2nd International Workshop

“Network Analysis in Law”

in conjunction with JURIX 2014: The 27th International Conference on
Legal Knowledge and Information Systems
10-12 December 2014, Krakow, Poland



>>> Pre-proceedings available (7Mb!)

In 2013 we organized the first workshop on Network Analysis in Law at the 14th ICAIL conference in Rome. Eight papers were presented on various aspects of this field and after the conference extended versions of these eight, plus an extended version of a paper from the main conference were collected in a volume of the “Law Science Technology” series (ISBN 9788849527698).


This second workshop again aims to bring together researchers from computational social science, computational legal theory, network science and related disciplines in order to discuss the use and usefulness of network analysis in the legal domain.

We invite papers and demonstrations of original works on the following aspects of network analysis in the legal field:

1.     Analysis and visualization of networks of people and institutions: law is made by people, about and for people and institutions. These people or institutions form networks, be it academic scholars, criminals or public bodies and these networks can be detected, mapped, analysed and visualised. Can we better study institutions and their activities by analysing their internal structure or the network of their relations? Does it help in finding the ‘capo di tutti i capi’ in organized crime?

2.     Analysis and visualization of the network of law: law itself forms networks. Sources of law refer to other sources of law and together constitute (part of) the core of the legal system. In the same way as above, we can represent, analyse and visualise this network. Can it help in determining the authority of case law or the likelihood a decision will be overruled? Does it shed light on complex or problematic parts of legislation? Is it possible to exploit networks visualization to support legal analysis and information retrieval?

3.     Combination of the first and second aspects: people or institutions create sources of law or appear in them: Research on the network of one may shed light on the other. Two examples:

a.     Legal scholars write commentaries on proposed legislation or court decisions. Sometimes they write these together. These commentaries may provide information on the network of scholars; the position of an author in the network of scholars may provide information on the authority of the comment.

b.     The application of network analysis techniques to court decisions and proceedings is proving to be helpful in detecting criminal organizations and in analysing their structure and evolution over time.


Submissions will be subject to a light review process on appropriateness for this call, originality of the research described and technical quality.

Submission of papers of around 3000 words should be done through Easychair at:


Workshop Format

Short presentations and/or demonstrations and discussion.


Workshop Program


Welcome and Opening

Radboud Winkels


Statutory Network Analysis plus Information Retrieval

Kevin Ashley, Elizabeth Ferrell Bjerke, Margaret Potter, Hasan Guclu, Jaromir Savelka and Matthias Grabmair


The Case Law of the Italian Constitutional Court between Network Theory and Philosophy of Information

Tommaso Agnoloni and Ugo Pagallo


Prominent Actors in Italian Civil Judiciary: a Social Network Analysis study

Gabriele Rinaldi and Giacomo Fiumara


Semi-Automatic Construction of Skeleton Concept Maps from Case Judgments

Alexander Boer and Bas Sijtsma


Coffee Break


Reference Structures of National Constitutions

Bart Karstens, Marijn Koolen, Giuseppe Dari Mattiacci, Rens Bod and Tom Ginsburg


35 years of Multilateral Environmental Agreements Ratification: a Network Analysis

Romain Boulet, Ana Flavia Barros-Platiau and Pierre Mazzega


Network analysis as an aid to legal interpretation – can counting and drawing rules help lawyers understand the context of those rules?

John Fitzgerald


A Model of Legal Systems as Evolutionary Networks: Normative Complexity and Self-organization of Clusters of Rules

Carlo Garbarino




A Method to Compare the Complexity of Legal Acts

Tõnu Tamme, Leo Võhandu and Ermo Täks


Outcome networks for policy analysis, with an application to a case study in labor law

Remo Pareschi, Franco Toffoletto and Paolino Zica


Why do you quote me? Citation of Superior Court

Deborah De Felice, Giuseppe Giura and Vilhelm Verendel


Towards a Legal Recommender System

Radboud Winkels, Alexander Boer, Bart Vredebregt and Alexander van Someren




Publication Opportunities

Selected papers will be published in extended form in a volume of the Series “Law Science Technology” (ESI) after another review round.


Important Dates

Submission due:                               November 10th 2014 (extended)
Accept/Reject notification:          November 21st 2014 (extended)
NAiL2014 Workshop:                        December 10th 2014


Organisation Committee

Radboud Winkels, Leibniz Center for Law, Netherlands
Nicola Lettieri, University of Sannio Law School, Italy

Programme Committee

Michael Bommartio, ReInventLaw Laboratory, Michigan, USA
Romain Boulet, University of Lyon, France
Daniele Bourcier, CNRS, France
Pompeu Casanovas, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
Sebastiano Faro, ITTIG-CNR, Italy
Giacomo Fiumara, University of Messina, Italy
Rinke Hoekstra, Vrije Universiteit, Netherlands
Daniel Katz, Michigan State University, USA
Marc Lauritsen, Capstone Practice, USA
Nicola Lettieri, University of Sannio Law School, Italy
Delfina Malandrino, University of Salerno, Italy
Marc van Opijnen, Knowledge Center for Official Government Publications, Netherlands
Innar Liiv, Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia
Thomas Smith, University of San Diego Law School, USA
Radboud Winkels, Leibniz Center for Law, Netherlands (chair)