BUILDING A STRONG, INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY: JUDICIOUS

USE OF COURTHOUSES IN JUDICIAL REFORM PROGRAMS∗

Mr. 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 and
economic improvement efforts in developing countries around the world.1 While
there are obviously many elements necessary for the success of such efforts,
organizations planning and implementing judicial reform measures have found that
such initiatives cannot be fully implemented without adequate support infrastructure,
of which appropriate Judicial facilities are a necessary part. Since there will be a
facilities component of almost every Judicial Reform program—whether anticipated
or 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 the

use of automated systems for case management and judicial research--which
improve the efficiency and accountability of the judiciary, and contribute to the
transparency of court operations. Automated systems cannot be
implemented without appropriate automation equipment. Such equipment
must have adequate facilities in which to operate: water-tight spaces,
adequate electrical power, and communications, both within the facility and to
the 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 “juvenile”
proceedings, and reorganization of support staff. All of these activities
require the reconfiguration of existing or construction of new spaces to
accommodate them. The appropriate layout of work spaces--both in size and
arrangement--contribute significantly to the efficiency of court staff.
Courtrooms appropriately sized and configured contribute to public access to
the Judicial system and to such initiatives as the use of juries in trials. Even
something as minor as adequate signage, making it easy for the public to find
the right courtroom or clerical office, increases the public's access to the legal
system.

∗
Presented during the International 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 human
rights; independence of the judiciary; transparent, open, responsive and accountable functioning of
the 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.
 • Judicial Independence While an independent Judiciary does not have to
have complete control of all aspects of Judicial facilities planning, design,
construction, operation and maintenance, Judiciaries cannot be truly
independent if another branch of the government does has absolute control of
its facilities. Adequate facilities are necessary for the administration of justice
and 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, and
the litigants in cases, is a primary objective. Appropriately designed court
spaces 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 sites
used to showcase, test, and train before full implementation, requiring
appropriate spaces to be created. Depending on the nature of the
demonstration site, the creation of appropriate spaces might require extensive
rehabilitation of existing facilities or construction of new facilities.

• New Locations Providing access to justice might mean establishing courts in

locations that are not presently served—sometimes in very remote areas of
the country. Facilities for the new court operations often have to be
constructed.

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 project
implementation), Judicial reform program planners must be aware of the potential
problems 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 Reform

Programs, useful for showcasing many other components of the programs and for
promoting program goals, it’s important to understand the peculiar characteristics of
real estate assets. There are several characteristics of real estate assets that
distinguish them from other program components, such as automation equipment
and 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;

2
 • the location-specific nature of the asset; and
• the specialized industries associated with real estate assets (for design,
construction, management, etc., each requiring specialized technical
education).

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 national
character, drawing on the country’s or the world’s history of “public”
architecture
• expected to be used for a long time
• expected to contribute positively to the economic development of the location
where they’re built
• expected to contribute positively to the architectural fabric of the specific
community and to the country where they’re built

Early in the planning stages, therefore, those planning Judicial Reform Programs
must think carefully about the potential costs and schedule impacts that facilities
projects will have, as well as the positive contributions those facilities projects can
make to the success of the program. Every facility project should be directly related
to a goal of the overall Judicial Reform Program, and included only after careful
consideration of alternative strategies.

Alternatives to Construction

Since the facilities component of Judicial reform programs has such an impact on the
program’s schedule and cost, program planners should be prudent in developing it.
Investing in facilities—while inevitable—should be the first choice of the project
planner. Alternatives should be considered very carefully in the planning phase and
during implementation. Alternatives to facilities investment include

• Revising work practices For example, if mounds of paper records are a

major problem in most courthouses, an aggressive records management
program should be undertaken before investing in building additional space to
house the records.

• Substituting automation and technology It might be possible to make

greater use of video conferencing for some court activities, such as initial
arraignments or interviewing defendants in custody at the jail site. The use of
video conferencing might also substitute for building new court facilities at
remote locations (wireless/satellite linking technology is rapidly maturing to
permit use even in remote areas with no dependable electricity and no
telephones). In many countries electronic access to the court system for filing
documents or requesting information has a number of benefits, as well as

3
 improving public access to the court system, including reducing the number of
people required to physically come to a courthouse (and the space needed for
them) and eliminating many paper records (and the space needed to store
them).

• Mobile courts. Many Judicial reform programs encourage the use of mobile
courts (buses or boats) to bring the court to remote locations on a periodic
basis rather than investing in building new facilities.

