Le système de justice constitutionnelle colombien est caractérisé par la richesse des moyens de protection de la constitution qu’il consacre. D’une part, il comprend un contrôle concentré dont la légitimité démocratique n’est guère questionnable au regard de son ouverture à la participation des citoyens et de son incidence autant sur la protection abstraite des droits fondamentaux que le sur contrôle des poids et contrepoids institutionnels. D’autre part, il existe un contrôle diffus qui, bien qu’il soit entré en vigueur au même moment que le contrôle concentré, n’a pas été véritablement au centre de la pensée juridique classique en Colombie. Il a fait l’objet d’un traitement très léger par la doctrine, la jurisprudence et la formation universitaire des juristes. En revanche, la culture juridique majoritaire, fortement « légicentriste », a conduit à des craintes autour de son utilisation qui se sont maintenues jusqu’à nos jours, malgré la transformation du droit impliquée par la Constitution de 1991. De plus, les contrôles diffus et concentré ne sont pas nés de manière coordonnée, la fonction de chacun n’étant pas délimitée. Tout au contraire, les dispositions qui les consacrent dans la Charte constitutionnelle octroient une portée très large au deux. Ainsi, l’étude s’achève-t-elle en proposant une conception du contrôle diffus qui interagisse de manière harmonieuse avec le contrôle concentré, afin de régler autant les inconstitutionnalités abstraites que concrètes. La thèse analyse donc quel a été - et quel devrait être - la place du contrôle diffus dans le système de justice constitutionnelle colombien en recourant à diverses méthodes de sciences sociales / The Colombian judicial review system is characterized by its wealth of methods of control. On the one hand, it has a concentrated control that reduces the democratic objection, comparatively speaking, because of the aperture to participation in its procedure and its impact both on the abstract protection of fundamental rights and on the control of respect for the checks and balances system. On the other hand, there is a diffuse control that, despite having entered into force at the same time as the concentrated control, has not been at the center of Colombian legal thought. In effect, its doctrinal and jurisprudential treatment has been scarce and superficial in the training of lawyers and judges. This is explained by a strongly exegetical law culture in which the idea of the non-application of rules was seen as a direct affront. Thus, fears were raised about the use of this mechanism that remain presently, despite the transformation of the concept of law as a result of the constitution of 1991. Indeed, the diffuse and concentrated controls were not conceived in a coordinated way, delimiting the function of each. In fact, the provisions that establish them tend to grant a very broad scope to both of them. Finally, this study proposes a concept of diffuse control that must interact harmoniously with concentrated control to restrain abstract and concrete unconstitutionalities. This thesis then ultimately analyzes the role diffuse control has had in (and should have in) the Colombian system of judicial review through various methodologies of the social sciences

Without doubt, John Rawls's A Theory of Justice is one of the most important statements of Anglo-American political philosophy in the twentieth century. Through a revival of the social contract device, Rawls formulates a set of principles of correct political association ("the right") that he argues must be considered as prior to any conception of the good. These principles apply to all persons as free and equal beings in society, but more importantly they assume some things about the nature of persons in that society. On the institutional aspect of his theory, Rawls conceives of the state as a neutral arbiter of the good. This, coupled with a conception of persons as individuals that affirm the values of autonomy and equality, has drawn extensive critical fire from philosophers within and without liberalism. One such group of critics, the communitarians, claim that Rawls's idea of the person is too abstract or "groundless" to account for shared values, and thus fails to appreciate the extent to which we understand ourselves as embedded within our culture. Michael Sandel has thus argued that Rawls's person so conceived is too abstract to be of any theoretical let alone practical use, while Alasdair Macintyre has argued that such a conception of persons is incoherent: liberal "persons" do not know themselves, and so they cannot know what is right or what is good. This thesis analyzes the liberal-communitarian debate by comparing and contrasting some terms used by both sides in the debate. By analyzing the terms, I will present a liberal conception of the person as properly understood in Rawls's theory. ' Rawls has not been idle since the publication of A Theory of Justice. He has defended his theory in a series of articles and lectures that have developed his position in response to these and other criticisms. Specifically, by positing his theory within liberal-democratic culture, by acknowledging individual formative conceptions of the good, and by emphasizing and relying upon a modus vivendi view as the basis for political liberalism and a liberal culture, Rawls has answered the communitarian objections by incorporating and responding to those pertinent criticisms. I will argue that Rawls's recent emphasis on a theory of political liberalism successfully accounts for his idea of persons because it accords with our considered moral principles, it treats persons as free and equal beings worthy of respect, and it incorporates the only coherent construction of the social embeddedness thesis to a greater degree than communitarians acknowledge or appreciate. Rawls's political liberalism thus surpasses this aspect of the communitarian critique.

