This chapter examines influential legislative remedies: the 1907 creation of the Court of Criminal Appeal, the 1995 creation of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) and the 2024 legislation to annul and compensate miscarriages of justice caused by the Post Office’s faulty computer system. The Court of Appeal’s restrictive approach to overturning convictions and admitting new evidence is critiqued. The role of wrongful convictions in abolishing the death penalty is examined. The CCRC’s performance, including some of its failures and underfunding, is assessed. The migration of similar institutions to Scotland, Norway, New Zealand and Canada is also examined. Failed attempts in 2006 to limit appeals to innocence and successful attempts in 2014 to require it for compensation are critically assessed. The tension between the Innocence Network of the United Kingdom’s (INUK) focus on innocence and the legal system’s focus on the safety of convictions is analysed in light of INUK’s demise and future evolution of innocence organisations. Finally, the Post Office Scandal and the implications of enacting legislation to depart from ordinary methods of correcting and compensating miscarriages of justice are assessed.

‘Remote work’ and ‘telework’, which used to be regarded as exceptional subcategories of labor engagement, became the norm for white collar workers during the pandemic. Recent years have seen the advent of hybrid labor arrangements, where work is directly or indirectly provided through apps or similar pieces of software and other technological innovations. The overarching work digitization phenomenon is defined by increasing delocalisation and fragmentation of workplaces, and by algorithmic management. Even work typically performed on-site includes nowadays elements of delocalization. This chapter revisits our understanding of ‘teleworking’ and examines the appropriateness of existing collective labor law institutions to address the needs and particular conditions of workers engaged in digitized hybrid work. It considers that a solution may lie with the extension of the scope and focus of the rights to collective organization and action, and with a re-evaluation of their substantive content. The chapter seeks solutions in worker empowerment through the redeployment of collective labor rights and institutions. The chapter also briefly touches upon illustrative case studies that provide glimpses into possible avenues of traditional and alternative collective action tactics. The relevant current EU framework is used to contextualize the discussion.

This chapter applies the volume’s interactive and holistic approach to the development and analysis of the regulation of remote work. The discussion underscores how employment contracts themselves combine locational elements, of direct significance for remote work, with specifications of the temporal extension of the work contract and its full time or part time nature. Moreover, as the chapter shows, the combinatory constellation of employment situations that results is itself then subject to regulation in ways that the regulatory institutions often frame interactively, using concepts rooted in one type of employment condition to deal with another condition – for example combining features of the contract’s time commitment with its locational definition. The chapter also discusses the importance of the subsidiarity principle for channeling the multilevel and interactive component of remote work’s regulation. These points are then used to address issues of fundamental rights for workers and more specifically, of labor rights under new and evolving employment conditions.

Cyber disinformation is a global, very sophisticated phenomenon, capable of producing negative consequences on democratic values and institutions. This chapter argues that individual behavior of users plays a key role in the control of the phenomenon and aims to identify factors that impact on users’ behavioral intentions and cyber hygiene behavior. This chapter integrates the Extended Theory of Planned Behavior and a Structural Equation Model, realized through Partial Least Square – –Structural Equation Modeling, applied to the cyber disinformation phenomenon. The research data were collected using a questionnaire administered in Poland and Romania and analyzed using the Structural Equation Model. The model’s parameters were processed using the SmartPLS software. The reliability of the variables was assessed using Cronbach’s Alpha and Composite Reliability. The research revealed the applicability of the Theory of Planned Behavior model and found that Moral Norms and Perceived Behavioral Control have an impact on Behavioral Intention and Cyber Hygiene Behavior. The findings of this chapter can provide stakeholders with important insights that can lead to improved responses to the phenomenon.

The book ends with a brief discussion of key conclusions. My four substantive chapters demonstrate different accounts of making-good-again. Read together, they show how the conduct of restitution emerges as a material question of responsibility which is asked through texts and objects in different genres, including law. Responsibility as a material practice is shown to be dynamic, contingent and contextual, shaped by personae and places.

For a long time, criminal justice typically operated through the human body. Historically, the intentional infliction of severe physical harm, such as through quartering and the rack, has been central to both criminal investigation and punishment. This centrality of the human body in criminal justice arguably changed with the rise of carceral punishment and, as of the mid 1900s, with the emergence of human rights protection to the integrity of persons. Yet, it is still the case that nowadays the use of physical force by state officials makes many appearances in modern criminal justice, ranging from handcuffing, taking bodily material for DNA analysis and using pepper spray on arrest, to physical force strip searches in prison and mechanical restraint in forensic hospitals. Moreover, capital punishment, as the supreme corporal sanction, is permitted under international human rights law and still applies in many jurisdictions worldwide.