Impact of the Facilities Component on the Program’s Scope, Schedule, and

Budget

It is critical that program planners have an assessment of the general conditions of

the current inventory of Judicial facilities when developing the program’s scope,
schedule, and budget. For example, as discussed above, implementing automation
projects require weather tight facilities and adequate electrical systems. Thus, it
would be useful for planners to know when developing the program’s budget and
schedule how many of the current facilities have severe roof leaks and inadequate
electrical systems. At the same time, planners should assess the ability of the
government to execute the facilities component, whether the government expects to
do the work in-house or contract for the design and construction.2

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

• rehabilitating or constructing Judicial facilities is very expensive (particularly

compared 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 from
location to location to provide any “rule of thumb” estimate for project planning. Such
factors as the cost of land, materials, and labor are very specific to a particular
region. Thus, a likely or rough cost estimate for program budgeting purposes must
be developed from the beginning specifically for every program plan, based on local
costs, and refined as the program scope becomes final.

It is somewhat easier to predict the time that will be required for rehabilitating or
constructing a Judicial facility based on the contracting procedures required of most
organizations implementing Judicial reform programs and the norms for the
construction trades:

• 9 to 14 months for projects up to 2000 square meters (2 to 3 months to

develop the scope of work or terms of reference and contract for the design; 3
months to design; 2 months to contract for construction; and 6 months to
construct);

2
This issue is discussed in more detail below.

4
 • 3 to 5 years for projects of 10,000 square meters and greater (3 to 6 months
to develop the scope of work or terms of reference; 6 months to design; 3
months 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. For
example, some countries have a well-established design/construction industry, with
many capable firms, an adequate pool of skilled labor, and readily available
construction supplies; some countries do not. Some countries enjoy weather
conditions that will permit year-round construction schedules; some countries do not.
Some countries have a transportation infrastructure that permits the easy and quick
movement of construction materials to construction sites; some countries do not.
Some court facilities projects will have little underlying environmental impact; other
projects will require substantial assessment and remediation, resulting in sometimes
very 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 than
the outside funding organization.4 Some countries will have the capacity to proceed
with several projects simultaneously; in some countries, there is capacity to execute
only one project at a time. So, for example, rather than a program plan schedule to
accomplish the rehabilitation of 7 court locations in a 12 month period for installing
automation 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 an
overall Judicial reform program schedule, however. As discussed in more detail
below, a number of preliminary steps are necessary during the planning stage of the
Judicial reform program: an assessment of facilities conditions; prioritizing work in
terms of project goals; and developing design standards. These activities can each
take several months, and often must proceed sequentially.

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

In addition, the most effective use of a facilities component recognizes that a more
comprehensive facilities component should aim to make the Judiciary an active and
equal partner with the executive and legislative components of government in
developing and managing a court facilities program to ensure that the resulting
facilities 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 of

indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contracts, and the use of “pattern” building designs
4
The funding or donor organization’s contracting and financial controls will probably be mandated for
use and they might be very different from the normal government practice, requiring a learning curve
and additional time in the project schedule.

5
Ensuring that the Judiciary has the capacity to perform this role should be a clearly
stated 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 and

document how it works within the courthouse, including the typical activities that
occur in each type of space; how people circulate within the space and where
circulation must be restricted; which groups or functions must be adjacent to
which others; the typical furniture, both fixed and movable, likely to be found in
each space; the use of special equipment, such as computers and video
displays, that will affect electrical, telecommunications, and lighting; and so on.
The Judiciary must examine not only how the space is used today, but also how
activities are likely to change in the future. For example, will there be greater use
of technologies? Will clerks now assigned to individual judges’ offices be
consolidated into a common work area? Will there be more or fewer criminal
defendants in custody during trial?

• Space Standards/Design Guide Once the Judiciary documents its functional

needs, design professionals can translate those functional needs into space
standards, i.e., the type and amount of space needed to house the functions. By
using space standards, the Judiciary is able to assess the adequacy of its current
locations and to project the size and configuration of its future needs. Space
standards can be incorporated into a Design Guide that describes functional
needs, the size and characteristics of individual spaces in a courthouse, and
provide typical architectural layouts for the use of Judges, staff, and design
professionals and builders for specific projects. The Design Guide serves as a
tool, also, for the Judiciary to control the design of new space. 5

Developing a Design Guide in a collaborative way, drawing into the process

judges and staff from every court level, has the added benefit of being a powerful
cohesion building tool and an opportunity to disseminate information about how
the units will work in a “reformed” Judiciary.

