sztucznej inteligencji. Punktem wyjścia jest diagnoza, że mimo rozwoju e-usług w innych obszarach administracji publicznej, podstawowe procesy sądowe w Polsce nadal pozostają w dużej mierze analogowe, oparte na papierowym obiegu akt, tradycyjnej korespondencji i ograniczonej interoperacyjności systemów.

Autor wskazuje, że dotychczasowe działania informatyzacyjne w sądownictwie miały charakter fragmentaryczny i nie doprowadziły do strategicznej zmiany jakościowej. Sukcesy takie jak elektroniczne księgi wieczyste czy Krajowy Rejestr Sądowy nie rozwiązują problemów sądów rozpoznających sprawy cywilne, rodzinne, karne, pracownicze czy ubezpieczeniowe. W centrum rozważań znajduje się więc nie sama digitalizacja pojedynczych rejestrów, lecz potrzeba całościowej transformacji cyfrowej obejmującej obsługę sprawy od jej wniesienia, przez zarządzanie dokumentami i rozprawą, aż po wydanie, doręczenie, anonimizację i analityczne wykorzystanie orzeczenia.

Istotnym wkładem tekstu jest rozróżnienie między digitalizacją materiałów, cyfryzacją usług i właściwą transformacją cyfrową organizacji. Autor proponuje model strategii oparty na czterech głównych celach: usprawnieniu działania wymiaru sprawiedliwości, zwiększeniu dostępności sądu, wzmocnieniu sprawozdawczości i analityki oraz rozwoju kompetencji użytkowników systemu. Wskazuje również zasady podstawowe, które powinny ograniczać i ukierunkowywać wykorzystanie technologii: praworządność, niezależność sądów, prawo do sądu, niedyskryminację, ochronę danych osobowych oraz przeciwdziałanie wykluczeniu cyfrowemu.

Rozdział proponuje także zasady wdrożeniowe: wczesny udział interesariuszy, rozliczalność i transparentność, interoperacyjność, równoległe projektowanie rozwiązań prawnych i cyfrowych, uwzględnianie możliwości AI oraz dostępność usług na komputerach i urządzeniach mobilnych. Sztuczna inteligencja jest traktowana nie jako substytut sędziego, lecz jako narzędzie wspierające organizację pracy sądów, analizę danych, transkrypcję, wyszukiwanie podobnych spraw, obsługę obywatela, anonimizację, planowanie pracy, analizę obciążenia sądów i przygotowywanie niektórych dokumentów.

Ważnym elementem tekstu jest autorska propozycja warstw strategii IT dla sądownictwa: warstwy podstawowej, mobilnej, komplementarnej analogowej oraz warstwy rozwiązań opartych na AI. Takie ujęcie pozwala łączyć modernizację sądów z ochroną osób wykluczonych cyfrowo i z zachowaniem konstytucyjnych gwarancji postępowania. Rozdział wnosi do debaty o cyfryzacji sądownictwa ramę strategiczno-zarządczą, która łączy zarządzanie publiczne, technologie informacyjne, sztuczną inteligencję, dostęp do wymiaru sprawiedliwości i zasady państwa prawa.

Słowa kluczowe

sztuczna inteligencja w sądownictwie; cyfryzacja sądownictwa; transformacja cyfrowa; e-sąd; strategia IT; zarządzanie ICT w sądach; dostęp do sądu; interoperacyjność; elektroniczny obieg dokumentów; case management; legal tech; praworządność; niezależność sądów; wykluczenie cyfrowe; public sector innovation

English
Abstract / Description

The chapter examines the need for a new digitalisation strategy for the Polish judiciary, with particular attention to the role of artificial intelligence. Its starting point is the observation that, despite the development of digital public services in other areas of administration, core judicial processes in Poland remain largely analogue, paper-based and insufficiently interoperable.

The author argues that previous digitalisation initiatives in the Polish justice system have been fragmented and have not produced a strategic qualitative transformation. While electronic land registers and the National Court Register are important examples of successful court-related digital services, they do not solve the operational problems of courts dealing with civil, family, criminal, labour and social insurance cases. The chapter therefore shifts attention from isolated registers and partial tools to the need for end-to-end digital transformation of judicial proceedings: from case filing and document circulation to hearings, judgments, electronic service, anonymisation and analytical reuse of judicial data.