The transformation of the judge's role in the problem-solving approach to domestic violence; Comparative study of common law and Iranian criminal law

REZAPOUR, ZAHRA; Farajiha, Mohammad; Roshan, Mohammad

doi:10.22106/jlj.2023.1982979.5107

The transformation of the judge's role in the problem-solving approach to domestic violence; Comparative study of common law and Iranian criminal law

Document Type : Research/Original/Regular Article

Authors

ZAHRA REZAPOUR ¹

mohammad farajiha ²

mohammad roshan ³

¹ Doctoral student of Women's Studies, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

² Associate Professor, Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Law, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

³ Associate Professor, Department of Family Law, Family Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

10.22106/jlj.2023.1982979.5107

Abstract

According to empirical studies, the process of investigation and traditional and retributirism magisterial decisions have not been effective in finding the appropriate answer and reducing the inflation of domestic violence cases despite its high costs; Since the point of view of the above-mentioned criminal justice system has been only to deal with the substantive issues of the lawsuits and apply the rule to them. Attempts to solve this problem and apply alternative views had to the proposal of a new approach under the title of problem solving with components such as rethinking the role of the judge in many countries under the common law system. The current research deals with two main issues through the aforementioned approach: First, what is the evolution of the judge's role in problem solving approach? And second, to what extent have the effects of this evolution been recognized in Iran's legal system? To answer them, the method of content analysis of legal documents and documents, including judicial cases (15 samples) in the summer of 1401, was used in the Justice Complex of Razavi Khorasan province. Also13 hearings were also observed and investigate the attitude of criminal justice authorities, 30 judicial activists and lawyers and a number of victims interviewed using the in-depth interview method. The findings of the research showed that in the approach of problem solving, in the criminal justice system of Iran, the judicial procedure of some judges, although unknowingly and unsystematically, has the characteristics of problem solving with different degrees

Keywords

problem-oriented judge

domestic violence resolution court

Iran'

s judicial system

defendant'

s responsibility

Subjects

منابع

فارسی

1- امیریان فارسانی، امین و سیمین آزادیان (1396), حمایت‌های کیفری از زنان در برابر خشونت، فصلنامه مطالعاتی صیانت از حقوق زنان، 10: 109-137.

2- بیرانوند رضا, کوشا جعفر, هاشمی حمید, رنجبر بهرام (1389), وظایف پلیس شهروندمداری در رعایت حقوق شهروندی متهمان (در مرحله تحقیقات مقدماتی), دانش انتظامی, دوره 12, شماره 3, 244-203.

3- چوپانی، وجیهه، حمایت کیفری شکلی از زنان در برابر خشونت (1399), فصلنامه علمی - حقوقی قانون یار – 4(11).

4- فرجی‌ها، محمد، مهرناز ملاپروری، موقعیت زنان بزه‌دیده خشونت خانوادگی در فرایندهای میانجیگری سنتی (1399), فصلنامه تحقیقات حقوقی، 82: 131-152.

5- محمدیان، سارا، محمدرضا پور، بابک (1392), لزوم تشکیل پرونده شخصیت در فرایند دادرسی کیفری، علوم پزشکی قانونی، (3 و 2)19, 340-329.

6- میر مجیدی، سپیده، ارزیابی نتایج مداخلۀ کیفری در پرونده‌های خشونت جنسی: بازتعریف عدالت برای بزه‌دیدگان خشونت جنسی (1396), مطالعات حقوق کیفری و جرم‌شناختی، 50 (1).

7- نعمتی، زهرا و فرجی‌ها، محمد، ادله اثبات در خشونت‌های جنسی زناشویی؛ چالش‌ها و راهکارها، (1400), مطالعات حقوق کیفری و جرم‌شناسی، ۵۱(۱):51-77.

8- وطنی امیر، مهدی‌پور، اعظم، تاجیک نشاطیه، حدیثه (1398), آسیب‌شناسی تحقق اهداف اصلاحی درمانی بزهکاران از طریق پرونده شخصیت در فرایند دادرسی کیفری، فصلنامه حقوق پزشکی، (5)13, 192-171؛

منابع لاتین

1- Angene, L., Evaluation report for the San Diego County domestic violence courts. San Diego, CA: San Diego Superior Court, 2000.

2- Baum, L., Specializing the Courts. University of Chicago Press, 2010.

3- Bell, M.E, & Goodman, L.A, Supporting Battered Women Involved with the Court System: An Evaluation of a Law School-Based Advocacy Intervention, Violence Against Women, 7, 2001.

4- Berman, G., & Feinblatt, J., Problem Solving Courts: A brief primer, law & policy, 23( 2), 2001.