• Long Range Facilities Plans Each current courthouse in the Judiciary’s

inventory must be assessed for its capability to provide space for the activities of
Judges, staff, litigants, members of the public, jurors, and others who visit them—
not 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 new
activities. Thus, the current facilities assessment will include evaluation of all
building systems and structures, and of the functionality of the facilities, e.g., are

5 Appendix B shows a topical outline of a typical Design Guide. A number of countries have

developed Design Guides for Judicial space in the course of implementing Judicial reform programs,
including Venezuela, Guatemala, Montenegro, and the Philippines. Examining design guides
developed by Great Britain and the United States (US Courts Design Guide for Federal courts and
The Courthouse: Planning and Design Guide for Court Facilities of the National Center for State
Courts) might also be helpful. See Appendixes C and D for a bibliography and some useful websites.

6
 the courtrooms adequate, is there secure circulation for judges, and so on.
Information about the facilities current capabilities must also be examined against
the expected future workload and number and type of staff. From this effort the
Judiciary will know for each facility in its inventory the work that must be done
and the cost to make it useful for current and post-reform activities and an
understanding of how long each current facility will serve before it must be
replaced with a new facility. It will also be apparent which facilities cannot
economically be modernized and renovated, or expanded, and should be
replaced 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 year
well into the future. Such a Capital Plan will enumerate the locations (and size
and cost) of where new facilities must be built, and the locations (and cost) where
renovations, modernization, and expansions are needed. Depending on the
degree of autonomy the Judiciary enjoys in submitting a budget request to the
legislative branch of government, close coordination might be required with
another government unit, such as the Ministry of Justice or the Ministry of
Finance and Budget. Even if the Judiciary makes a direct budget submission, the
Judiciary must be sensitive to the government’s budget deadlines and to the
timeframes required for designing and constructing facilities.

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

If another unit of government, such as a department of public works, is to be

responsible for executing the capital plan (designing, constructing, and operating
Judicial facilities) the capacity of that unit to accomplish the Judicial work must be
taken into account in developing a yearly schedule of projects.

The Capital Plan must also account for the long-term operation and maintenance
of the Judiciary’s facilities. Rehabilitated and newly constructed facilities can
quickly deteriorate if they are not maintained and major repairs (roof
replacements, for example) made when needed. Since an adequate repair and
maintenance budget is accepted to be 2 to 3 percent of the replacement cost of a
facility, it can be a major cost factor in a Judiciary’s budget. Most countries
(including the United States) typically do not budget enough money to adequately
maintain and repair its public buildings. Thus, the Judiciary must provide in its
capital planning process a method for prioritizing and allocating the funding that is
actually provided by the government each year for this purpose.

6
A preliminary assessment of the Judiciary’s inventory of facilities should be completed in the
planning phase of the facilities component of Judicial Reform Program to estimate the costs and
impact on overall schedule. A much more detailed assessment by qualified engineering professionals
should be completed early in the program implementation. Appendix A contains a suggested
checklist of information that should be collected.

7
• In-house Staff for Oversight and Maintenance: It must also be recognized that
a comprehensive facilities program requires a long-term commitment—both for
maintaining and updating the components and for implementing the capital plan.
Thus, while the technical skills needed for developing a capital plan, and for
designing, constructing, and operating facilities can be obtained by contract with
private sector firms, or from another government unit, such as a department of
public works, the Judiciary must have a staff of trained professionals to define
requirements, oversee the contracts, and evaluate the results.

Courthouse Design Issues

Courthouses should be designed to promote the dignity and importance of the

Judicial 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 be
made. Thus, if program planners are selecting locations to serve as pilot or
demonstration sites, careful evaluation must be made of the extent to which facilities
can be rehabilitated to showcase the program’s goals.

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

• Scale The tremendous growth in both judicial officers and support staff in many
countries 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 the
primary challenge to the design architect.

• Nature of the space While there has been a significant increase in the number
of judges in many countries during the last 20 years, in terms of percentage of
increase, the growth in the support staff has often been even more significant.
Consequently, the greater percentage of the modern courthouse is composed of
general-purpose office space—perhaps 80 to 85%. Thus, as with any modern
office space, the design architect must pay particular attention to the functionality
of the space and to its flexibility. Perhaps more than most businesses, the
business side of the courts and how that business is accomplished are changing
continuously and rapidly. The office space must be designed to expand to
accommodate additional staff and to be easily reconfigured to accommodate new
functions, such as even greater use of automation and alternative dispute
resolution.

• Technology in the courtroom and the courthouse The design architect must
be sensitive to automation issues applicable both to the courtroom and the whole
courthouse throughout the design process: the court’s current and future needs,
and the design Implications/costs and alternatives for various technologies.

