Thacker 2005 Use of Courthouses in Reform Programmes

8/7/2019 Thacker 2005 Use of Courthouses in Reform Programmes

1/27

BUILDING A STRONG, INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY: JUDICIOUS

USE OF COURTHOUSES IN JUDICIAL REFORM PROGRAMSMr. Gerald Thacker

Consultant on Facilities, The World Bank

The Facilities Component of Judicial Reform Programs

Judicial and legal reforms are now integral components of democratization andeconomic improvement efforts in developing countries around the world.1 Whilethere are obviously many elements necessary for the success of such efforts,organizations planning and implementing judicial reform measures have found thatsuch initiatives cannot be fully implemented without adequate support infrastructure,of which appropriate Judicial facilities are a necessary part. Since there will be afacilities component of almost every Judicial Reform programwhether anticipatedor not by the project planners--it seems only prudent to address the facilities

component into the early planning stages.

Accommodating automation Most Judicial reform programs plan for theuse of automated systems for case management and judicial research--whichimprove the efficiency and accountability of the judiciary, and contribute to thetransparency of court operations. Automated systems cannot beimplemented without appropriate automation equipment. Such equipmentmust have adequate facilities in which to operate: water-tight spaces,adequate electrical power, and communications, both within the facility and tothe outside virtual world.

Efficient Court Operations And Easy Public Access Many projects

anticipate the creation of new Judicial activities, such as use of juries in trials,mediation, alternative dispute resolution, specialized family or juvenileproceedings, and reorganization of support staff. All of these activitiesrequire the reconfiguration of existing or construction of new spaces toaccommodate them. The appropriate layout of work spaces--both in size andarrangement--contribute significantly to the efficiency of court staff.Courtrooms appropriately sized and configured contribute to public access tothe Judicial system and to such initiatives as the use of juries in trials. Evensomething as minor as adequate signage, making it easy for the public to findthe right courtroom or clerical office, increases the public's access to the legalsystem.

Presented during theInternational Conference and Showcase on Judicial Reforms held at the Shangri-la Hotel,Makati City, Philippines on 28-30 November 2005.

1Objectives of Judicial reform programs typically are economic development; protection of humanrights; independence of the judiciary; transparent, open, responsive and accountable functioningofthe courts; timely, consistent,legally-correct resolution of legal disputes; reduction of case backlogs;increased capacity of the judiciary to formulate and implement changes in court organization,practices and performance over the longer term.


2/27

2

Judicial Independence While an independent Judiciary does not have tohave complete control of all aspects of Judicial facilities planning, design,construction, operation and maintenance, Judiciaries cannot be trulyindependent if another branch of the government does has absolute control ofits facilities. Adequate facilities are necessary for the administration of justiceand Judicial involvement in every aspect of its facilities program is necessary

for providing those adequate facilities.

Security In many programs, increasing the security of judges, court staff, andthe litigants in cases, is a primary objective. Appropriately designed courtspaces can result in more security at less cost than most other alternatives.Further, poorly designed spaces sometimes cannot be secured at any cost.

Demonstration and Pilot Sites Implementation of new technologies,systems, and practices is most often done in stages, with demonstration sitesused to showcase, test, and train before full implementation, requiringappropriate spaces to be created. Depending on the nature of thedemonstration site, the creation of appropriate spaces might require extensiverehabilitation of existing facilities or construction of new facilities.

New Locations Providing access to justice might mean establishing courts inlocations that are not presently servedsometimes in very remote areas ofthe country. Facilities for the new court operations often have to beconstructed.

Since facilities projects are such a necessary part of most Judicial reform programs(whether they are planned for at the beginning of the project or arise during projectimplementation), Judicial reform program planners must be aware of the potentialproblems that such projects can cause as well as the positive contributions they can

make to accomplishing the goals of the program.

Characteristics of Real Estate Assets

Since facilities projects are an important component of most Judicial ReformPrograms, useful for showcasing many other components of the programs and forpromoting program goals, its important to understand the peculiar characteristics ofreal estate assets. There are several characteristics of real estate assets thatdistinguish them from other program components, such as automation equipmentand personnel costs, and that require very different methods for managing them:

the cost of the real estate investment; the length of time required to acquire the asset (whether by construction,

lease, or purchase);

the costs and methods (including procurement methods) used to acquire,maintain, repair, and renovate the asset;

the specialized laws and regulation affecting them (environmental regulations,for example);

the length of the useful life of the asset;


3/27

3

the location-specific nature of the asset; and

the specialized industries associated with real estate assets (for design,construction, management, etc., each requiring specialized technicaleducation).

Public buildings have a number of additional peculiar characteristics. Public buildings

are:

used by the general public to carry out public functions

built with public funds

the public face of the governmental units occupying them, and are expected,in their design to exhibit dignity, permanence, stability, strength, and nationalcharacter, drawing on the countrys or the worlds history of publicarchitecture

expected to be used for a long time

expected to contribute positively to the economic development of the locationwhere theyre built

expected to contribute positively to the architectural fabric of the specificcommunity and to the country where theyre built

Early in the planning stages, therefore, those planning Judicial Reform Programsmust think carefully about the potential costs and schedule impacts that facilitiesprojects will have, as well as the positive contributions those facilities projects canmake to the success of the program. Every facility project should be directly relatedto a goal of the overall Judicial Reform Program, and included only after carefulconsideration of alternative strategies.