An estimated 200,000 juveniles are tried as adults yearly and receive punitive sentences intended to deter juvenile crime and increase public safety. Few qualitative studies on juveniles sentenced as adults and contradictory results indicate a need for further research. This study used a qualitative, phenomenological interpretive design, with the conceptual frameworks of general and specific deterrence and rational choice theories. In-depth interviews took place with 12 incarcerated adults serving sentences (24--540 months) for juvenile crimes. The research questions explored their knowledge of transfer laws and adult sentencing and perceptions of deterrence from future criminal activity. Coding of transcripts and audio files was distilled into meaning units following the hermeneutical tradition, and triangulation was used to identify overarching themes and patterns. Findings revealed that no participants understood application of transfer to adult court to them, and 10 (83%) revealed ignorance of juvenile transfer laws. Thus, they did not weigh costs or benefits prior to offending (general deterrence) or exercise rational decision making; however, 11 (92%) would have reconsidered offending if they were aware of adult sentences. Half admitted the impacts of incarceration would not deter them from future offending (no specific deterrence), and half believed negative factors would prevent recidivism. Study results can prompt further research in juvenile offenders' knowledge and decisions regarding adult sentencing. Implications for social change include dissemination of findings to deter adolescents from criminal behavior. Findings may also aid policymakers' reevaluation and revision of sentencing policies for juvenile offenders to help prevent juvenile crime and recidivism and increase public safety.

A la faveur d'un accroissement de la répression et de l'introduction des techniques de managérialisation (telles que la comparution sur reconnaissance préalable de culpabilité) au sein de l'institution judiciaire, les magistrats des juridictions lyonnaise, roannaise et stéphanoise adoptent des pratiques standardisées en matière de répression de la délinquance routière. Cette apparition d'un modèle managérial et standardisé du traitement de la délinquance routière, privilégiant une réponse pénale systématique, rapide, normée et sévère, redéfinit le cadre de travail de tous les acteurs de la chaîne pénale, en l'occurrence des forces de l'ordre, des parquetiers, des juges et des avocats. Plus précisément, remettant en cause les principes d'individualisation de la peine et d'autonomie propre à la profession de magistrat, les parquetiers et, par effet domino, les juges alignent leurs pratiques sur les prescriptions ministérielles qui sont de plus en plus répressives. Ce travail montre que la déclinaison de la politique pénale en matière de délinquance routière au niveau local est le produit d'une action top-down, traduisant un «Etat en action » et non pas en « interaction ». La politique pénale de sécurité routière et le traitement de la délinquance routière restent plus que jamais des secteurs régaliens dans lesquels l'Etat veut réaffirmer son leadership. / As a consequence of the increase in repression and of the implementation of management standards(such as the plea bargaining) in Justice, the substitutes of the prosecutor and the judges adopt standardized practices as regards repression of the road delinquency in Lyon, Roanne and Saint-Etienne. The implementation of management standards as regards the road delinquency, privileging systematic and fast penal answer, redefines the framework of ali the actors of the criminal justice system (police, substitutes of the prosecutor, judges and lawyers). More precise! y, the substitutes of the prosecutor and the judges put into question fundamental principles such as individualized judgments and autonomy. They align their practices on the ministerial directives, which are increasingly repressive. This work shows that the variation in criminal policy as regards road delinquency at the local leve! is the product of a top-down action, translating a "State into action" and not in "interaction". The cri minai policy of road safety and the treatment of road delinquency remain sectors in which the State wants to reaffirm its leadership.

