In 2003, the Deliberative Democracy Consortium convened thirty leading scholars and practitioners specializing in public deliberations. They were asked to define the top priorities for future research. The primary issue they agreed merited further research was the effect the design of a deliberative procedure has on its outcome. This Paper tries to meet the challenge of researching this interaction by presenting a novel decisionmaking model called Constructive Controversy Deliberations (CCD).;Constructive Controversy Deliberations show how courts and skilled facilitators can cooperate to enhance the legitimacy and effectiveness of deliberative procedures. Combining the theory and practice of the legal and public deliberation fields, CCD demonstrates how the cooperation of the two can assist in overcoming some of the most recurring problems each field is facing.;CCD is designed to provide a framework for resolution of value-laden social controversies. A process of Constructive Controversy Deliberations includes three main stages. At the first stage, a court declares the legal frameworks governing the disputes, and initiates deliberations between relevant stakeholders. At the second stage, a skilled facilitator conducts a conflict assessment and submits a recommends list of relevant participants for the court's review. At the third stage, the chosen participants deliberate in an effort to reach an agreement. Participants are encouraged to use innovative discursive forms to assist them in finding common ground. If the parties reach an agreement, they bring it before the court. At the final stage, the court reviews the agreement reached, and if the court finds it to be legal and constitutional, the agreement becomes part of judicial order.
展开▼
