Abstract
Qualitative interviews with one hundred defendants in Dutch criminal cases examine whether perceived procedural justice is a relevant concern for defendants, and, if so, which procedural justice components they refer to. The study provides a point of epistemological departure from the quantitative studies dominating the field, as it assessed which components of procedural justice (if any) respondents put forward themselves rather than asking about predetermined procedural justice components. The large majority of respondents mentioned procedural justice issues themselves, and six components were at the core of their procedural justice perceptions: (1) information on which decisions are based, (2) interpersonal treatment, (3) due consideration, (4) neutrality, (5) voice, and (6) accuracy. Although these procedural justice components largely correspond with the literature, respondents thus mentioned some components more often, and others less often, than the literature would suggest. In particular, neutrality plays an important role in the Dutch legal context examined here.
Highlights
Qualitative interviews with one hundred defendants in Dutch criminal cases examine whether perceived procedural justice is a relevant concern for defendants, and, if so, which procedural justice components they refer to
This section starts with results regarding the two main issues this paper focuses on: Whether defendants in criminal cases refer to procedural justice themselves when asked about their fairness perceptions, and, if so, which components of procedural justice they put forward
Our first aim was to examine whether defendants in criminal cases come up with issues of procedural justice themselves when asked about their fairness perceptions
Summary
Qualitative interviews with one hundred defendants in Dutch criminal cases examine whether perceived procedural justice is a relevant concern for defendants, and, if so, which procedural justice components they refer to. During the past four decades, many studies have demonstrated that perceived procedural justice is associated with important attitudes and behaviors, such as outcome satisfaction and acceptance, cooperation with authorities, trust and perceived legitimacy, and compliance with the law (e.g., Grootelaar 2018; Hulst 2017; Thibaut and Walker 1975; Tyler 2006; Tyler and Huo 2002; Van den Bos et al 2014) Taken together, these positive effects of perceived procedural justice are referred to as the fair process effect (Folger et al 1979; Van den Bos 2015). Perceived procedural justice can help explain and understand people’s attitudes and behaviors in legal contexts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
