Are certain characteristics of dispute resolution procedures associated with higher levels of procedural justice? We address this question through a quantitative analysis of real-world experiences of 194 professional legal representatives with the objection procedures of 81 Dutch administrative authorities. In our analysis, two general procedural characteristics are taken into account: the involvement of an independent third party and the extent to which the procedure is focused on the conciliation of competing interests. The involvement of an independent third party was not associated with higher levels of procedural justice. Procedures that were perceived to be more focused on the conciliation of competing interests were evaluated as more procedurally just, even more so in disputes where the administrative authority was perceived to have a higher degree of discretion and in disputes that ended in a negative result for the litigant.

争议解决程序的某些特征是否与更高水平的程序正义相关？我们通过对 194 名专业法律代表的现实经验以及 81 个荷兰行政当局的异议程序进行定量分析来解决这个问题。在我们的分析中，考虑了两个一般程序特征：独立第三方的参与以及程序在多大程度上注重协调竞争利益。独立第三方的参与与更高水平的程序正义无关。那些被认为更侧重于调解利益冲突的程序被认为在程序上更加公正，在行政当局被认为拥有更高程度自由裁量权的争议以及以负面结果结束的争议中更是如此。当事人。