7 July 2006                                                                                                                 CEPEJ (2006) 3

EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR THE EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE

(CEPEJ)

2005 Activity Report

adopted by the CEPEJ at its 7^th plenary meeting

(Rome, 6 – 7 July 2006)

For further information: www.coe.int/cepej

1.     This report outlines the work undertaken by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ)[1] in 2005, in accordance with its Programme of Activities[2].  It was drafted by the Bureau, adopted by the CEPEJ at its 7^th plenary meeting (6 – 7 July 2006) and submitted to the Committee of Ministers for approval, under Articles 7-6 and 7-7 of the CEPEJ Statute.

1.   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR THE EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE (CEPEJ) IN 2005

1.1 Membership of the CEPEJ

2.     The CEPEJ is made up of experts from the 46 member states of the Council of Europe. Only 2 states did not appoint CEPEJ members during the year (Liechtenstein and Switzerland). Among those states enjoying observer status with the Council of Europe, the Holy See and Japan regularly attended meetings.  

3.     The CEPEJ is chaired by Mr Eberhard DESCH (Germany). Mr André POTOCKI (France), Vice-Chair, Mr Alan UZELAC (Croatia) and Mr Pim ALBERS (Netherlands) are also members of the Bureau.

4.     The European Court of Human Rights, the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE), the European Committee on Legal Co-operation (CDCJ) and the Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH) are also represented at plenary meetings.  

5.     The European Union contributes to the activities of the CEPEJ and is represented by the European Commission at its meetings.  The World Bank is likewise involved in the work of the CEPEJ.

6.     The European Association of Judges, Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les Libertés (MEDEL), the European Federation of Administrative Judges, the Council of the Bars of the European Community (CBEC), the European Union of Rechtspfleger (EUR) and the International Union of Judicial Officers (UIHJ) have observer status. These organisations have attended plenary meetings of the CEPEJ. Their observer status was renewed at the 6^th plenary meeting for a period of two years.

1.2 Meetings of the CEPEJ

7.     The CEPEJ held its 5^th plenary meeting from 15 to 17 June and its 6^th plenary meeting from 7 to 9 December, both in Strasbourg.

8.     The Bureau of the CEPEJ met in Brussels on 17 January and in Strasbourg on 17 October.

9.     The CEPEJ Working Group for the Evaluation of Judicial Systems (CEPEJ-GT-EVAL) met three times in Strasbourg, on 23-25 February, 16-18 March and 23–25 May, with Mr Pim ALBERS (Netherlands) in the chair.

10.  The CEPEJ Task Force on Timeframes of Proceedings (CEPEJ-TF-DEL) met three times in Strasbourg, on 14-16 March, 14-16 September and 7-9 November, with Mr Alan UZELAC (Croatia) in the chair.  

2.   ACTIVITIES AND ACHIEVEMENTS IN 2005

11.  The work of the CEPEJ fits into Line of Action 1 of the Council of Europe’s Programme of Activities:  “Compliance with human rights and rule of law standards”, under the project “Evaluating and improving efficiency of justice”.  The task of the CEPEJ is central to the Council of Europe’s activities, in that it is expected to promote “common fundamental values: human rights, rule of law and democracy” by “strengthening democracy, good governance and the rule of law in member states”[3].

12.  The CEPEJ has been entrusted by the Committee of Ministers with proposing practical solutions, suitable for use by Council of Europe member states, for:

§  promoting the effective implementation of existing Council of Europe instruments relating to the organisation of justice;

§  ensuring that public policies concerning the courts take account of the needs of users of the justice system and, in particular, the judiciary and law officers;

§  helping to reduce congestion in the European Court of Human Rights by offering states effective solutions prior to application to the Court and preventing violations of Article 6.

13.  In the Action Plan which they adopted at their 3^rd Summit (Warsaw, 16-17 May 2005), the Heads of State and Government of Council of Europe member states decided to develop the evaluation and assistance functions of the CEPEJ in order to help member states deliver justice fairly and rapidly.

14.  In order to fulfil the tasks assigned to it, in 2005 the CEPEJ focused on:

§  examining the pilot process for evaluating European judicial systems, in order to draw the necessary conclusions for launching a regular evaluation process,

§  implementing the Framework Programme for optimal and foreseeable timeframes,

§  supporting judicial reform in various member states,

§  engaging in debate with the European legal community and providing information for users of the justice system.