In the courtroom, technologies are increasingly used for presentation of

testimony, presentation of evidence, taking the record, access to ancillary

8
 information, in-court case administration, public access, and security. In each of
these areas, there are design implications for lighting, sightlines, casework
design, electrical, cabling, and telecommunications. Throughout

the courthouse, technologies are used in the court’s business processes;

electronic filing; case administration; recordkeeping; public access to court
information; security; telecommunications; and building operating/fire and life
safety systems. While the design architect will most often not be required to
design or specify the automation used in a new courthouse7 (except for the
building operating and life/fire safety systems), he must be knowledgeable about
both the current and future uses of technology throughout the courthouse and
incorporate that knowledge into every aspect of the design so that the resulting
facility 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. A
secure courthouse requires much more than providing separated circulation
patterns for visitors, judges and staff, and defendants in custody. The design
architect must also understand the work processes of the court: who visits the
courthouse, for example, and how the staff moves within the space. In order to
provide greatest flexibility for future expansion—adding courtrooms and judges’
chambers, for example—the security requirements for such expansion must be in
the initial design. The design architect must examine with the Judiciary the
specific 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; electronic

systems; and security staff. Good design addresses courthouse approaches
e.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; restricted
access plans; symbolism; construction techniques and materials; and electronic
systems, e.g., cameras/monitors, locks, screening. Again, as with technology
used in the courthouse, the design architect will not have to design or specify all
the courthouse’s security features and systems.8 He will, however, have the key
role in ensuring that all threats are addressed in the design process and that the
security 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 requirements
into small spaces.

7 Design of the technology and systems is now most often done by specialty consultants. This
situation creates the need to ensure careful coordination of the technology consultants and design
architects from the beginning of the design.
8 As with technology, specialty consultants are increasingly used for security system design in

projects. The coordination of the overall building system design, the technology design and the
security systems design must be done from the beginning of the project and can be expected to be
the source of some unpleasant and expensive surprises as the project nears completion.

9
Fortunately, adequate and appropriate facilities have been part of many judicial
reform programs for some time. Therefore, there is an impressive portfolio of
completed projects to examine, revealing certain common characteristics suitable for
replication in both large and small courthouses:

• The exteriors of the new court facilities are very attractively but simply
designed, reflecting both the regional architecture and the importance of the
public facility
• The facilities are given prominent locations in the towns where they’re built
and are easily accessible to the public
• Construction materials are inexpensive, easily available, and durable,
requiring a minimum of maintenance, for example, concrete, tile, sheet metal
roofing
• Interior partitioning uses drywall, permitting easy rearrangement if ever
necessary
• The interior layout is simple, well defined, and functional; space sizes are
adequate and not cramped
• The circulation pattern in the larger courthouses is well defined, separating
with architectural barriers and design the judges, staff, public, and prisoners
• There is adequate storage space, both for supplies and records, and for
evidence
• Building systems are kept simple, for example, innovative natural ventilation
techniques and natural lighting
• In the locations likely to expand, thought has been given to providing the
future expansion space

Conclusion

Facilities projects (both renovation and modernization of existing court facilities and
construction of new facilities) are an important component (whether planned or
unplanned) of most Judicial reform programs, useful for showcasing aspects of the
program and for promoting program goals. The facilities component, however, has
many characteristics that are very different from other program components. Those
planning Judicial reform programs, therefore, very early must think carefully about
the potential costs and schedule impacts that facilities projects can have, as well the
positive contributions that facilities projects can make.

---oo0oo---

10
 Appendix A

CHECKLIST FOR FACILITY SURVEYS: DESCRIPTION, CONDITIONS,

COSTS

1. General
a. Location/address
b. Owner
c. Surrounding context
d. Age
e. Occupants (by Organization for both Judicial and Non Judicial
occupants)
f. Number of personnel (by Organization and function)
g. Number of floors
h. Floor plans/drawings

2. Exterior

a. Siting/setbacks
b. Parking/vehicle control
c. Landscaping
d. Building Façade design and materials
e. Type of Roof
f. Exterior lighting
g. 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 usable
b. Occupants (offices) on each floor
c. Interior construction
i. Floor
ii. Ceiling
iii. Partitions
d. Access controls
e. Individual offices
i. Occupants
ii. Functions
iii. Adjacency requirements
iv. Electrical Services (size of circuits and number of outlets)
v. Lighting (type and illumination)
vi. Telephones (number of lines and number of instruments)

11
 vii. Furnishings (types and size of equipment)
viii.
f. Building Services
i. Toilets
ii. Janitor closets
iii. Storage
iv. Service entrances
v. For telephone, water, electrical, heating, cooling, sewage
1. total building
2. floor capacity
3. distribution type

4. General Conditions and Major Problems

a. Exterior
i. façade
ii. windows
iii. roof
iv. foundation
b. Interior systems
i. Electrical
ii. Plumbing
iii. Heating and air conditioning
iv. Sewage
c. Other (specify)
d. Estimated repair costs