A water supply service can be seen as a public or private good, but this thesis makes the argument that water is vital for society and so to ensure accountability it is important that water governance includes citizens' participation for social and environmental justice concerns. Public goods are generally defined as goods and services that are provided by 'means of public policy' (Lane, 1993, p. 21), or 'collective political choice' (Stretton & Orchard, 1994, p. 54) rather than by means of an individual market mechanism in which private goods are usually provided. This thesis addresses the function of water as a public good. If social and environmental goals of water use are ignored, the implications can be detrimental particularly for the poorest members of society. An organization's goal effectiveness is usually related to its success in achieving desired outcomes of the organization's goals through a systemic management interaction across organizational aspects at the input, process, output, and outcome/impact stages. This thesis argues an evaluation model of performance measurement can be developed to reflect the characteristics of a public good for a water supply utility, and this model of performance measurement can assist in addressing issues of social and environmental justice. Harris et al argue that better governance can only be achieved by working for democracy in multiple arenas (Harriss, Stokke, & Tornquist, 2004, pp. 7-8). This study considers multidimensional performance measures taking on board the values of many stakeholders with different backgrounds. It 'unfolds' and 'sweeps in' in many dimensions in an attempt at systemic representation (Ulrich, 1983, p. 169). McIntyre- Mills states that 'service need to reflect the values of the users and for this to occur the users need to participate in and decide on policy design and governance' (McIntyre-Mills, 2003, p. 14). Performance measurement systems can be used to detect a gap between services supplied by providers and various needs demanded by stakeholders. The thesis develops an outcome performance measurement model for evaluating social equity and environmental justice concerns. It draws on and adapts four performance measurement models of the International Water Association, World Bank, Indonesian Home Affairs Department and Indonesian Water Supply Enterprise Association. A complementary combined method was developed that addresses qualitative and quantitative governance concerns as they perform to water supply performance problems. Three research methods were used, namely the case study, survey and focus group discussion for collecting qualitative and quantitative data from the three governance sectors. These were triangulated. Five research tools in the case study method were used for collecting information from stakeholders in the three governance sectors including interview, personal communication or email, document analysis, direct observation and documentation. The survey was used to investigate 431 respondents from three case study locations in Cinusa1 city, and the two focus groups were conducted in the city's water supply company management for discussing problems of water supply performance as summarized from the survey. The locus of this study was concentrated in the Cinusa city jurisdiction area, and the focus was the performance problem of the water supply company in Cinusa during 2001-2004. However, a comparative study of water supply performance nationally and internationally is presented for analyzing relative performance gaps.This research evaluates interconnections among cost inefficiency, tariff escalation and other non-financial performances: water supply quantity, quality, continuity and pressure. Inefficient costs because of corrupt, collusive and nepotistic practices in this Indonesian water supply company implicate cost burdens in the company and prevent this water local public enterprise perform its social and environmental missions. The Cinusa local government as the owner of this local public enterprise and the Cinusa local parliament hold a monopoly power in some important decisions related to this local public enterprise, including tariff policy, senior management positions and the total amount of profit share paid to the local government. Such customers from lower income household instead of being subsidized as specified in the national regulation are paying at a profitable tariff and subsidizing this enterprise's inefficiency and the government's locally generated revenue. The inefficiency alongside the profit sharing policy also weakens this enterprise's capacity to invest and improve its service performances. Improving the service performance is essential for current and potential customers and could also benefit the society economically, socially and environmentally, besides being of economic benefit to the enterprise itself. Securing public health concerns and groundwater preservations can be conducted by improving the accessibility, the availability and the reliability of water quality, quantity, pressure and continuity. This research presents an evaluation model for improving the accountability of water supply by means of performance management tool and it makes policy recommendations.

