This article provides an empirical, comparative analysis of three criminal justice programs that reflect different social and ideological accounts: community courts, arraignment hearings, and restorative justice. The study draws on empirical findings that have been collected over three years in Israel, through observations and archival documentation of these mechanisms. Using the Criminal Law Taxonomy developed elsewhere by the authors as an analytical tool, the comparison is based on characteristics that relate to the structure, content, stakeholders, and outcomes of these justice mechanisms, emphasizing the plurality we have today in multi-door criminal justice systems. The comparative analysis highlights differences and similarities among various justice mechanisms, and offers policy makers and criminal justice practitioners important insights for referring different cases to various mechanisms.
Characterizing Multi-door Criminal Justice: A Comparative Analysis of Three Criminal Justice Mechanisms
Associate Professor and Associate Dean for Research, Bar-Ilan University Law School; Visiting Professor, UC Berkeley Law School (2017–2018); Visiting Scholar, The Center for the Study of Law and Society and the Berkeley Institute for Jewish Law and Israel Studies, UC Berkeley (2016–2018, summer 2019).
- Views Icon Views
- Share Icon Share
- Search Site
Tali Gal, Hadar Dancig-Rosenberg; Characterizing Multi-door Criminal Justice: A Comparative Analysis of Three Criminal Justice Mechanisms. New Criminal Law Review 1 February 2020; 23 (1): 139–166. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2020.23.1.139
Download citation file: