PATTERNS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN LEGAL BEHAVIOR: ETHNIC ASPECTS. PART THREE

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Published: Nov 30, 2021

  Vladislav Volkov

Abstract

The article aims to display and analyze the nature of the attitude of the multi-ethnic population to the settlement of disputes and conflicts in the judicial system of Latvia. The goal is attained through the analysis of the significance of ethnic differences: 1. in influencing people's ideas about the judicial system in Latvia, the principles of fair justice implemented in it; 2. in assessing the importance of the judicial system in resolving conflicts that are not directly related to the ethno-cultural identity of the parties to these conflicts; 3. in assessing the importance of the judicial system in resolving conflicts that unfold over the public manifestations of collective ethno-cultural identities. As an empirical base, the author used the data of sociological research “Patterns disputes and dispute resolution as the elements of legal mass culture”conducted by him in Daugavpils in 2014, as part of an international research project under the guidance of Professor of Warsaw University Jacek Kurczewski.

How to Cite

Volkov, V. (2021). PATTERNS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN LEGAL BEHAVIOR: ETHNIC ASPECTS. PART THREE. Baltic Journal of Legal and Social Sciences, (1), 95-107. Retrieved from http://www.baltijapublishing.lv/index.php/bjlss/article/view/1296
Article views: 36 | PDF Downloads: 37

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

legal system, judicial system, dispute resolution, ethno-cultural identity

References
1. V1 nodaļa (2018). Latvijas Republikas Satversme.https://likumi.lv/doc.php?id=57980 (14.6.2016) Par tiesu varu. (2018) https://likumi.lv/doc.php?id=62847(12.2.2018)
2. Зотов Д.В., Сыщикова Т.М. (2013) Какой поступок умаляет авторитет судебной власти?Судебная власть и уголовный процесс. №2. Сс. 144 – 151.
3. Развейкина Н.А. (2016) Доверие населения к судебной власти. Юридический вестник Самарского университета. Сс. 99 – 105.
4. Хёффе О. (2007) Справедливость. Москва: Праксис.
5. Hrehovà Н. (2014) Morality and justice in social life. Studia Philosophiae Christianae. No. 50.3. Рр. 8 – 19.
6. SmithD. J. (1997) Ethnic Origins, Crime, and Criminal Justice in England and Wales. In: M. Torny (ed.) Ethnicity, Crime and Immigration: Comparative and Cross-National Perspectives. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Pp. 101-182.
7. Jackson J., Pooler T., Hohl K, Kuha J. (2011) Trust in Justice: Topline Results from Round 5 of the European Social Survey. London: Еhe Institute for Criminal Policy Research, Birkbeck, University of London.
8. Van de Walle S. (2009) Trust in the Justice System: A Comparative View Across Europe. Prison Service Journal. Issue 183. Pp. 22 – 26.
9. Austere L., Kalniņš V. (2010) Ētikas jautājumi un korupcijas riskiRīgas apgabaltiesā. Rīga: Sabiedriskās politikas centrs Providus.
10. Litvins G. (2014) Likuma vara un taisnīguma nodrošināšana. – Rozenvalds J. (ed.) Cik demokrātiska ir Latvija? Demokrātijas audits, 2005–2014. Rīga: LU Sociālo un politisko pētījumu institūts.
11. Veidne: Latvijas iedzīvotāju nacionālais sastāvs. (2018) https://lv.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ Veidne: Latvijasiedz%C4%ABvot%C4%81ju_nacion%C4%81lais_sast%C4%81vs (5.10.2018)
12. Рига. (2018) https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D0% B8%D0%B3%D0% B0#Национальный_состав (5.10.2018).
13. Даугавпилс. (2018) https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94%D0%B0% D1%83%D0%B3%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0%BB%D1%81 (5.10.2018).
14. Елгава. (2018) https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%95%D0%BB%D0%B3%D0% B0%D0%B2%D0%B0 (5.10.2018).
15. Лиепая. (2018) https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9B%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%BF%D0%B0%D1%8F (5.10.2018).
16. Резекне.(2018) https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%BD%D0%B5 (5.10.2018).
17. Юрмала.(2018) https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AE%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B0 (5.10.2018).
18. Daugavpils. (2016)https://lv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daugavpils#Etniskais_sastāvs. (5.10.2018).
19. Iedzīvotāju skaita sadalījums pēc valstiskās piederības 2016.gada 1.janvārī (%). (2016) Centrālā statistikas pārvalde. www.csb.gov.lv
20. Ņikišins J., Rozenvalds J., Zepa B. (2014) Politiskākultūra un demokrātija. – Rozenvalds J. (ed.) Cik demokrātiska ir Latvija?: Demokrātijas audits, 2005–2014. Rīga: LU Sociālo un politisko pētījumu institūts.
21. Rajevska F. (2014) Ekonomiskās un sociālās tiesības. – Rozenvalds J. (ed.) Cik demokrātiska ir Latvija?: Demokrātijas audits, 2005–2014. Rīga: LU Sociālo un politisko pētījumu institūts. 97. Lpp.
22. Almond G.A., Verba S. (1963) The Civic culture. Political attitudes and democraty in five nations. Nee York, Princeton. http://www.civisbook.ru/files/File/1992-4-Almond_Verba.pdf
23. Макинтаир А. (2000) После добродетели: Исследования теории морали. Москва: Академический Проект. С. 342 – 343.
24. Хёффе О. (2007) Справедливость. Москва: Праксис. С. 39, 140.
25. Нерсесянц В.С. (2000) Общая теория права и государства. Москва: Издательство НОРМА. С. 267 – 268, 272 – 274.
26. Малахов В.П., Казаков В.Н. (ред.) (2002) Теория государства и права. Москва: Академический Проект; Екатеринбург: Деловая книга. С. 301.
27. Osipova S. (2010) Ievads tiesību socioloģijā. Rīga: Tiesu namu aģentūra. 126. Lpp.
28. Horowitz D. (1996) Symbolic Politics and Ethnic Status. – Hutchinson J., Smith A.D. (eds.) Ethnicity. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. P. 285.
29. Gans H.J (1996) Symbolic Ethnicity. – Hutchinson J., Smith A.D. (eds.) Ethnicity. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 146-147.