5- Berman. G,& Feinblatt. J, Good Courts: The Case For Problem-solving Justice, New York, Quid Pro Books. 2005.

6- Birnbaum., R., Saini, M., & Nicholas, B. Canada’s First Integrated Domestic Violence Court: Examining Family and Criminal Court Outcomes at the Toronto IDVC, Journal of Family Violence, 32(6), 2017.

7- Bond, C., Holder, R., Samantha, J., & Fleming, C, Evaluation of the specialist domestic and family violence court Trial in Southport, Griffith Criminology Institute, 2017.

8- Brown, Trevor, Charging and Prosecution Policies in Cases of Spousal Assault: a Synthesis of Research, Academic, and Judicial Responses, Department of Justice Canada, 2002.

9- Burkemper, Bennett & Balsam, Nina, Examining the Use of Restorative Justice Practices in Domestic Violence Cases, Saint Louis University Public Law Review, 27(1), 2007, 121-133.

10- Bowen, P., & Whitehead, S. Problem-solving courts: an evidence review. Centre for Justice Innovation, 2015.

11- Burton, M., Judicial Monitoring of Compliance: Introducing ‘Problem Solving’ Approaches to Domestic Violence Courts in England and Wales. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 20(3), 2006.

12- Buzawa. E, & Hotaling. G, & Klein, A., The response to domestic violence in a model court: Some initial findings and implications, Behav Sci Law, 16(2). 1998: 185-206.

13- Casey, P. M.,& Rottman, D. B, Problem-solving courts: Models and trends, The Justice System Journal, 26(1). 2003.

14- Castellano, Ursula, Problem-Solving Courts: Theory and Practice, Sociology Compass, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Sociology Compass,Ohio University, 2011

15- Centre for Court Innovation, Domestic Violence Mentor Court Fact Sheet - Miami Dade County Domestic Violence Court, the Office on Violence Against Women, 2018.

16- Cissner., A. B., Labriola. M.,& Rempel, M, Domestic Violence Courts: A Multisite Test of Whether and How They Change Offender Outcomes, Violence Against Women, 21(9). 2015.

17- Edwin Zedlewski & Mary B. Murphy, Victim Satisfaction with the Criminal Justice System, A Major Benefit for Law Enforcement, Behavioral Sciences and the Law, (253), 2006.

18. Epstein, D, Procedural Justice: Tempering the State's Response to Domestic Violence, William & Mary Law Review, 43(5), 2002.

19. Farole, D,. Puffett, N,& Rempel, M, Collaborative Justice in Conventional Courts: Opportunities and Barriers, Center for Court Innovation, 2004.

20. Fagan, J., The Criminalization of Domestic Violence: Promises and Limits, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice, 1996.

21. Frederick, Loretta, Questions about Family Court Domestic Violence Screening and Assessment, Family Court Review, 46(3), 2008.

22. Fritzler, R. B, & Simon, L. M. J, Creating a domestic violence court: Combat in the trenches. Court Review, 37(1), 2000.

23. Garner H. J,& Maxwell D. C., Prosecution and conviction rates for Intimate Partner Violence. Criminal Justice Review, 2009.

24. Gondolf, W. E., Evaluating batterer counseling programs: A difficult task showing some effects and implications, Aggression and Violent Behavior ,9, 2004.

25. Gover, R.Angela,& Brank M Eve& MacDonald, M. John, A Specialized Domestic Violence Court in South Carolina: An Example of Procedural Justice for Victims and Defendants, Violence Against Women, 13 (6): 603-626, 2007.

26. Hart, Barbara, Battered Women and the Criminal Justice System, American Behavioral Scientist.1993, 36(5).

27. Harrell, A. L,& Newmark,& Visher. C, Final Report on the Evaluation of the Judicial Oversight Demonstration: Findings and lessons on implementation. Final report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, 2, 2007.

28. Healey, K. M., Smith, C., & O’Sullivan, C. Batterer interventions: Program approaches and criminal justice strategies. Issues and practices in criminal justice. Washington: U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from, 1998.

29. Hilton, N. Zoe.Legal responses to wife assault: current trends and evaluation, Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications, 1993.

30. Labriola, M., Bradley, S., O’Sullivan, C., Rempel, M., & Moore, S., A National Portrait of Domestic Violence Courts, New York: Center for Court Innovation, 2010.

31. Labriola, M., Rempel, M., O‘Sullivan, C. S,& Frank, P.B, Court responses to batterer program noncompliance: A national perspective. New York, Center for Court Innovation, 2007.

32. Lane, E, Due Process and Problem-Solving Courts, Fordham Urban Law Journal, 30 (3), 2003

33. Lerman, Lisa G, The Decontextualization of Domestic Violence, Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 82,(1), 217-240, 1992.