5. Projected Case Load and Staffing

a. 5 years
b. 10 years

12
 Appendix B

DESIGN GUIDES: SAMPLE TOPICAL OUTLINE

Courthouse exterior

Siting/location

Appearance

Construction materials

Landscaping

Interior spaces (for each space describe: activities/functions; typical

furniture/sizes; appropriate office sizes; appropriate adjacencies)

Main Entrance/Public Lobby

Courtroom

Judge’s 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

Façade design/appearance

Built-in furniture

Signage

Heating/air conditioning

Handicapped accessibility

Security

Exterior and vehicular control

Separated interior circulation: public; prisoners; Judges; staff

13

Entrance screening

Emergency lighting

Interior controls

14
 Appendix C

BIBLIOGRAPHIES

GETTING TO KNOW EACH OTHER:

Judges and Architects
Confronting
Courthouse Projects

A Bibliography
of Extracurricular Readings
Beyond the

15
 Design Guides

Compiled by
Hon. Douglas P. Woodlock
United States District Judge
District of Massachusetts
For The Judiciary: Policy, Governance and Inter Branch Relations
Harvard 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 circumference
like a single cloud in its ring of horizon, laying its vast
shadow 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 of
the passions and lusts, repository and guardian of the
aspirations and the hopes; rising course by brick course
during that first summer, simply square, simplest Georgian
colonial . . . since, as the architect had told them, they had
no money to buy bad taste with nor even anything from
which to copy what bad taste might still have been within
their compass;

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

Note: The quotidian details of court design are prescribed to a greater or lesser
degree 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 Judicial
Conference of the United States and available from the Government Printing Office
and the Administrative Office of the U. S. Courts. An overview of state court
guidelines is found in THE COURTHOUSE: A PLANNING AND DESIGN GUIDE FOR
COURT FACILITIES (National Center for State Courts 1991).

I. THE BUILDINGS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

- THE FEDERAL PRESENCE: ARCHITECTURE, POLITICS, AND

SYMBOLS IN UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT BUILDING by Lois
Craig & The Staff of the Federal Architecture Project of the National
Endowment for the Arts, (MIT Press, 1978, paperback ed. 1984) (a
thorough photographic essay providing a complete history of American
national buildings, e.g. post offices, courthouses, customhouses, from
the founding of the country through the 1970's)

16
 - BUILDING A NATIONAL IMAGE; ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR
THE AMERICAN DEMOCRACY, 1789-1912, by Bates Lowery (National
Building Museum 1985) (A coffee table book overview of the federal
government's buildings during its first 150 years containing an insightful
88 page introduction followed by a selection of drawings done over the
past two centuries by the federal government's varied and frequently
gifted in-house architects)

- FEDERAL BUILDINGS IN CONTEXT: THE ROLE OF DESIGN REVIEW

Studies in the History of Art, Volume 50, National Gallery of Art, J. Carter
Brown ed. (Washington, 1995) including the new Boston Federal
Courthouse as a case study with papers by a judicial client, Woodlock,
"Judicial Responsibility in Federal Courthouse Design Review: Intentions
and 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 efforts
of the U. S. General Services Administration, principally through the
courthouse building program, to increase the quality of design for
federal buildings)

II. THE COURTHOUSE AS A BUILDING TYPE

A. SYMBOLS OF LAW AND JUSTICE

- Symbolism in Architecture: Courtrooms by Allan Greenberg in THE

PUBLIC FACE OF ARCHITECTURE: CIVIC CULTURE AND PUBLIC
SPACES 209-217 (Glazer & Lilla eds. Free Press 1987) (an argument
for giving primary consideration to the symbolic aspects of the
arrangement of a courtroom. This essay is a less technical version of
two articles on courtroom and courthouse symbolism which Greenberg
published in Judicature: Greenberg, Selecting a courtroom design, 59
Judicature 422 (1976) and Greenberg, Raising "temples of justice", 59
Judicature 484 (1976). A companion piece arguing for a more
innovative courtroom design, derived from planning in the District of
Columbia Superior Court is Malech, Testing a new courtroom, 59
Judicature 429 (1976))

- Curtis and Resnik, Images of Justice, 96 Yale L.J. 1727 (1987) (a

provocative consideration of the traditional legal icons and an argument
that such "images must remain vital and immediate")

- Temples of Justice: The Iconography of Judgment and American Culture

by 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

17
 judicial art and architecture which ultimately concludes that "credible and
consensual judgments are far more vital to the integrity of a political
culture 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, two
chapters of which trace the law courts as occupants of government
buildings from the late twelfth to the late seventeenth century at 27-34,
followed by the development of separate law court buildings from the
eighteenth century to the present, at 53-62)