Alternatives to Construction

Since the facilities component of Judicial reform programs has such an impact on theprograms schedule and cost, program planners should be prudent in developing it.Investing in facilitieswhile inevitableshould be the first choice of the projectplanner. Alternatives should be considered very carefully in the planning phase andduring implementation. Alternatives to facilities investment include

Revising work practices For example, if mounds of paper records are amajor problem in most courthouses, an aggressive records managementprogram should be undertaken before investing in building additional space tohouse the records.

Substituting automation and technology It might be possible to makegreater use of video conferencing for some court activities, such as initialarraignments or interviewing defendants in custody at the jail site. The use ofvideo conferencing might also substitute for building new court facilities atremote locations (wireless/satellite linking technology is rapidly maturing topermit use even in remote areas with no dependable electricity and notelephones). In many countries electronic access to the court system for filingdocuments or requesting information has a number of benefits, as well as


4/27

4

improving public access to the court system, including reducing the number ofpeople required to physically come to a courthouse (and the space needed forthem) and eliminating many paper records (and the space needed to storethem).

Mobile courts. Many Judicial reform programs encourage the use of mobile

courts (buses or boats) to bring the court to remote locations on a periodicbasis rather than investing in building new facilities.

Impact of the Facilities Component on the Programs Scope, Schedule, andBudget

It is critical that program planners have an assessment of the general conditions ofthe current inventory of Judicial facilities when developing the programs scope,schedule, and budget. For example, as discussed above, implementing automationprojects require weather tight facilities and adequate electrical systems. Thus, itwould be useful for planners to know when developing the programs budget and

schedule how many of the current facilities have severe roof leaks and inadequateelectrical systems. At the same time, planners should assess the ability of thegovernment to execute the facilities component, whether the government expects todo the work in-house or contract for the design and construction.2

Judicial facilities issues very often control the critical path of the projects schedule.There are several reasons why we should expect this to occur, but two have thegreatest impact:

rehabilitating or constructing Judicial facilities is very expensive (particularlycompared to other project costs, such as for Judicial training, and even

compared to the expensive cost of automation equipment and software); and facilities projects have a long lead time.

The costs of rehabilitating or constructing court facilities will vary too widely fromlocation to location to provide any rule of thumb estimate for project planning. Suchfactors as the cost of land, materials, and labor are very specific to a particularregion. Thus, a likely or rough cost estimate for program budgeting purposes mustbe developed from the beginning specifically for every program plan, based on localcosts, and refined as the program scope becomes final.

It is somewhat easier to predict the time that will be required for rehabilitating orconstructing a Judicial facility based on the contracting procedures required of most

organizations implementing Judicial reform programs and the norms for theconstruction trades:

9 to 14 months for projects up to 2000 square meters (2 to 3 months todevelop the scope of work or terms of reference and contract for the design; 3months to design; 2 months to contract for construction; and 6 months toconstruct);

2This issue is discussed in more detail below.


5/27

5

3 to 5 years for projects of 10,000 square meters and greater (3 to 6 monthsto develop the scope of work or terms of reference; 6 months to design; 3months to contract for construction; and 24 months to construct).

There are techniques that can shorten the timeframes somewhat3, but there are also

a number of factors that can substantially increase the timeframes, as well. Forexample, some countries have a well-established design/construction industry, withmany capable firms, an adequate pool of skilled labor, and readily availableconstruction supplies; some countries do not. Some countries enjoy weatherconditions that will permit year-round construction schedules; some countries do not.Some countries have a transportation infrastructure that permits the easy and quickmovement of construction materials to construction sites; some countries do not.Some court facilities projects will have little underlying environmental impact; otherprojects will require substantial assessment and remediation, resulting in sometimesvery significant cost and time increases.

In most Judicial Reform Programs, the local government (or even local Judiciary) will

actually contract for and manage the execution of the facilities projects, rather thanthe outside funding organization.4 Some countries will have the capacity to proceedwith several projects simultaneously; in some countries, there is capacity to executeonly one project at a time. So, for example, rather than a program plan schedule toaccomplish the rehabilitation of 7 court locations in a 12 month period for installingautomation equipment, a more realistic schedule might be 7 locations in 2 or 3 years,with a resulting impact on the schedule for automation implementation.

The actual construction timeframes are not the only considerations for developing anoverall Judicial reform program schedule, however. As discussed in more detailbelow, a number of preliminary steps are necessary during the planning stage of theJudicial reform program: an assessment of facilities conditions; prioritizing work interms of project goals; and developing design standards. These activities can eachtake several months, and often must proceed sequentially.

Early planning for the facilities component of a reform project can, thus, not onlyprevent implementation delays and other unpleasant surprises, but permit thecomponent to play a positive role in the projects success: demonstration projects;showcasing pilots; system-wide upgrades; major rehabilitation and modernization ofexisting facilities; and the construction of new facilities.

In addition, the most effective use of a facilities component recognizes that a morecomprehensive facilities component should aim to make the Judiciary an active and

equal partner with the executive and legislative components of government indeveloping and managing a court facilities program to ensure that the resultingfacilities meet the needs of the reformed Judiciary and promotes its independence.

3such as design/build contracting, the use of multiple projects in a single contract award, the use ofindefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracts, and the use of pattern building designs

4The funding or donor organizations contracting and financial controls will probably be mandated for

use and they might be very different from the normal government practice, requiring a learning curveand additional time in the project schedule.


6/27

6

Ensuring that the Judiciary has the capacity to perform this role should be a clearlystated goal of the Judicial Reform project.