34. King, Michael S (2009). Solution-Focused Judging Bench Book. Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration.

35. MacLeod, D, and Weber, J.F, Domestic violence courts: A descriptive study, Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts, 2000.

36. Marlowe B. Douglas,& Carolyn D. Hardin,& Carson L. Fox, Painting the Current Picture: A National Report on Drug Courts and Other Problem-Solving Court Programs in the United States, National Drug Court Institute, 2016.

37. Mazur, Robyn & Liberty Aldrich, What Makes a Domestic Violence Court Work? Lessons from New York, Judges’ Journal, 2003, 42(2).

38. Miami-Dade County Domestic Violence Oversight Board ,GAPS AND NEEDS REPORT Gaps and Needs Workgroup, of the Miami-Dade County Domestic Violence Oversight Board, 2020.

39. Moore, Samantha, Two Decades of Specialized Domestic Violence Courts: A Review of the Literature, center for court innovation, 2009.

40. Nancarrow, Heather. In search of justice for domestic and family violence: Indigenous and nonIndigenous Australian women’s perspectives. Theoretical Criminology, 10(1), 87-106, 2006.

41. Newmark, L,& Rempel, M,& Diffily, K ,& Kane, KM. Specialized felony domestic violence courts: Lessons on implementation and impact from the Kings County experience. Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2001.

42. Nolan, L. ,James, Legal accents, legal borrowing: The international problem-solving court movemen, LAW AND CULTURE ,Princeton University Press, 2009.

43. Ofori, Aisha, Integrated Domestic Abuse Court: Evidence and practice brief, Centre for Justice Innovation, 2020.

43. Ostrom, J. Brian,& Neal B. Kaucler, Examining the Work of State Courts, 1997 A National Perspective from the Court Statistics Project. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts, 1997.

44. Paulin, Judy,& Paipa, Kirimatao,& Carswell, Sue, The use of restorative justice in family violence cases with a focus on the possibility of victims being coerced or controlled to participate by the persons who harmed them, New Zealand: Office of the Chief Victims Advisor, 2021.

45. Peterson, R.Richard, The Impact of Manhattan’s specialized domestic violence court, New York City Criminal Justice Agency, 2004.

46. Peterson L. Wayne, Stephen Thunberg, Evaluation report for the San Diego County domestic violence courts. San Diego, CA: San Diego Superior Court, 2000.

47. Rempel, Michael, Melissa Labriola, and Robert C. Davis, Does judicial monitoring deter domestic violence recidivism? Results of a quasi-experimental comparison in the Bronx,Comparative Study, Violence Against Women,14(2), 2008.

48. Rottman David, Casey Pamela, Therapeutic Jurisprudence and the Emergence of Problem-Solving Courts, National Institute of Justice Journal, 12-19, 1998.

49. Sack, Emily, Creating A Domestic Violence Court: Guidelines and Best Practices. San Francisco: Family Violence Prevention Fund, 2002.

50. Saini, Michael., Birnbaum, Rachel., & Bala, Nicholas, Access to justice in Ontario’s family courts: The parents’ perspective, Windsor Review of Legal & Social Issues, 37, 1–25, 2016.

51. Serotta, M. Helene, Presented to the faculty of the Division of Criminal Justice California State University, Sacramento, California State University, Sacramento 2021.

52. Sherman, W. Lawrence,& Strang, Heather, Restorative Justice: The Evidence, The Smith Instituted, 2007.

53. Simon, Leonore . M. J. A therapeutic jurisprudence approach to the legal processing of domestic violence cases. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, (1995).1(1), 43–79.

54. Steketee, M., L. Levey, and S. Keilitz, Implementing an Integrated Domestic Violence Court: Systemic Change in the District of Columbia. National Center for State Courts, 2000.

55. Tsai, Betsy. The Trend Toward Specialized Domestic Violence Courts: Improvements on an Effective Innovation, Fordham Law Review, 68(4),128/5–1327, 2000.

56. Ursel, Jane, Tutty. M, Leslie, LeMaistre, Janice (Eds.), What's Law Got To Do With It?: The law, Specialized Courts and Domestic Violence in Canada, Toronto: Cormorant Books, 2008.

57. Weber, Julia. Domestic violence courts: Components and considerations. Journal of the Center for Families, Children & the Courts, 2, 23–36, 2000.

58. Winick BJ, Therapeutic jurisprudence and problem solving courts. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 30(3), 1044-1090. 2003.

59. Winick J Bruce, Applying the Law Therapeutically in Domestic Violence Cases, UMKC LAW REV,69(33), 2000.

Young Pamela ,An Informed Response: An Overview of the Domestic Violence.