Cross-border mutual trust

  1. ENCJ WG, Judicial Ethics, Report 2009-2010, Judicial Ethics Principles, Values And Qualitites, Download the file;
  2. Council Conclusions on ‘Promoting mutual recognition by enhancing mutual trust, OJ C 449, 13.12.2018, p. 6. See the web site;
  3. The way forward in the field of mutual recognition in criminal matters, Outcome of the 3697th Council meeting, Justice and Home Affairs, 6 and 7 June 2019, Download the file;
  4. Council of the EU conclusion 6926/21, 8 March 2021, Download the file;
  5. Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, See the web site;
  6. Proposal for a Regulation of the European parliament and of the council on European Production and Preservation Orders for electronic evidence in criminal matters, See the web site;
  7. Proposal for a Regulation of the European parliament and of the council on a computerized system for communication in cross-border civil and criminal proceedings (e-CODEX system), and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1726, See the web site;
  8. European union instruments in the field of criminal law and related texts, Council of the EU, December 2009, Download the file;
  9. Gert Vermeulen, Wendy De Bondt, Charlotte Ryckman, Rethinking international cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, Moving beyond actors, bringing logic back, footed in reality, DG Justice,2012, ISBN 978-90-466-0487-8, Download the file;

Social media

  1. Use of social media by judges deontological rules or instructions/relevant case-law, European Commission for democracy through law, 2019, Download the file;
  2. Resolution on Judicial Ethics, ECtHR, 2021, Download the file;
  3. Non-binding guidelines on the use of social media by judges, UNODC, 2018, Download the file;
  4. Practical guidelines on use of social media by judges: Central and Eastern European context, Ceeli Institute Report, November 2019, Download the file;
  5. Before the judicial investigation commission of West Virginia, In the matter of the honorable Sally G. Jackson, judge of 24th Family Court Circuit, Complaint № 07-2021, Download the file; Cox CL, Uddin LQ, Di Martino A, Castellanos FX, Milham MP, Kelly C., Download the file;

Judicial empathy

  1. The balance between feeling and knowing: affective and cognitive empathy are reflected in the brain’s intrinsic functional dynamics, Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 2012 Aug;7(6):727-37. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsr051. Epub 2011 Sep 5. PMID: 21896497; PMCID: PMC3427869, See the web site;
  2. Jason Marsh, The Unselfish Gene?, 2009, See the web site;
  3. Jason Marsh, Do Mirror Neurons Give Us Empathy?, 2012, See the web site;
  4. Jill Suttie, Do We Need More Empathic Judges?, 2016, See the web site;
  5. Cormack, Warren (2021) “Reassessing the Judicial Empathy Debate: How Empathy Can Distort and Improve Criminal Sentencing,” Mitchell Hamline Law Review: Vol. 47 : Iss. 4 , Article 3. Available at: https://open.mitchellhamline.edu/mhlr/vol47/iss4/3, Download the file;
  6. Grignoli N, Petrocchi S, Bernardi S, Massari I, Traber R, Malacrida R and Gabutti L (2021) Influence of Empathy Disposition and Risk Perception on the Psychological Impact of Lockdown During the Coronavirus Disease Pandemic Outbreak. Front. Public Health 8:567337. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.567337, Download the file;
  7. Amanda Morin, What is self-awareness?, See the web site;
  8. Kate Kelly, Why Kids Who Learn and Think Differently Need to Stay Motivated, See the web site;
  9. Naomi Jamieson, The Queen’s teary moment at Prince Philip’s memorial left fans heartbroken, 2022, See the web site;
  10. Stina Bergman Blix, Åsa Wettergren, Professional Emotions in Court. A Sociological Perspective, Routledge, 2018, ISBN: 978-1-138-23450-5 (hbk), ISBN: 978-1-315-30675-9 (ebk), Download the file;

 