Comprehensive Judiciary-directed Facilities Program

A comprehensive, judiciary-directed facilities program incorporates five components:

Functional Assessment/Profile The Judiciary must thoroughly examine anddocument how it works within the courthouse, including the typical activities thatoccur in each type of space; how people circulate within the space and wherecirculation must be restricted; which groups or functions must be adjacent towhich others; the typical furniture, both fixed and movable, likely to be found ineach space; the use of special equipment, such as computers and videodisplays, that will affect electrical, telecommunications, and lighting; and so on.The Judiciary must examine not only how the space is used today, but also howactivities are likely to change in the future. For example, will there be greater useof technologies? Will clerks now assigned to individual judges offices be

consolidated into a common work area? Will there be more or fewer criminaldefendants in custody during trial?

Space Standards/Design Guide Once the Judiciary documents its functionalneeds, design professionals can translate those functional needs into spacestandards, i.e., the type and amount of space needed to house the functions. Byusing space standards, the Judiciary is able to assess the adequacy of its currentlocations and to project the size and configuration of its future needs. Spacestandards can be incorporated into a Design Guide that describes functionalneeds, the size and characteristics of individual spaces in a courthouse, andprovide typical architectural layouts for the use of Judges, staff, and design

professionals and builders for specific projects. The Design Guide serves as atool, also, for the Judiciary to control the design of new space. 5

Developing a Design Guide in a collaborative way, drawing into the processjudges and staff from every court level, has the added benefit of being a powerfulcohesion building tool and an opportunity to disseminate information about howthe units will work in a reformed Judiciary.

Long Range Facilities Plans Each current courthouse in the Judiciarysinventory must be assessed for its capability to provide space for the activities ofJudges, staff, litigants, members of the public, jurors, and others who visit themnot only for the current types of activities and numbers of people, but for the

future, based on a projection of caseload increases (or decreases) and newactivities. Thus, the current facilities assessment will include evaluation of allbuilding systems and structures, and of the functionality of the facilities, e.g., are

5Appendix B shows a topical outline of a typical Design Guide. A number of countries havedeveloped Design Guides for Judicial space in the course of implementing Judicial reform programs,including Venezuela, Guatemala, Montenegro, and the Philippines. Examining design guidesdeveloped by Great Britain and the United States (US Courts Design Guide for Federal courts andThe Courthouse: Planning and Design Guide for Court Facilities of the National Center for StateCourts) might also be helpful. See Appendixes C and D for a bibliography and some useful websites.


7/27

7

the courtrooms adequate, is there secure circulation for judges, and so on.Information about the facilities current capabilities must also be examined againstthe expected future workload and number and type of staff. From this effort theJudiciary will know for each facility in its inventory the work that must be doneand the cost to make it useful for current and post-reform activities and anunderstanding of how long each current facility will serve before it must be

replaced with a new facility. It will also be apparent which facilities cannoteconomically be modernized and renovated, or expanded, and should bereplaced immediately. 6

Capital Plan: Using the Long Range Facility Plan for each current courthouse,the Judiciary will then able to develop a Capital Plan of needs by funding yearwell into the future. Such a Capital Plan will enumerate the locations (and sizeand cost) of where new facilities must be built, and the locations (and cost) whererenovations, modernization, and expansions are needed. Depending on thedegree of autonomy the Judiciary enjoys in submitting a budget request to thelegislative branch of government, close coordination might be required withanother government unit, such as the Ministry of Justice or the Ministry of

Finance and Budget. Even if the Judiciary makes a direct budget submission, theJudiciary must be sensitive to the governments budget deadlines and to thetimeframes required for designing and constructing facilities.

Since funding constraints will probably not permit accomplishing the entireCapital Plan in one funding year, it will be necessary for the Judiciary to prioritizethe projects in its Capital Plan for funding purposes, perhaps over a five or tenyear period. Criteria for prioritizing projects might include unhealthy or unsafeworking conditions; lack of security; inoperable building systems; lack ofadequate space for conducting judicial proceedings; expected increases inworkload and personnel, and so on.

If another unit of government, such as a department of public works, is to beresponsible for executing the capital plan (designing, constructing, and operatingJudicial facilities) the capacity of that unit to accomplish the Judicial work must betaken into account in developing a yearly schedule of projects.

The Capital Plan must also account for the long-term operation and maintenanceof the Judiciarys facilities. Rehabilitated and newly constructed facilities canquickly deteriorate if they are not maintained and major repairs (roofreplacements, for example) made when needed. Since an adequate repair andmaintenance budget is accepted to be 2 to 3 percent of the replacement cost of afacility, it can be a major cost factor in a Judiciarys budget. Most countries

(including the United States) typically do not budget enough money to adequatelymaintain and repair its public buildings. Thus, the Judiciary must provide in itscapital planning process a method for prioritizing and allocating the funding that isactually provided by the government each year for this purpose.

6A preliminary assessment of the Judiciarys inventory of facilities should be completed in the

planning phase of the facilities component of Judicial Reform Program to estimate the costs andimpact on overall schedule. A much more detailed assessment by qualified engineering professionalsshould be completed early in the program implementation. Appendix A contains a suggestedchecklist of information that should be collected.


8/27

8

In-house Staff for Oversight and Maintenance: It must also be recognized thata comprehensive facilities program requires a long-term commitmentboth formaintaining and updating the components and for implementing the capital plan.Thus, while the technical skills needed for developing a capital plan, and fordesigning, constructing, and operating facilities can be obtained by contract with

private sector firms, or from another government unit, such as a department ofpublic works, the Judiciary must have a staff of trained professionals to definerequirements, oversee the contracts, and evaluate the results.