- THE LAW COURTS: THE ARCHITECTURE OF GEORGE EDMUND

STREET by David B. Brownlee (MIT Press 1984) (a book length
treatment of the Victorian era construction of the Royal Courts of Justice
on the Strand in London from the decision to build a new civil courts
complex, through the selection of the site, the design competition and
the successful efforts of the architect to preserve the integrity of the
building in the face of a parsimonious executive ministry)

- IN THE THEATRE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE: THE PALAIS DE JUSTICE

IN SECOND EMPIRE PARIS by Katherine Fischer Taylor (Princeton U.
Press 1993) (a study of the mid-nineteenth century design of the new
wing to the principal courthouse in Paris and the way in which that
design both shaped and was shaped by "conflicting notions about the
theory and practice of criminal justice")

- ZODIAC 14 (1996) - An issue of the bilingual (Italian/English)

architectural review (focussing on recent courthouse projects principally
in Italy--but including one example each from Spain, the United States,
Israel and Argentina and the European Court of Human Rights in
Strasbourg--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 (Phaidon
Press 1986; paperback ed. 1992) (a chapter in a comprehensive study
of one of the greatest of twentieth century architects, who was
commissioned Prime Minister Nehru to design the High Court,
Parliament, Governor's Palace and Secretariat for a new state in the
recently independent Republic of India, where he produced "monuments
[which] idealize cherished notions of law and government [and] span the

18
 centuries by fusing modern and ancient myths in symbolic forms of
prodigious 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 designed
capitals throughout the world, focusing on the work of another of the
twentieth century's greatest architects, Louis Kahn, in the development
of the governmental complex at Dacca, Bangladesh, where the position
of the courts was over the design process shifted from one of special
emphasis to marginalized to unbuilt)

- THE SUPREME COURT BUILDING, JERUSALEM by Yosef Sharon

(Yad Hanadiv, 1993) (English Translation) (a complete treatment of the
development of the magnificent new Israeli Supreme Court building
opened 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 (March

1999) 105 (a discussion of current responses--including a portfolio of five
new federal and state courthouses--to the "problems of computer
technology, security and accessibility [which] have become the driving
factors in the design of new courthouses.")

- THE AMERICAN COURTHOUSE: PLANNING AND DESIGN FOR THE

JUDICIAL PROCESS by the American Bar Association - American
Institute of Architects (ABA 1973; reprinted 1983) (a now somewhat
dated reference setting forth standards and planning procedures
principally directed at state and local courts but also including a
fascinating section on historic American courthouses containing pictures
and floor plans)

- TWENTY YEARS OF COURTHOUSE DESIGN REVISITED:Supplement

to THE AMERICAN COURTHOUSE by the American Bar Association
and The National Center for State Courts (ABA 1993) (an updating, with
examples of projects since 1972, of THE AMERICAN COURTHOUSE
containing both new and historic renovations of Federal, State and
Canadian courthouses)

- A COURTHOUSE CONSERVATION HANDBOOK by the National Trust

for Historic Preservation, (Preservation Press 1976) (an overview of the
considerations which come into play--and when they should--with
respect to restoration, repair and alteration of courthouse buildings)

19
- COURT HOUSE, Richard Pare ed. (Horizon Press 1978) (a magnificent
photographic essay on county courthouses throughout the United States
including a lengthy and scholarly appendix by Henry-Russell Hitchcock
and William Seale providing an excellent architectural history of the
development of American courthouse design)

E. THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE - BY STATE

- Johnson, Andrist & Stewart, HISTORIC COURTHOUSES OF NEW

YORK STATE (Columbia U. Press 1977) (a county-by-county anecdotal
and photographic history of New York state courthouses built before
1900 and still in existence)

- Robinson, THE PEOPLE'S ARCHITECTURE: TEXAS COURTHOUSES,

JAILS AND MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS (Texas State Historical Ass'n
1983) (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 Massachusetts
state courts with an excellent architectural history placing the various
courthouses within the larger themes of American architectural
development)

- Van Trump, MAJESTY OF THE LAW: THE COURT HOUSES of

ALLEGHENY COUNTY (Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation
1988) (a comprehensive history of Pittsburgh's three courthouses since
1800 with special emphasis and primary focus on H. H. Richardson's
magisterial 1880 courthouse and the threats to its integrity over the
years)

- James, TEMPLES OF JUSTICE (U. Nevada Press 1994) (the author

traces the development of courthouse structures as a reflection of the
development of Nevada and as "symbols of the community [conveying]
the presence of law and authority and a sense of permanence and
prosperity")