15.  In the light of the Action Plan adopted by the Summit, and bearing in mind the informal exchange of views with the Ambassadors and Permanent Representatives of Germany and Sweden at the 5^th plenary meeting, the CEPEJ developed a strategy and medium-term work programme, approved at the 6^th plenary meeting[4].

2.1  Tools for analysing the functioning of judicial systems and ensuring that public policies concerning the courts are geared to greater efficiency

2.1.1 Evaluating the functioning of European judicial systems

16.  The report “European judicial systems 2002: facts and figures”, adopted by the CEPEJ at its 4^th plenary meeting (December 2004) was presented by the Chair of the CEPEJ to the Committee of Ministers at the 912^th meeting of Deputies (19 January). The Deputies urged the CEPEJ to continue its efforts in this direction.

17.  The report was presented and discussed with the European legal community and the media at the conference on “Evaluating judicial systems” held in The Hague (2-3 May), at the invitation of the Ministry of Justice of the Netherlands.

18.  The Chair of the CEPEJ and the Director General of Legal Affairs were invited by the Chair of the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, Mr Jean-Louis BOURLANGES (France), to attend a public hearing on promoting the quality of justice in Europe (Brussels, 18 January).  The report was presented at this hearing.  The work of the CEPEJ met with a favourable response from parliamentarians and the Vice-President of the European Commission, Mr Franco FRATTINI, who said it should be regarded as a benchmark for the European Union’s future activities, calling for the development of synergies with the CEPEJ. The report of the CEPEJ was made available to parliamentarians and the European Commission.

19.  In addition, several members of the CEPEJ and the CEPEJ-GT-EVAL had an opportunity to present the report at a scientific forum of the Law Society Conference in Las Vegas (June).

20.  As well as the online version posted on the CEPEJ web site, 2,000 copies of the report were printed and widely distributed among policy-makers and the legal community in member states. The report received extensive media coverage, thus helping to publicise the CEPEJ and generate interest in its work.

21.  A number of states have translated the report and/or prepared summaries in their own language. It has been studied by policy-makers and judicial authorities in many member states, some of which have said that they will draw on the overview provided by the report to identify gaps in their own systems or to find inspiration for reform. Several states have set up ad hoc working groups to study the report and make use of it.

22.  In keeping with the 3^rd Summit Action Plan and based on the lessons learnt from the successful pilot exercise, the CEPEJ launched an initial regular evaluation exercise, using the in-depth methodological approach implemented in the pilot exercise and drawing on the Network of national correspondents set up to collect data.

23.  The CEPEJ-GT-EVAL accordingly prepared a revised Scheme for evaluating judicial systems, adopted by the CEPEJ at its 5^th plenary meeting (June) and approved by the Ministers’ Deputies at their 936^th meeting (7 September). This new scheme is to be systematically used in future evaluation exercises.  

24.  The revised Scheme was officially submitted to member states on 8 September, the closing date for replies being 15 January 2006. States were invited to appoint national correspondents to coordinate replies in their respective countries.  

2.1.2 Optimising timeframes for court proceedings

25.  In an effort to relieve congestion in the European Court of Human Rights, the CEPEJ asked its Task Force on Timeframes of Proceedings (CEPEJ-TF-DEL) to develop measures and tools to help member states implement the Lines of Action set out in its Framework Programme “A new objective for European judicial systems:  the processing of each case within an optimum and foreseeable timeframe”[5].

26.  The CEPEJ-TF-DEL began work aimed at providing a clearer picture of the situation with regard to judicial timeframes in European states:

§  by examining the timeframes in cases before the European Court of Human Rights; a study was entrusted to a scientific expert, Ms Françoise CALVEZ (France);

§  through a study on “Time management in Nordic courts” financed by the Finnish Ministry of Justice, implemented by the Finnish National Research Institute of Legal Policy, in association with Denmark, Norway and Sweden, and supervised by Mr Jon JOHNSEN.

27.  The CEPEJ-TF-DEL also developed practical tools for use by policy-makers and judicial institutions.  A “Checklist for time management”[6] was adopted by the CEPEJ at its 6^th plenary meeting. This is a tool for legislators, policy-makers, judges and court administrative staff to make it easier to obtain the necessary information and analyse the length of proceedings in order to reduce undue delays, ensure the effectiveness of proceedings and provide the necessary transparency and foreseeability to users of the justice system.