Recent polls suggest that less than half (46%) of Canadians are confident in the criminal justice system (CJS) as a whole (e.g., Roberts, 2004). Low levels of public confidence are problematic, as the criminal justice system relies on public support in order to function effectively (Casey, 2008). Previous research has found that attitudes toward the CJS are typically based on misperceptions and misinformation, with the public being unaware of the functioning of the CJS as well as crime trends (e.g., Doob, 2000). Therefore, it seems logical that providing the public with factual information about crime and criminal justice may lead to increased confidence. A handful of studies conducted in the United Kingdom have shown that, in general, public education does lead to increased confidence (e.g, Hough & Park, 2002). However, questions pertaining to the mode of delivery have been raised (Singer & Cooper, 2009). Therefore, three studies were conducted in order to further investigate this issue as well as to delve into the differences between active and passive learning. Whereas active learning refers to being actively engaged in the learning process through various means (e.g, discussion, problem-solving), passive learning refers to passively obtaining information, such as by listening or by reading (Prince, 2004). Before attempting to change public opinion of the CJS, it is crucial that we first have a comprehensive understanding of what these opinions and attitudes are. As such, Study 1, a quantitative survey of CJS knowledge and attitudes, and Study 2, qualitative focus groups, were conducted. Results from these two studies were used to develop materials for Study 3: Increasing confidence in the CJS through education. As has been found in past research, participants who received CJS information had a higher level of knowledge than controls, who received information about Canadas health care system. Interestingly, the type of learning (active vs. passive) did not have an effect on CJS knowledge. However, an effect was observed in regards to confidence and satisfaction: Participants who received CJS information through active learning were more confident in the CJS and had a higher level of satisfaction. These results have important implications for real-world interventions.

Many political theorists agree that an equal distribution of certain goods is a requirement of justice. However, they disagree about the types of agents that possess these distributive obligations, and about the range of agents who owe these obligations to each other. Are states primarily responsible for ensuring a just distribution of income? Or, is distributive justice also the responsibility of private individuals? Do agents – whether states or individuals – possess distributive obligations to foreigners? Or, is distributive justice only a requirement within national borders? I argue that the primary subject of distributive justice is the state’s relation to its citizens. States, and not private individuals, possess distributive obligations; and states only possess these obligations to their citizens, not to foreigners. I argue first that the state possesses distinctive distributive obligations to its citizens because of the way in which it exercises political authority over them. To exercise its political authority legitimately, that is, in a way that is consistent with the free and equal nature of its citizens, I argue, the state must secure a just distribution of civil liberties, political rights, income, and opportunities. I argue second that the subject of distributive justice does not extend beyond the state’s relation to its citizens. I argue first that principles of distributive justice do not apply to the private choices of citizens on the grounds that justice demands that citizens be free to decide what to do with their lives on the basis of their own conception of the good, and not on the basis of what is best for others. I argue second that because international organizations do not exercise political authority in the same way that states do, equality is not a demand of global justice.

Many political theorists agree that an equal distribution of certain goods is a requirement of justice. However, they disagree about the types of agents that possess these distributive obligations, and about the range of agents who owe these obligations to each other. Are states primarily responsible for ensuring a just distribution of income? Or, is distributive justice also the responsibility of private individuals? Do agents – whether states or individuals – possess distributive obligations to foreigners? Or, is distributive justice only a requirement within national borders? I argue that the primary subject of distributive justice is the state’s relation to its citizens. States, and not private individuals, possess distributive obligations; and states only possess these obligations to their citizens, not to foreigners. I argue first that the state possesses distinctive distributive obligations to its citizens because of the way in which it exercises political authority over them. To exercise its political authority legitimately, that is, in a way that is consistent with the free and equal nature of its citizens, I argue, the state must secure a just distribution of civil liberties, political rights, income, and opportunities. I argue second that the subject of distributive justice does not extend beyond the state’s relation to its citizens. I argue first that principles of distributive justice do not apply to the private choices of citizens on the grounds that justice demands that citizens be free to decide what to do with their lives on the basis of their own conception of the good, and not on the basis of what is best for others. I argue second that because international organizations do not exercise political authority in the same way that states do, equality is not a demand of global justice.