Courthouse Design Issues

Courthouses should be designed to promote the dignity and importance of theJudicial process and to promote the efficient and safe administration of justice.These design goals can be successfully met in both large and small court facilities.In the rehabilitation of existing facilities, many trade-offs will most likely have to bemade. Thus, if program planners are selecting locations to serve as pilot or

demonstration sites, careful evaluation must be made of the extent to which facilitiescan be rehabilitated to showcase the programs goals.

For larger courthouses in urban settings, there are four characteristics thatdistinguish the modern courthouse from its predecessors:

Scale The tremendous growth in both judicial officers and support staff in manycountries has resulted in courthouses much larger than their predecessors.Architecturally translating the traditional small courthouse into a multi-story, multi- judge facility without losing the essence of The Courthouse is perhaps theprimary challenge to the design architect.

Nature of the space While there has been a significant increase in the numberof judges in many countries during the last 20 years, in terms of percentage ofincrease, the growth in the support staff has often been even more significant.Consequently, the greater percentage of the modern courthouse is composed ofgeneral-purpose office spaceperhaps 80 to 85%. Thus, as with any modernoffice space, the design architect must pay particular attention to the functionalityof the space and to its flexibility. Perhaps more than most businesses, thebusiness side of the courts and how that business is accomplished are changingcontinuously and rapidly. The office space must be designed to expand toaccommodate additional staff and to be easily reconfigured to accommodate newfunctions, such as even greater use of automation and alternative dispute

resolution.

Technology in the courtroom and the courthouse The design architect mustbe sensitive to automation issues applicable both to the courtroom and the wholecourthouse throughout the design process: the courts current and future needs,and the design Implications/costs and alternatives for various technologies.

In the courtroom, technologies are increasingly used for presentation oftestimony, presentation of evidence, taking the record, access to ancillary


9/27

9

information, in-court case administration, public access, and security. In each ofthese areas, there are design implications for lighting, sightlines, caseworkdesign, electrical, cabling, and telecommunications. Throughout

the courthouse, technologies are used in the courts business processes;electronic filing; case administration; recordkeeping; public access to court

information; security; telecommunications; and building operating/fire and lifesafety systems. While the design architect will most often not be required todesign or specify the automation used in a new courthouse7 (except for thebuilding operating and life/fire safety systems), he must be knowledgeable aboutboth the current and future uses of technology throughout the courthouse andincorporate that knowledge into every aspect of the design so that the resultingfacility is truly a smart courthouse.

Security As with technology, security must be designed into the courthouse

throughout the design process, and integrated with all building systems. Asecure courthouse requires much more than providing separated circulationpatterns for visitors, judges and staff, and defendants in custody. The design

architect must also understand the work processes of the court: who visits thecourthouse, for example, and how the staff moves within the space. In order toprovide greatest flexibility for future expansionadding courtrooms and judgeschambers, for examplethe security requirements for such expansion must be inthe initial design. The design architect must examine with the Judiciary thespecific potential risks such as vandalism; theft; personnel security; litigants(family/friends) disruption; prisoner movement; judicial security; and terrorism.

A secure courthouse is a combination of good architectural design; electronicsystems; and security staff. Good design addresses courthouse approachese.g., lighting, landscaping, locks, vehicular control, parking; courthouse perimeter;access for the public, judges and court staff, prisoners, and others, e.g.,witnesses, jurors, undercover agents; internal circulation patterns; restrictedaccess plans; symbolism; construction techniques and materials; and electronicsystems, e.g., cameras/monitors, locks, screening. Again, as with technologyused in the courthouse, the design architect will not have to design or specify allthe courthouses security features and systems.8 He will, however, have the keyrole in ensuring that all threats are addressed in the design process and that thesecurity features are compatible and complementary.

The design of small courthouses has the same design goals as large courthouses.Small courthouses are, in many ways, no less complex than large courthouses,since they have the same functional, technological, and security requirements.

Small courthouses offer the additional challenge of designing all those requirementsinto small spaces.

7Design of the technology and systems is now most often done by specialty consultants. Thissituation creates the need to ensure careful coordination of the technology consultants and designarchitects from the beginning of the design.8As with technology, specialty consultants are increasingly used for security system design inprojects. The coordination of the overall building system design, the technology design and thesecurity systems design must be done from the beginning of the project and can be expected to bethe source of some unpleasant and expensive surprises as the project nears completion.


10/27

10

Fortunately, adequate and appropriate facilities have been part of many judicialreform programs for some time. Therefore, there is an impressive portfolio ofcompleted projects to examine, revealing certain common characteristics suitable forreplication in both large and small courthouses:

The exteriors of the new court facilities are very attractively but simplydesigned, reflecting both the regional architecture and the importance of thepublic facility

The facilities are given prominent locations in the towns where theyre builtand are easily accessible to the public

Construction materials are inexpensive, easily available, and durable,requiring a minimum of maintenance, for example, concrete, tile, sheet metalroofing

Interior partitioning uses drywall, permitting easy rearrangement if evernecessary

The interior layout is simple, well defined, and functional; space sizes areadequate and not cramped

The circulation pattern in the larger courthouses is well defined, separatingwith architectural barriers and design the judges, staff, public, and prisoners

There is adequate storage space, both for supplies and records, and forevidence

Building systems are kept simple, for example, innovative natural ventilationtechniques and natural lighting

In the locations likely to expand, thought has been given to providing thefuture expansion space

Conclusion

Facilities projects (both renovation and modernization of existing court facilities andconstruction of new facilities) are an important component (whether planned orunplanned) of most Judicial reform programs, useful for showcasing aspects of theprogram and for promoting program goals. The facilities component, however, hasmany characteristics that are very different from other program components. Thoseplanning Judicial reform programs, therefore, very early must think carefully aboutthe potential costs and schedule impacts that facilities projects can have, as well thepositive contributions that facilities projects can make.

