How to Measure? An Essay on the Social Context of Measuring Quality

  • Zoltán FleckEmail author
Part of the Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice book series (IUSGENT, volume 69)


In the case of judicial activity any measurement must have a clear concept of judgeship. Accepting H. Kritzer’s concept of craft, judicial qualities are a combination of relevant skills and attitudes which are present in argumentation and communication. Behind the measurement of the quality of judicial work there lies the theoretical question of justice and a sociological task. As for the theoretical question, one of the most complicated problems concerning the measurement of judicial quality is specifying the content, i.e. what aspects of this professional work can and should be measured. This essay concentrates also on the other issue, which may be an essential one if the organization is devoted to real amelioration. This issue is the organizational and wider social context of this process.


  1. Badó A (2014) “Fair” selection of judges in a modern democracy. In: Badó A (ed) Fair trial and judicial independence: Hungarian perspectives. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 27–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Badó A, Szarvas K (2014) “As luck would have it…”: fairness in the distribution of cases and judicial independence. In: Badó A (ed) Fair trial and judicial independence: Hungarian perspectives. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 59–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banakar R (2014) Normativity in legal sociology. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  4. Bárdits A, Kádár AK, Novoszádek N et al (2014) Last among equals: the equality before the law of vulnerable groups in the criminal justice system. Hungarian Helsinki Committee, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  5. Baum L (2009) Judges and their audiences: a perspective on judicial behavior. Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  6. Bencze M, Badó A (2016) A magyar bírósági rendszer hatékonyságát és az ítélkezés színvonalát befolyásoló strukturális és személyi feltételek. In: Jakab A, Gajduschek G (eds) A magyar jogrendszer állapota. MTA TK JTI, Budapest, pp 415–441Google Scholar
  7. Bovens M (2010) Two concepts of accountability: accountability as a virtue and as a mechanism. West Eur Polit 33:946–967. Scholar
  8. Caenegem RC (1993) Judges, legislators and professors: chapters in European legal history. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  9. Duxbury N (2001) Jurists and judges: an essay on influence. Hart PublishingGoogle Scholar
  10. Fleck Z (2001) Jogszolgáltató mechanizmusok az államszocializmusban: totalitarizmus-elméletek és a magyarországi szocializmus. Napvilág, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  11. Fleck Z (2012) Judicial independence in Hungary. In: Seibert-Fohr A (ed) Judicial independence in transition. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 793–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fleck Z (2014) A comparative analysis of judicial power, organisational issues in judicature and the administration of courts. In: Badó A (ed) Fair trial and judicial independence: Hungarian perspectives. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 3–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Halász G (2012) Az oktatás az Európai Unióban - Tanulás és együttműködés. Új Mandátum Kiadó, BudapestGoogle Scholar
  14. Holvast NL, Doornbos N (2015) Exit, voice, and loyalty within the judiciary: judges’ responses to new managerialism in the Netherlands. Utrecht Law Rev 11:49–63. Scholar
  15. Karpik L, Halliday TC (2011) The legal complex. Annu Rev Law Soc Sci 7:217–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kornai J (2015) Hungary’s U-turn. Capital Soc 10:1–24Google Scholar
  17. Kornai J, Eggleston K (2001) Welfare, choice and solidarity in transition: reforming the health sector in Eastern Europe. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  18. Kritzer HM (2015) Lawyers at work. Quid Pro BooksGoogle Scholar
  19. Markovits I (2010) Justice in Luritz: experiencing socialist law in East Germany. Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  20. Podgórecki A, Olgiati V (eds) (1996) Totalitarian and post-totalitarian law a sociolegal analysisGoogle Scholar
  21. Porter TM (1996) Trust in numbers: the pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  22. Roma Press Center (1999) Hungarian court denies compensation to family of wrongly convicted Romani man.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Law, Department for Sociology of LawEötvös Loránd UniversityBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations