Efficiency of Justice Efficiency of Justice and Trust in Justice and Trust in Justice across Europe: the across Europe: the

CEPEJCEPEJ(Eurojustis, Parma, 7 May 2010)(Eurojustis, Parma, 7 May 2010)

François PaychèreFrançois PaychèreWORKING GROUP ON QUALITY OF WORKING GROUP ON QUALITY OF

JUSTICEJUSTICE

1. Short presentation of the 1. Short presentation of the CEPEJCEPEJ2. GT-EVAL2. GT-EVAL3. GT-QUAL3. GT-QUAL

When was the CEPEJ When was the CEPEJ established ?established ?

The CEPEJ was established on The CEPEJ was established on 18 September 2002 with 18 September 2002 with

Resolution Res(2002)12 of Resolution Res(2002)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Committee of Ministers of

the Council of Europe.the Council of Europe.

What was the CEPEJ What was the CEPEJ made for ?made for ?

Two main concerns: Two main concerns: 1)European Convention 1)European Convention

on Human Rightson Human Rights2)Efficiency of justice2)Efficiency of justice

1) 1) Article 6 .1 – Right Article 6 .1 – Right to a fair trialto a fair trial

Everyone is entitled to Everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing a fair and public hearing

within within a reasonable a reasonable timetime by a… tribunal… by a… tribunal…

Two kinds of legitimacy Two kinds of legitimacy (Tom-Jon):(Tom-Jon):

A)Bottom => Up approachA)Bottom => Up approachLegitimation through the Legitimation through the

citizenscitizensB) Up => BottomB) Up => Bottom

through the systemthrough the system

The legitimation aimed by The legitimation aimed by the CoE is a B-approach:the CoE is a B-approach:

How to meet with the How to meet with the requirements of the requirements of the

European Convention of European Convention of Human Rights?Human Rights?

2) Search for efficiency: 2) Search for efficiency: a quantitative or a a quantitative or a

qualitative approach ?qualitative approach ?

The first concerns of the The first concerns of the CEPEJ were related with CEPEJ were related with

timeliness:timeliness:How to deliver justice at a How to deliver justice at a

appropriate time?appropriate time?

Time management Time management checklistchecklist

(Checklist of indicators (Checklist of indicators for the analysis of lengths for the analysis of lengths

of proceedings in the of proceedings in the justice system; 2005) justice system; 2005)

Time management of justice systems: a Northern Europe study

(2006) (2006)

Length of court proceedings in the member states of the Council of Europe based on the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights

(2006)(2006)

The Evaluation process The Evaluation process carried out by the carried out by the Working Group on Working Group on

Evaluation (CEPEJ-GT-Evaluation (CEPEJ-GT-EVAL)EVAL)

(Stefano)(Stefano)

2 reports have been 2 reports have been already published : 2006, already published : 2006,

2008.2008.The 3rd evaluation cycle The 3rd evaluation cycle has started. The report has started. The report will be published during will be published during autumn 2010 (figures autumn 2010 (figures

from 2008).from 2008).

Chapter 4 is devoted to Chapter 4 is devoted to the "Users of courts" the "Users of courts"

using criteria like using criteria like information provided to information provided to

the parties, protection of the parties, protection of vulnerable persons, vulnerable persons,

compensation compensation procedures…procedures…

Section 4.7 is devoted to Section 4.7 is devoted to the assessment of the the assessment of the satisfaction of users:satisfaction of users:

It is not a common It is not a common practice to conduct practice to conduct

surveys but "Exceptions surveys but "Exceptions can be found in the can be found in the

countries where quality-countries where quality-control systems for the control systems for the

courts have been courts have been introduced.introduced.

or where the assessment or where the assessment of court users is common of court users is common practice: Austria, Finland, practice: Austria, Finland,

the Netherlands, Spain the Netherlands, Spain and Switzerland.”and Switzerland.”

(European judicial systems: Edition 2008 (data 2006) CEPEJ, p. 70/71)(European judicial systems: Edition 2008 (data 2006) CEPEJ, p. 70/71)

http://www.coe.int/T/dghl/cooperation/cepej/evaluation/default_en.asp

Part of the work done by Part of the work done by the GT-QUAL also relies on the GT-QUAL also relies on

public surveys.public surveys.

1. The judges and prosecutors in the court of ____________ LEVEL OF SATISFACTION IMPORTANCE 21. The attitude and politeness of the judges and prosecutors are: unsatisfactory satisfactory low high 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 22. The judge/prosecutor’s language is: unclear clear low high 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 23. The judges’ impartiality in conducting the oral proceedings is: unsatisfactory satisfactory low high 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

ConclusionsConclusions