---oo0oo---


11/27

11

Appendix A

CHECKLIST FOR FACILITY SURVEYS: DESCRIPTION, CONDITIONS,COSTS

1. Generala. Location/addressb. Ownerc. Surrounding contextd. Agee. Occupants (by Organization for both Judicial and Non Judicial

occupants)f. Number of personnel (by Organization and function)g. Number of floorsh. Floor plans/drawings

2. Exterior

a. Siting/setbacksb. Parking/vehicle controlc. Landscapingd. Building Faade design and materialse. Type of Rooff. Exterior lightingg. Building services (water, electricity, telephone, sewage, heating,

cooling) type, capacities, and source

3. Interior

a. Square meters for each floor and building total: gross and usableb. Occupants (offices) on each floorc. Interior construction

i. Floorii. Ceiling

iii. Partitionsd. Access controlse. Individual offices

i. Occupantsii. Functionsiii. Adjacency requirementsiv. Electrical Services (size of circuits and number of outlets)v. Lighting (type and illumination)vi. Telephones (number of lines and number of instruments)


12/27

12

vii. Furnishings (types and size of equipment)viii.

f. Building Servicesi. Toiletsii. Janitor closetsiii. Storage

iv. Service entrancesv. For telephone, water, electrical, heating, cooling, sewage

1. total building2. floor capacity3. distribution type

4. General Conditions and Major Problemsa. Exterior

i. faadeii. windowsiii. roofiv. foundation

b. Interior systemsi. Electricalii. Plumbingiii. Heating and air conditioningiv. Sewage

c. Other (specify)d. Estimated repair costs

5. Projected Case Load and Staffinga. 5 yearsb. 10 years


13/27

13

Appendix B

DESIGN GUIDES: SAMPLE TOPICAL OUTLINE

Courthouse exterior Siting/location Appearance Construction materials Landscaping

Interior spaces (for each space describe: activities/functions; typicalfurniture/sizes; appropriate office sizes; appropriate adjacencies) Main Entrance/Public Lobby Courtroom Judges office Intake/filing offices

Civil Criminal

Court Archive Library Special spaces

Housekeeper's office Coffee Bar Conference Room Server/computer wiring room Telephone switching room Holding cell Evidence/seized property room

Any requirement different from other government buildings Lighting/Electrical Security Wall/floor finishes/telecommunications Location Landscaping

Handicapped access Faade design/appearance

Built-in furniture Signage Heating/air conditioning

Handicapped accessibility

Security Exterior and vehicular control Separated interior circulation: public; prisoners; Judges; staff


14/27

14

Entrance screening Emergency lighting Interior controls


15/27

15

Appendix C

BIBLIOGRAPHIES

GETTING TO KNOW EACH OTHER:Judges and Architects

ConfrontingCourthouse Projects

A Bibliographyof Extracurricular Readings

Beyond the


16/27

16

Design Guides

Compiled byHon. Douglas P. WoodlockUnited States District Judge

District of MassachusettsFor The Judiciary: Policy, Governance and Inter Branch RelationsHarvard University Kennedy School of Government.

Reprinted with permission..

[A]bove all, the courthouse: the center, the focus, the hub;sitting looming in the center of the county's circumferencelike a single cloud in its ring of horizon, laying its vastshadow to the uttermost rim of horizon; musing, brooding,symbolic and ponderable, tall as cloud, solid as rock,

dominating all: protector of the weak, judiciate and curb ofthe passions and lusts, repository and guardian of theaspirations and the hopes; rising course by brick courseduring that first summer, simply square, simplest Georgiancolonial . . . since, as the architect had told them, they hadno money to buy bad taste with nor even anything fromwhich to copy what bad taste might still have been withintheir compass;

-W. Faulkner, Requiem For A Nun 35 (1950).

Note: The quotidian details of court design are prescribed to a greater or lesserdegree in guidelines adopted by a number of jurisdictions. For the federal courts,these are found in the U. S. COURTS DESIGN GUIDE, issued by the JudicialConference of the United States and available from the Government Printing Officeand the Administrative Office of the U. S. Courts. An overview of state courtguidelines is found in THE COURTHOUSE: A PLANNING AND DESIGN GUIDE FORCOURT FACILITIES (National Center for State Courts 1991).

I. THE BUILDINGS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

- THE FEDERAL PRESENCE: ARCHITECTURE, POLITICS, ANDSYMBOLS IN UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BUILDING by LoisCraig & The Staff of the Federal Architecture Project of the NationalEndowment for the Arts, (MIT Press, 1978, paperback ed. 1984) (athorough photographic essay providing a complete history of Americannational buildings, e.g. post offices, courthouses, customhouses, fromthe founding of the country through the 1970's)


17/27

17

- BUILDING A NATIONAL IMAGE; ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FORTHE AMERICAN DEMOCRACY, 1789-1912, by Bates Lowery (NationalBuilding Museum 1985) (A coffee table book overview of the federalgovernment's buildings during its first 150 years containing an insightful88 page introduction followed by a selection of drawings done over the

past two centuries by the federal government's varied and frequentlygifted in-house architects)