- Peters & Peters, VIRGINIA'S HISTORIC COURTHOUSES, (University

Press of Va., 1995) (a beautifully produced full narrative and color
photographic treatment, tracing the development of courthouse design in
five chronological periods from 1725 to the mid twentieth century)

F. THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE - FEDERAL

- Woodlock, The "Peculiar Embarrassment": An Architectural History of

the Federal Courts in Massachusetts, 74 Mass.L.Rev. 268 (1989) (an

20
 effort to provide a distinctive history of federal courthouses, a separate
treatment largely ignored in the literature)

- Kazaks, Architectural Archeology: Women in the United States

Courthouse for the District of Columbia, 83 Geo.L.J. 559 (1995) (a close
analysis of the current District of Columbia federal courthouse with
emphasis on the impact of the structure and its appurtenances on the
ways women and men function in courthouse life)

- ARCHITECTURE (January, 1996) (an issue of The Magazine of the

American Institute of Architects devoted to the topic "Federal
Architecture: A New Era," containing articles on the current federal
courthouse 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 to
federal courthouses, provides a sound orientation to the work of
the federal courts)

- COURTS, JUDGES, & POLITICS: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE

JUDICIAL PROCESS, Murphy & Pritchett eds. (Random House
4th ed. 1985) (the introduction to the section dealing with the
federal courts, at 82-97, and the following readings in this
collection of writings offer a concise overview of the place of the
federal courts in American judicial organization)

- REPORT OF THE FEDERAL COURTS STUDY COMMITTEE,

April 2, 1990, (a collection of recommendations for addressing
perceived problems of the federal courts; for the particularly
hardy, the committee's two volumes of subcommittee reports and
working papers are also quite useful)

- LONG RANGE PLAN FOR THE FEDERAL COURTS, December,

1995 (a comprehensive plan for the federal courts adopted by the
Judicial Conference of the United States to anticipate future
challenges and opportunities)

- THE FEDERAL COURTS: CHALLENGE AND REFORM by

Richard A. Posner (1996) (a challenging discussion by a sitting U.
S. Court of Appeals Chief Judge, with an academic background,

21
 outlining the fundamental institutional issues facing the federal
judicial system)

2. Modern Judicial Administration

- Resnik, Managerial Judges, 96 Harv.L.Rev. 374 (1982) (a

discussion of the changing--and increasingly managerial--role
federal judges are assuming in their jobs; incidentally, this article
contains a pertinent appendix entitled "The Iconography of
Justice," id. at 446, which is the brief precursor of the article
identified in Part II.A. supra)

- Owen Fiss, Gilbert Merrill, Patricia Wald, The Bureaucratization of

the Judiciary, 92 Yale L.J. 1442 (1983) (a symposium in which a
Yale Law School Professor expresses anxious concerns about
the 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, in

COURTS, JUDGES, & POLITICS, 108-110 supra Part III.A.1., (an
elegiac letter by the late Chief Judge of the United States District
Court for the District of Massachusetts, declining to be considered
for the First Circuit and explaining his commitment to remaining a
trial judge)

- Wyzanski, A Trial Judge's Freedom and Responsibility, 65 Harv.

L. Rev. 1281 (1952) (an article which remains--even after 40
years--the best description of the basic responsibilities of the job
of the federal district judge)

- Howard, Judge Harold R. Medina: the "freshman" years, 69

Judicature 127 (1985) (part of a biography-in- preparation, which,
by focusing on the socialization process for one newly appointed
federal district judge--later to be appointed a court of appeals
judge--captures the nature of the work a lawyer finds and the
adjustment which must be made when appointed to the federal
trial bench)

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

- THE WAYS OF A JUDGE: REFLECTIONS FROM THE FEDERAL

APPELLATE BENCH by Frank M. Coffin (Houghton Mifflin 1980) (an
extraordinary insight into the modern workings of federal Courts of
Appeals by a judge whose duty station was not the headquarters city for
his court)

22
 - ON APPEAL: COURTS, LAWYERING, AND JUDGING by Frank M.
Coffin (W.W. Norton & Co. 1994) (returning to the issue of the distinctive
role of appellate courts, the author of "THE WAYS OF A JUDGE "
looks at our system of appellate justice--its basic values and its place
among competing systems)

- LEARNED HAND'S COURT by Marvin Schick (Johns Hopkins Press,

1970) (a fascinating volume which uses private papers to explore the
dynamics among appellate court judges serving on what was during this
period the most highly respected federal court, apart from the Supreme
Court)

- LEARNED HAND: THE MAN AND THE JUDGE by Gerald

Gunther(Knopf 1994) (the masterful and definitive biography of the
"greatest judge never to be appointed to the Supreme Court," vividly and
intelligibly capturing his complex personal, intellectual and professional
life and times)

IV. JUDICIAL ACTIVITY GENERALLY

A. GENERAL

- THE JUDICIAL PROCESS by Henry J. Abraham (Oxford U. Press 6th

ed. 1993) (a comprehensive overview, the "text examines the theory,
practice and people behind the judicial process in the United States,
England and France" with emphasis on the structure of and the political,
legal and governmental role played by American judicial systems).

