司法评估数据收集中的缺陷

Q2 Social Sciences

International Journal for Court Administration Pub Date : 2018-12-19 DOI:10.18352/IJCA.278

M. Fabri

{"title":"司法评估数据收集中的缺陷","authors":"M. Fabri","doi":"10.18352/IJCA.278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper is divided into two parts plus some concluding remarks. The first one deals with some problems in comparing the number of judges, court personnel, and caseflow in European judiciaries. Data come from the Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe. The second part deals with some pitfalls in the data gathering carried out by the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ) in the attempt to measure judicial independence and accountability. Each case study brings some hints, summed up in the concluding remarks, that may be useful to improve both exercises.","PeriodicalId":37676,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Court Administration","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pitfalls in Data Gathering to Assess Judiciaries\",\"authors\":\"M. Fabri\",\"doi\":\"10.18352/IJCA.278\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper is divided into two parts plus some concluding remarks. The first one deals with some problems in comparing the number of judges, court personnel, and caseflow in European judiciaries. Data come from the Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe. The second part deals with some pitfalls in the data gathering carried out by the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ) in the attempt to measure judicial independence and accountability. Each case study brings some hints, summed up in the concluding remarks, that may be useful to improve both exercises.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37676,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal for Court Administration\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal for Court Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18352/IJCA.278\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Court Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18352/IJCA.278","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

本文共分为两个部分，并附有一些结论性意见。第一部分讨论了在比较欧洲司法机构的法官人数、法院人员和案件流方面的一些问题。数据来自欧洲委员会司法效率委员会。第二部分论述了欧洲司法委员会网络（ENCJ）在试图衡量司法独立性和问责制时进行的数据收集中的一些陷阱。每一个案例研究都会带来一些提示，总结在总结语中，这些提示可能有助于改进这两项练习。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Pitfalls in Data Gathering to Assess Judiciaries

This paper is divided into two parts plus some concluding remarks. The first one deals with some problems in comparing the number of judges, court personnel, and caseflow in European judiciaries. Data come from the Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe. The second part deals with some pitfalls in the data gathering carried out by the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ) in the attempt to measure judicial independence and accountability. Each case study brings some hints, summed up in the concluding remarks, that may be useful to improve both exercises.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

International Journal for Court Administration Social Sciences-Law

CiteScore

1.70

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

16 weeks

期刊介绍： The International Journal for Court Administration (IJCA) is an on-line journal which focuses on contemporary court administration and management. It provides a platform for the professional exchange of knowledge, experience and research in those areas for a diverse audience of practitioners and academics. Its scope is international, and the editors welcome submissions from court officials, judges, justice ministry officials, academics and others whose professional, research projects, and interests lie in the practical aspects of the effective administration of justice. IJCA is an open access journal, and its articles are subjected to a double blind peer review procedure. Please contact the editors if you are not sure whether your research falls into these categories.