- FEDERAL BUILDINGS IN CONTEXT: THE ROLE OF DESIGN REVIEWStudies in the History of Art, Volume 50, National Gallery of Art, J. CarterBrown ed. (Washington, 1995) including the new Boston FederalCourthouse as a case study with papers by a judicial client, Woodlock,"Judicial Responsibility in Federal Courthouse Design Review: Intentionsand Aspirations for Boston" and by the project architect, Harry Cobb)

- Dean, The Nations Biggest Landlord Just Found Style,

ARCHITECTURAL RECORD (Feb. 2000) 62 (discussing recent effortsof the U. S. General Services Administration, principally through thecourthouse building program, to increase the quality of design forfederal buildings)

II. THE COURTHOUSE AS A BUILDING TYPE

A. SYMBOLS OF LAW AND JUSTICE

- Symbolism in Architecture: Courtrooms by Allan Greenberg in THEPUBLIC FACE OF ARCHITECTURE: CIVIC CULTURE AND PUBLICSPACES 209-217 (Glazer & Lilla eds. Free Press 1987) (an argumentfor giving primary consideration to the symbolic aspects of thearrangement of a courtroom. This essay is a less technical version oftwo articles on courtroom and courthouse symbolism which Greenbergpublished in Judicature: Greenberg, Selecting a courtroom design, 59Judicature 422 (1976) and Greenberg, Raising "temples of justice", 59Judicature 484 (1976). A companion piece arguing for a moreinnovative courtroom design, derived from planning in the District ofColumbia Superior Court is Malech, Testing a new courtroom, 59Judicature 429 (1976))

- Curtis and Resnik, Images of Justice, 96 Yale L.J. 1727 (1987) (aprovocative consideration of the traditional legal icons and an argumentthat such "images must remain vital and immediate")

- Temples of Justice: The Iconography of Judgment and American Cultureby Michael Kammen in ORIGINS OF THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY:ESSAYS ON THE JUDICIARY ACT OF 1789, 248-280 (Marcus ed.Oxford U. Press 1992) (an overview of the symbolic aspects of American


18/27

18

judicial art and architecture which ultimately concludes that "credible andconsensual judgments are far more vital to the integrity of a politicalculture than its temples of justice--however elegant, however awesome,however austere.")

B. THE EUROPEAN HERITAGE AND EXPERIENCE

- A HISTORY OF BUILDING TYPES by Nikolas Pevsner, (Princeton U.Press 1976) (a classic treatment of the range of building types, twochapters of which trace the law courts as occupants of governmentbuildings from the late twelfth to the late seventeenth century at 27-34,followed by the development of separate law court buildings from theeighteenth century to the present, at 53-62)

- THE LAW COURTS: THE ARCHITECTURE OF GEORGE EDMUNDSTREET by David B. Brownlee (MIT Press 1984) (a book length

treatment of the Victorian era construction of the Royal Courts of Justiceon the Strand in London from the decision to build a new civil courtscomplex, through the selection of the site, the design competition andthe successful efforts of the architect to preserve the integrity of thebuilding in the face of a parsimonious executive ministry)

- IN THE THEATRE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE: THE PALAIS DE JUSTICEIN SECOND EMPIRE PARIS by Katherine Fischer Taylor (Princeton U.Press 1993) (a study of the mid-nineteenth century design of the newwing to the principal courthouse in Paris and the way in which thatdesign both shaped and was shaped by "conflicting notions about thetheory and practice of criminal justice")

- ZODIAC 14 (1996) - An issue of the bilingual (Italian/English)architectural review (focussing on recent courthouse projects principallyin Italy--but including one example each from Spain, the United States,Israel and Argentina and the European Court of Human Rights inStrasbourg--and containing several interesting historical essays)

C. THE MODERN NON-EUROPEAN EXPERIENCE

- Le Corbusier in India: The Symbolism of Chandigarh by William J.R.Curtis in LE CORBUSIER: IDEAS AND FORMS 188-201 (PhaidonPress 1986; paperback ed. 1992) (a chapter in a comprehensive studyof one of the greatest of twentieth century architects, who wascommissioned Prime Minister Nehru to design the High Court,Parliament, Governor's Palace and Secretariat for a new state in therecently independent Republic of India, where he produced "monuments[which] idealize cherished notions of law and government [and] span the


19/27

19

centuries by fusing modern and ancient myths in symbolic forms ofprodigious authenticity.")

- The Acropolis at Bangladesh by Lawrence J. Vale inARCHITECTURE,POWER, AND NATIONAL IDENTITY, 236-271 (esp. 255-56) (Yale U.

Press 1992) (a chapter in a book length study of modern designedcapitals throughout the world, focusing on the work of another of thetwentieth century's greatest architects, Louis Kahn, in the developmentof the governmental complex at Dacca, Bangladesh, where the positionof the courts was over the design process shifted from one of specialemphasis to marginalized to unbuilt)

- THE SUPREME COURT BUILDING, JERUSALEM by Yosef Sharon(Yad Hanadiv, 1993) (English Translation) (a complete treatment of thedevelopment of the magnificent new Israeli Supreme Court buildingopened in 1992, from the inspiration of the Rothschild family, through the

architectural competition, to design, construction and completion)

D. THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE - GENERAL

- Phillips, Designing Justice For All, ARCHITECTURAL RECORD (March1999) 105 (a discussion of current responses--including a portfolio of fivenew federal and state courthouses--to the "problems of computertechnology, security and accessibility [which] have become the drivingfactors in the design of new courthouses.")