- HANDBOOK FOR JUDGES by the American Judicature Society (this

"anthology of inspirational and educational readings for judges" is
designed to provide an "invitation to reflection" about what it means to be
"charged with the awesome responsibility of resolving disputes equitably
and determining guilt or innocence justly.")

23
- THE JUDGE'S BOOK by the American Bar Association National
Conference of State Trial Judges (this non-technical book is "intended to
provide both a rapid orientation for the new trial judge and refreshment
and 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 clear

and comprehensive discussion by a Connecticut Superior Court Judge
of what it means to be and what is involved with being a state trial judge;
described by novelist William Styron as evidencing an "abiding
awareness that the judge and the judged are bound inseparably by their
common humanity.")

- IN PURSUIT OF JUSTICE: REFLECTIONS OF A STATE SUPREME

COURT JUSTICE by Joseph R. Grodin (U. of California Press 1989)
(Retired U. S. Supreme Court Justice William Brennan has observed
that this "illuminating" book of personal reminiscence by a California
State Supreme Court Justice, who failed to be reelected because of his
opposition to the death penalty, provides "a rare glimpse of the inner
workings of a first-rate judicial mind" at the state appellate level.)

CONCLUSION

[The courthouse] was theirs, bigger than any

because it was the sum of all and, being the sum of
all, it must raise all of their hopes and aspirations
level with its own aspirant and soaring cupola, so
that, sweating and tireless and unflagging, they
would look about at one another a little shyly, a little
amazed, with something like humility too, as if they
were realising, or were for a moment at least
capable of believing, that men, all men, including
themselves, 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).

 JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION PAPERS
Prepared by
HON. MR. JUSTICE RD NICHOLSON
Federal Court of Australia

“Issues in Court Security” paper presented to the 11th Conference of Chief Justices of
Asia 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 the

10th 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/Pacific

Region” 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 the
Indonesia 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 to
the Philippines Supreme Court, 26 September 2001 published in (2002) 12(2) Journal of
Judicial Administration 63. Also published in The Supreme Court of the Philippines
Centenary Lecture Series, I July 2000-June 2001, II September 2001-June 2002.

“Judicial Ethics and Corruption: Issues for Discussion”, presentation to the 9th
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 Yearbook 35

“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 Judicial
Administration 127

“Capturing and Maintaining Public Confidence in Courts” (2000) VIII, CIJL Yearbook 43

25
“Judicial Education and the Means of Funding it in the Asian Region: A Judge’s View”
given at the 15th LAWASIA Conference, Manila 27-31 August 1997 and the 7th
Conference of Chief Justice of Asia and the Pacific, published in (1998) 7(2) Journal of
Judicial Administration 83.

“The Profound Change to United Kingdom Law: Domestic Application of the European
Convention on Human Rights” (1998) 72 The Australian Law Journal 946.

“The Courts, the Media and the Community”, published (1995) 5 The Journal of Judicial
Administration 1.

"Judicial Governance and the Planning of Court Space and Facilities", paper to the
Australian Institute of Judicial Administration Annual Conference, Hobart 1993 published
in the (1994) 3(4) Australian Journal of Judicial Administration 181.

"Judicial Independence and Accountability: Can they co-exist?" (1993) 67 Australian Law
Journal 404.

"Judicial Independence and the Conduct of Media Relations by Courts" (1993) 2(4)
Journal of Judicial Administration 207.

"Judicial Independence and Judicial Organisation": A Judicial Conference for Australia?"

(1993) 2(3) Journal of Judicial Administration 143.

“The Ways Available to the Judicial Arm of Government to Preserve Judicial

Independence” a comment on Mr Justice McGarvie’s paper, published in (1992) 1(4)
Journal of Judicial Administration 281.

26
 Appendix D

SOME USEFUL WEBSITES

• The National Center for State Courts www.ncsconline.org

• US Federal Courts www.uscourts.gov
• Courtroom21 Technology Project at the College of William and Mary (for
the use and impact of technologies in the legal system)
www.courtroom21.net
• Americans with Disabilities Act www.ada.gov
• International Centre for Facilities (for information about determining
functional space requirements and prioritizing capital investment
decisions) www.icf-cebe.com
• Whole Building Design Guide (for design standards and specifications for
several building types) www.wbdg.org

27