ABSTRACT
This chapter lays the groundwork for a study of procedural justice, with a particular focus upon the concept of third-party neutrality in the settling of disputes. Its impulse derives from a strong suspicion that procedural justice is a "pluralistic", rather than a unitary, notion. In analyzing this notion it is easy—too easy—to assume that the elements that we hope to unfold apply across the board and without qualification to all contexts in which adherence to the standards of procedural justice is expected. In the light of the considerations, the chapter seems plausible to maintain that procedural justice may require a "pluralistic" analysis. It suggests from the contexts to which jural-like forms are appropriate, that the role of the neutral third party and the import of the persuasive conflict are different in the various forms and contexts.