- THE AMERICAN COURTHOUSE: PLANNING AND DESIGN FOR THEJUDICIAL PROCESS by the American Bar Association - AmericanInstitute of Architects (ABA 1973; reprinted 1983) (a now somewhatdated reference setting forth standards and planning proceduresprincipally directed at state and local courts but also including afascinating section on historic American courthouses containing picturesand floor plans)

- TWENTY YEARS OF COURTHOUSE DESIGN REVISITED:Supplementto THE AMERICAN COURTHOUSE by the American Bar Associationand The National Center for State Courts (ABA 1993) (an updating, withexamples of projects since 1972, of THE AMERICAN COURTHOUSEcontaining both new and historic renovations of Federal, State andCanadian courthouses)

- A COURTHOUSE CONSERVATION HANDBOOK by the National Trustfor Historic Preservation, (Preservation Press 1976) (an overview of theconsiderations which come into play--and when they should--withrespect to restoration, repair and alteration of courthouse buildings)


20/27

20

- COURT HOUSE, Richard Pare ed. (Horizon Press 1978) (a magnificentphotographic essay on county courthouses throughout the United Statesincluding a lengthy and scholarly appendix by Henry-Russell Hitchcockand William Seale providing an excellent architectural history of thedevelopment of American courthouse design)

E. THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE - BY STATE

- Johnson, Andrist & Stewart, HISTORIC COURTHOUSES OF NEWYORK STATE (Columbia U. Press 1977) (a county-by-county anecdotaland photographic history of New York state courthouses built before1900 and still in existence)

- Robinson, THE PEOPLE'S ARCHITECTURE: TEXAS COURTHOUSES,JAILS AND MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS (Texas State Historical Ass'n1983) (a comprehensive narrative and photographic history of Texas

public architecture focusing on the state's county courthouses)

- Peet and Geller eds., COURTHOUSES OF THE COMMONWEALTH (U.Mass. Press 1984) (a photographic essay regarding the Massachusettsstate courts with an excellent architectural history placing the variouscourthouses within the larger themes of American architecturaldevelopment)

- Van Trump, MAJESTY OF THE LAW: THE COURT HOUSES ofALLEGHENY COUNTY (Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation1988) (a comprehensive history of Pittsburgh's three courthouses since1800 with special emphasis and primary focus on H. H. Richardson'smagisterial 1880 courthouse and the threats to its integrity over theyears)

- James, TEMPLES OF JUSTICE (U. Nevada Press 1994) (the authortraces the development of courthouse structures as a reflection of thedevelopment of Nevada and as "symbols of the community [conveying]the presence of law and authority and a sense of permanence andprosperity")

- Peters & Peters, VIRGINIA'S HISTORIC COURTHOUSES, (UniversityPress of Va., 1995) (a beautifully produced full narrative and colorphotographic treatment, tracing the development of courthouse design infive chronological periods from 1725 to the mid twentieth century)

F. THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE - FEDERAL

- Woodlock, The "Peculiar Embarrassment": An Architectural History ofthe Federal Courts in Massachusetts, 74 Mass.L.Rev. 268 (1989) (an


21/27

21

effort to provide a distinctive history of federal courthouses, a separatetreatment largely ignored in the literature)

- Kazaks, Architectural Archeology: Women in the United StatesCourthouse for the District of Columbia, 83 Geo.L.J. 559 (1995) (a close

analysis of the current District of Columbia federal courthouse withemphasis on the impact of the structure and its appurtenances on theways women and men function in courthouse life)

- ARCHITECTURE (January, 1996) (an issue of The Magazine of theAmerican Institute of Architects devoted to the topic "FederalArchitecture: A New Era," containing articles on the current federalcourthouse construction program)

III. FEDERAL COURTHOUSE ACTIVITY

A. OVERVIEWS

1. The Role of the Federal Courts

- Federal Courts and What They Do, by the Federal Judicial Center(this pamphlet, designed by the FJC to be provided to visitors tofederal courthouses, provides a sound orientation to the work ofthe federal courts)

- COURTS, JUDGES, & POLITICS: AN INTRODUCTION TO THEJUDICIAL PROCESS, Murphy & Pritchett eds. (Random House4th ed. 1985) (the introduction to the section dealing with thefederal courts, at 82-97, and the following readings in thiscollection of writings offer a concise overview of the place of thefederal courts in American judicial organization)

- REPORT OF THE FEDERAL COURTS STUDY COMMITTEE,April 2, 1990, (a collection of recommendations for addressingperceived problems of the federal courts; for the particularlyhardy, the committee's two volumes of subcommittee reports andworking papers are also quite useful)

- LONG RANGE PLAN FOR THE FEDERAL COURTS, December,1995 (a comprehensive plan for the federal courts adopted by theJudicial Conference of the United States to anticipate futurechallenges and opportunities)

- THE FEDERAL COURTS: CHALLENGE AND REFORM byRichard A. Posner (1996) (a challenging discussion by a sitting U.S. Court of Appeals Chief Judge, with an academic background,


22/27

22

outlining the fundamental institutional issues facing the federaljudicial system)

2. Modern Judicial Administration

- Resnik, Managerial Judges, 96 Harv.L.Rev. 374 (1982) (adiscussion of the changing--and increasingly managerial--rolefederal judges are assuming in their jobs; incidentally, this articlecontains a pertinent appendix entitled "The Iconography ofJustice," id. at 446, which is the brief precursor of the articleidentified in Part II.A. supra)

