Jump to content

Submissions/Constitutional Court meets Wikipedia

From Wikimania

This is an accepted submission for Wikimania 2017.


This is an Open submission for Wikimania 2017 that has not yet been reviewed by a member of the Programme Committee.

Submission no. 5001 Subject - G1
Title of the submission
Constitutional Court meets Wikipedia
Type of submission (lecture, panel, tutorial/workshop, roundtable discussion, lightning talk, poster, birds of a feather discussion)
Author of the submission
Thomas Planinger
Language of presentation
E-mail address
User:Thomas Planinger (VfGH)
Country of origin
Affiliation, if any (organisation, company etc.)

Personal homepage or blog

Abstract (up to 300 words to describe your proposal)
Talking about the same topic at the WikiCon 2016
In summer 2016 for the first time ever, an institution outside of the cultural area (GLAM) had the confidence to recruit a Wikipedian in residence, to open up its holdings to them, and to work with them to toward fostering an understanding of free knowledge. Significantly, this institution was not one that depends on public visibility, but was instead one whose sense of discretion and reliability sets standards and constitutes an essential element of its fundamental mission: the Austrian Constitutional Court.
The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Austria is one of the three high courts in Austria and the only court in the country exercising constitutional jurisdiction; as public institution that pronounces final highest court judgments, it is comparable to the US Supreme Court or the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany. Its findings have often helped write Austrian contemporary history.
As described before, one of the essential features defining a court — at least according to our Central European understanding — is that the parties to the proceedings are assured discretion. At the same time, or as a result thereof, the public places the greatest trust in this institution, something that applies all the more to a high court, because its assessments cannot be further challenged and its judgment is final. As a rule, such courts do not have a lot of latitude when it comes to commenting on current proceedings or even allowing outsiders access to files and documents.
This is precisely what makes the work of a Wikipedian in residence at such an institution particularly interesting: determining whether documents and files can be made accessible is like a treasure hunt on uncharted land.
What will attendees take away from this session?
I'd like to show how both, the Wikimedia movement and its projects as well as the Courts can benefit from cooperations like the showcased one. Possibly this Wikipedian in residence engagement could be kind of an icebreaker for further cooperations with Constitutional (or regular) Courts in other countries.
Theme of presentation
For workshops and discussions, what level is the intended audience?

Length of session (if other than 25 minutes, specify how long)
25 minutes
Will you attend Wikimania if your submission is not accepted?
Slides or further information (optional)
Special requests
Is this Submission a Draft or Final?

This is a Completed submission for Wikimania 2017 ready to be reviewed by a member of the Programme Committee.

Interested attendees

If you are interested in attending this session, please sign with your username below. This will help reviewers to decide which sessions are of high interest. Sign with a hash and four tildes. (# ~~~~).

  1. --Claudia.Garad (talk) 07:55, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Shikeishu (talk) 09:32, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Amir É. Aharoni (talk) 14:49, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Raimund Liebert (WMAT) (talk) 09:29, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Cobblet (talk) 03:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Simon04 (talk) 20:13, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]