A field guide to the clearing house.
Why the Justice Matrix exists, how the two surfaces work, and how to move through the UX from a strategic question to cases, campaigns, evidence, and review.
Strategic work gets weaker when memory is scattered.
The background paper proposed the Matrix as a Global Strategic Litigation and Advocacy Clearing House. The problem is fragmentation: lawyers, clinics, NGOs, academics, and movements fight similar battles across borders, but the case law, pleadings, public campaigns, and tactics are hard to find together.
JusticeHub already had the raw ingredients: Postgres, source scanning, semantic search, public profiles, consent-aware evidence, and admin review. The Justice Matrix turns those ingredients into a working strategy layer.
Refugee & Asylum
Cross-border strategic litigation and advocacy for people seeking asylum.
- cases from courts and tribunals
- campaigns and coalitions
- issue playbooks
Youth Justice
Australian evidence, cases, and campaigns for keeping children out of the justice system.
- ALMA evidence
- Australian inquiries and cases
- movement and reform campaigns
Every screen has a job.
The public side is for finding and understanding. The admin side is for trust, source quality, and editorial control.
Orient quickly. See the corpus, featured rails, and entry points.
Search by keyword or meaning, then filter by type, scope, category, outcome, or strength.
Search the corpus on a world map, with coordinate precision, surface filters, and near-me sorting.
Explain the pipeline, surfaces, trust model, and frequently asked questions.
Ask a plain-language question and receive a cited research packet from Matrix records.
Start from a strategic question and see law, movement, people, and playbook in one place.
Run a real scenario that compares youth remand across law, systems, campaigns, funders, tour countries, and consented stories.
Read the legal record: court, issue, holding, source, verification, and related work.
Understand movement strategy: asks, tactics, coalitions, status, and source link.
Submit a case, campaign, pleading, source, or correction for editorial review.
Cases
Precedent, holding, court, jurisdiction, outcome, source, and verification.
Campaigns
Coalition, demand, tactic, outcome, status, and campaign source.
Evidence
Australian youth-justice evidence with consent rules respected.
Issues
The weave screen: law, movement, people, and playbook around one question.
Manage feeds that power scanning: court databases, legal databases, NGOs, and trusted sources.
Triage scanned candidates, approve real items, reject noise, and avoid duplicates.
Open the source of record and confirm legal facts before a case earns the verified badge.
Spot missing links, weak metadata, queue problems, and source quality issues.
Has anyone argued this before, and did it win?
What tactic moved government or public pressure?
What did the scanner find, and can we trust it?
What is the state of protection and where are the gaps?
How does this country handle youth remand, and what can Australia learn without extracting private stories?
Show the Matrix by moving from question to action.
- 01Open the hub and name the two surfaces.
- 02Open Ask and ask about offshore detention and third-country transfer.
- 03Open Issues and choose the same strategic question.
- 04Show the Law column, then the Movement column.
- 05Open a case profile and point to the authoritative source and verified badge.
- 06Open a campaign profile and point to tactics and coalition.
- 07Return to Explore and search non-refoulement high seas.
- 08Open the Youth Remand scenario to show the human layer, country comparison, alternatives, and partner brief.