- Owen Fiss, Gilbert Merrill, Patricia Wald, The Bureaucratization ofthe Judiciary, 92 Yale L.J. 1442 (1983) (a symposium in which aYale Law School Professor expresses anxious concerns aboutthe depersonalization of the judicial function and responsive, less

anxious, comments are provided by two Court of Appeals Judges)

B. THE WORK OF THE DISTRICT COURT AND ITS JUDGES

- The Importance of the Trial Judge by Charles Wyzanski, inCOURTS, JUDGES, & POLITICS, 108-110 supra Part III.A.1., (anelegiac letter by the late Chief Judge of the United States DistrictCourt for the District of Massachusetts, declining to be consideredfor the First Circuit and explaining his commitment to remaining atrial judge)

- Wyzanski, A Trial Judge's Freedom and Responsibility, 65 Harv.L. Rev. 1281 (1952) (an article which remains--even after 40years--the best description of the basic responsibilities of the jobof the federal district judge)

- Howard, Judge Harold R. Medina: the "freshman" years, 69Judicature 127 (1985) (part of a biography-in- preparation, which,by focusing on the socialization process for one newly appointedfederal district judge--later to be appointed a court of appeals

judge--captures the nature of the work a lawyer finds and theadjustment which must be made when appointed to the federaltrial bench)

C. THE WORK OF THE COURT OF APPEALS AND ITS JUDGES

- THE WAYS OF A JUDGE: REFLECTIONS FROM THE FEDERALAPPELLATE BENCH by Frank M. Coffin (Houghton Mifflin 1980) (anextraordinary insight into the modern workings of federal Courts ofAppeals by a judge whose duty station was not the headquarters city forhis court)


23/27


24/27

- THE JUDGE'S BOOK by the American Bar Association NationalConference of State Trial Judges (this non-technical book is "intended toprovide both a rapid orientation for the new trial judge and refreshmentand renewal for the experience jurist" with "thoughts on the life of a

judge, the judge's work, techniques of judging and the nature of the

judicial profession.")

B. STATE JUDICIAL PERSPECTIVES

- DOING JUSTICE by Robert Satter (Simon & Schuster 1990) (a clearand comprehensive discussion by a Connecticut Superior Court Judgeof what it means to be and what is involved with being a state trial judge;described by novelist William Styron as evidencing an "abidingawareness that the judge and the judged are bound inseparably by theircommon humanity.")

- IN PURSUIT OF JUSTICE: REFLECTIONS OF A STATE SUPREMECOURT JUSTICE by Joseph R. Grodin (U. of California Press 1989)(Retired U. S. Supreme Court Justice William Brennan has observedthat this "illuminating" book of personal reminiscence by a CaliforniaState Supreme Court Justice, who failed to be reelected because of hisopposition to the death penalty, provides "a rare glimpse of the innerworkings of a first-rate judicial mind" at the state appellate level.)

CONCLUSION

[The courthouse] was theirs, bigger than anybecause it was the sum of all and, being the sum ofall, it must raise all of their hopes and aspirationslevel with its own aspirant and soaring cupola, sothat, sweating and tireless and unflagging, theywould look about at one another a little shyly, a littleamazed, with something like humility too, as if theywere realising, or were for a moment at leastcapable of believing, that men, all men, includingthemselves, were a little better, purer maybe even,than they had thought, expected, or even needed to

be.

-W. Faulkner, REQUIEM FOR A NUN 37 (1950).


25/27

25

JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION PAPERSPrepared by

HON. MR. JUSTICE RD NICHOLSONFederal Court of Australia

Issues in Court Security paper presented to the 11th Conference of Chief Justices ofAsia and the Pacific, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, 22 March 2005 published in(2005) 15(1) Journal of Judicial Administration 17.

Judicial Independence and Judicial Corruption: Further Developments delivered to the10th Conference of Chief Justices of Asia and the Pacific Conference, Tokyo, 2003.Yearbook of the International Commission of Jurists 2004 p 303.

Publication of Judicial Decisions and Availability of Law Reports in the Asia/PacificRegion delivered to the 10th Conference of Chief Justices of Asia and the Pacific

Conference, Tokyo, 2003. (2004) 13(4) Journal of Judicial Administration 201

The Paperless Court?: Technology and the Courts in the Region, presented to theIndonesia Supreme Court, 30 January 2002 published in (2002) 12(2) Journal of Judicial

Administration 63

The Paperless Court?: Technology and the Courts in the Region, Centenary Lecture tothe Philippines Supreme Court, 26 September 2001 published in (2002) 12(2) Journal ofJudicial Administration 63. Also published in The Supreme Court of the PhilippinesCentenary Lecture Series, I July 2000-June 2001, II September 2001-June 2002.

Judicial Ethics and Corruption: Issues for Discussion, presentation to the 9

th

Conference of Chief Justices of Asia and the Pacific, 5 October 2001 published (2001)11(2) Journal of Judicial Administration 69

The Legal Concept of Judicial Corruption (2001) IX CIJL Yearbook35

The Impact of the Entry into the EEC Treaty on United Kingdom Courts and Judges,published (2001) 10(4) Journal of Judicial Administration 227

Judicial Training in the Asian Region(2000) 8(4)Australian Law Librarian 322

Courts Look at their Publics, IBA Judges Forum, May 2000, p 4

Design Guidelines: Their Value and Development (2000) 9(3) Journal of JudicialAdministration 127

Capturing and Maintaining Public Confidence in Courts (2000) VIII, CIJL Yearbook43


26/27


27/27

Thacker 2005 Use of Courthouses in Reform Programmes

Documents