This study explores the connections between justice understood biblically, and restorative justice. Restorative justice theory has argued that its foundational principles and its forms of practice draw directly from the taproot of biblical justice. This study argues that biblical justice as conceived by restorative justice is incomplete. More, the primary theological and biblical work in the field has not drawn the connections to the way restorative justice is practiced. This study argues that judgment and forgiveness are essential components of biblical justice that are missing from discussions of restorative justice. It concludes by drawing some of the implications of incorporating judgment and forgiveness for restorative justice practice by suggesting language that can be used by mediators. Chapter 1 outlines the main principles of restorative justice and describes the ways in which these principles were initially grounded on a description of biblical justice. The ways in which recent writing about restorative justice has identified an apparent loss of vision are explored, a loss that flows from a theological grounding that has failed to adequately reflect the fulness of biblical justice. Chapter 2 explores the main themes of biblical justice. Drawing connections between biblical understandings of peace, covenant, and justice, it discusses the ways in which restitution, vindication, vengeance, retribution, punishment, mercy, judgment, and forgiveness are all constitutive of a full understanding of biblical justice. Finally this understanding of justice is described as central to repentance and reconciliation. Chapter 3 draws the connections between biblical justice and restorative justice. Arguing that biblical justice is a justice for the nations, that it is what justice ought to be, the role that judgment and forgiveness can play within restorative justice is described. Chapter 4 connects the discussion to the work that mediators do in restorative justice. Offering potential language for restorative justice practitioners, it seeks to find ways for the biblical and theological discussion to influence their work with victims and offenders. Chapter 5 draws the argument together, and identifies the necessity of restorative justice programmes remaining rooted in the church so as to retain the courage and creativity to continually experiment with new forms of practice.

This study explores the connections between justice understood biblically, and restorative justice. Restorative justice theory has argued that its foundational principles and its forms of practice draw directly from the taproot of biblical justice. This study argues that biblical justice as conceived by restorative justice is incomplete. More, the primary theological and biblical work in the field has not drawn the connections to the way restorative justice is practiced. This study argues that judgment and forgiveness are essential components of biblical justice that are missing from discussions of restorative justice. It concludes by drawing some of the implications of incorporating judgment and forgiveness for restorative justice practice by suggesting language that can be used by mediators. Chapter 1 outlines the main principles of restorative justice and describes the ways in which these principles were initially grounded on a description of biblical justice. The ways in which recent writing about restorative justice has identified an apparent loss of vision are explored, a loss that flows from a theological grounding that has failed to adequately reflect the fulness of biblical justice. Chapter 2 explores the main themes of biblical justice. Drawing connections between biblical understandings of peace, covenant, and justice, it discusses the ways in which restitution, vindication, vengeance, retribution, punishment, mercy, judgment, and forgiveness are all constitutive of a full understanding of biblical justice. Finally this understanding of justice is described as central to repentance and reconciliation. Chapter 3 draws the connections between biblical justice and restorative justice. Arguing that biblical justice is a justice for the nations, that it is what justice ought to be, the role that judgment and forgiveness can play within restorative justice is described. Chapter 4 connects the discussion to the work that mediators do in restorative justice. Offering potential language for restorative justice practitioners, it seeks to find ways for the biblical and theological discussion to influence their work with victims and offenders. Chapter 5 draws the argument together, and identifies the necessity of restorative justice programmes remaining rooted in the church so as to retain the courage and creativity to continually experiment with new forms of practice.