Gender related issues

  1. Paper – Gender-Related Judicial Integrity Issues, UNODC, 2019
  2. Web site of Gender-Related Judicial Integrity Issues, UNODC
  3. Eldén, Å., D. Calvo, E. Bjarnegård, S. Lundgren and S. Jonsson (2020), Sextortion: Corruption and Gender-Based Violence, EBA Report 2020:06, the Expert Group for Aid Studies (EBA), Sweden, Download the file;
  4. Sara Carnegie, Sextortion. A crime of corruption and sexual exploitation, International Bar Association, 2019, Download the file;
  5. COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, Download the file, See the web site;
  6. Harassment, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), See the web site.
  7. COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2004/113/EC of 13 December 2004 implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services, Download the file, See the web site;
  8. Sexual harassment in the world of work, International Labor Organization, Download the file;
  9. Tracey G. Gove, Captain, West Hartford, Implicit Bias and Law Enforcement, The Police Chief, p. 44-56, 2011, Download the file;
  10. Police agencies line up to learn about unconscious bias, Associated Press, March 2015, See the web site;

Whistleblowing

  1. Recommendation CM/Rec(2014)7 and explanatory memorandum of the Committee of Ministers to member States on the protection of whistleblowers. See the web site;
  2. M.A. Hersh, Whistleblowers — heroes or traitors?: Individual and collective responsibility for ethical behaviour, Annual Reviews in Control, Volume 26, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 243-262, ISSN 1367-5788, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1367-5788(02)00025-1Download the file;
  3. McGlone, J. (2012). The Health Consequences of Speaking Out. Social Medicine, Download the file;
  4. DIRECTIVE (EU) 2019/1937 of the European parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law, Download the file, See the web site;
  5. Law no. 571/2004, often referred to as the Whistleblower Protection Act, Download the file;
  6. Protection of whistleblowers: A brief guide for implementing a national framework, Council of Europe, January 2015; The Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) enacted on 2 July 1998, amended on 25 April 2013 by the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (ERRA); Download the file;
  7. Guja v. Moldova, no. 14277/04, ECHR 2008, Download the file;
  8. Heinisch v. Germany, no. 28274/08, ECHR 2011, Download the file;
  9. Bucur and Toma v. Romania, no. 40238/02, ECHR, 8 January 2013, Download the file in French, Download the Information Note of ECtHR in English, Information letter in English, Database of HUDOC;
  10. Kövesi v. Romania, no. 3594/19, ECHR 2020, Download the file;
  11. Miroslava Todorova v. Bulgaria, no 40072/13, ECHR 2021, Download the file in French, in Bulgarian, Information letter in English;
  12. Kudeshkina v. Russia, no. 29492/05, ECHR 2009, Download the file;
  13. Baka v. Hungary, no. 20261/12, ECHR 2008, Download the file;
  14. Volkov v. Ukraine, no 21722/11, ECHR 2013, Download the file;
  15. Harabin v. Slovakia, no 58688/11, ECHR 2012, Download the file;
  16. Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1916 (2010) on the protection of “whistle-blowers” (2010), Council of Europe. See the web site;
  17. Parliamentary Assembly Resolution 1729 (2010) on the protection of “whistle-blowers” (2010), Council of Europe. See the web site;

Legal technologies

  1. Aletras N, Tsarapatsanis D, Preoţiuc-Pietro D, Lampos V. 2016Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: a Natural Language Processing perspectivePeerJ Computer Science 2:e93 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.93, See the web site;
  2. Definition of Deepfake, Wikipedia, See the web site;
  3. The European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe, European ethical Charter on the use of Artificial Intelligence in judicial systems and their environment, 3-4.December 2018, Download the file;
  4. European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters, 1959, Download the file;
  5. Second additional protocol of European convention of mutual assistance in criminal matters (CoE, 1959), See the web site;
  6. Convention 2000 (EU), Download the file;
  7. Directive 2014/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 April 2014 regarding the European Investigation Order in criminal matters, See the web site;
  8. Draft Issues Paper on Intellectual Property Policy And Artificial Intelligence, WIPO, December 2019. Download the file;
  9. The evolution of human rights, Council of Europe, See the web site;
  10. Final report on Automated decision-making on the basis of personal data that has been transferred from the EU to companies certified under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, The European Commission, 2018, Download the file;
  11. Guiding Principles for Automated Decision-Making in the EU, ELI Innovation Paper ELI, Paper European Law Institute, Download the file;

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.