Conflicts and Commonalities in Judicial Evaluation

This article explores the proper role of judicial evaluation in relation to the various branches of government and a range of disciplines. Judicial evaluation is a practical, interpretive sphere of inquiry, based on dialogue and collaboration. It must respect important shared values, based on human rights and dignity, responsible approaches to research, and the conservation of resources. After outlining two contrasting approaches, from the European Commission and from Sweden, the article considers the roles of politics and knowledge or science (broadly defined) in judicial evaluation. Then nine values are enunciated, based on the common heritage of courts, government and scientific research. In the practice of judicial evaluation, meaningful data must be collected, reported clearly and interpreted transparently in dialogue with stakeholders. Conclusions should be consistent with the shared values, derived from honest arguments and communicated effectively. Researchers should be impartial, treat participants with equal dignity and respect their rights to privacy. Judicial evaluation must be useful in improving the administration of justice, without wasting time or resources of the courts or researchers. Este art