28.  The CEPEJ-TF-DEL also began preparing a Compendium of good practice designed to highlight concrete examples which could contribute to the implementation of the Lines of Action set out in the Framework Programme. This Compendium is expected to draw on the experience of the CEPEJ pilot courts (see below).

2.1.3 Developing exchanges with professional networks

29.  Under Article 3.e of its Statute, the CEPEJ continued developing networks of professionals involved in the justice area in order to support its work in collecting information and comments from practitioners and to give those who are the main targets of the measures it develops a greater sense of “ownership” of those measures. 

30.  The CEPEJ has thus set up a Network of pilot courts designated by member states from among courts of first instance or higher courts, competent in civil, administrative or criminal matters, and which reflect the judicial situation in the country concerned. States were invited to consider the courts’ practical experience with regard to the length of proceedings: there were 45 courts from 34 member states in the network at the end of 2005. The CEPEJ has drawn on this Network to promote the innovative projects introduced by courts in an effort to reduce and manage judicial timeframes, with a view to preparing the Compendium of good practice. [The first meeting of the Network was held in Bucharest on 5 and 6 April 2006, in the framework of the Romanian Presidency of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe].

31.  The CEPEJ also reinforced its Network of National Correspondents as part of the process of evaluating judicial systems.

2.1.4 Supporting member states in their judicial reforms

32.  At its 6th plenary meeting, the CEPEJ adopted the report prepared at the request of the Russian Federation on “Examination of problems related to the execution of decisions by national civil courts against the state and its bodies in the Russian Federation"[7]. The report was very well received by the competent Russian authorities, who said they were already working on the implementation of several conclusions contained in this report. [The report was officially presented to the Russian authorities during a visit by CEPEJ experts to Kaluga from 6 to 8 February 2006]. The CEPEJ agreed to continue working with the Russian Federation in this area in 2006.

33.  A seminar was held in Ljubljana (27 - 28 September) concerning implementation of the CEPEJ report on “Practical ways of combating delays in the justice system, excessive workloads of judges and case backlogs"[8] concerning Croatia and Slovenia, which were represented at a senior level. The seminar provided an opportunity for in-depth discussions contributing to the advancement of reform in both of these countries.

2.2 Contributing specific expertise to the debate about the functioning of the justice system

2.2.1 Providing the legal community with a forum for discussion and suggestions

34.  At the request of the European Committee of Legal Co-operation (CDCJ), the CEPEJ prepared and adopted at its 6^th plenary meeting an Action Plan for implementing opinions given by the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE)[9]. It took place within the framework of the necessary dialogue between the relevant bodies of the Council of Europe in the judicial field.

35.  To mark the 3^rd European Day of Civil Justice, co-organised by the Council of Europe and the European Commission, events designed to educate the public about judicial systems were organised in around fifteen member states.  The main event was held in Edinburgh via the “Justice for All” conference organised by the UK Presidency of the European Union (24-26 October).

36.  The European Day of Civil Justice formed the background for the first ever European prize for innovative practice contributing to the quality of civil justice, the “Crystal Scales of Justice”. This award, organised with the help of the CEPEJ, is designed to discover and highlight innovative and efficient practices used in courts, and which deserve to be brought to the attention of policy-makers and the legal community so as to improve the operation of the public system of civil justice.  

22 judicial institutions took part in the competition.  7 projects were singled out for honours and 3 were shortlisted: the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia (Court Annexed Mediation and Accelerated Civil Litigation Program at Ljubljana District Court), the Austrian Ministry of Justice (law enforcement reform) and the courts in the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal of Rovaniemi, Finland (quality project).  The winners were selected by a jury made up of 11 eminent European lawyers, who met in Brussels (3 September). The prize was awarded in Edinburgh (25 October) by the Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Ms Maud de BOER-BUQUICCHIO, and by the Director for Civil Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, European Commission, Mr Francisco FONSECA MORILLO.

37.  Several members of the CEPEJ took part in judicial training seminars held in South-East Europe under the CARDS-justice programme, funded by the European Commission and implemented by a consortium led by the Austrian authorities with the active participation of the Council of Europe. The work of the CEPEJ served as one of the main reference points.  

38.  The Chair of the CEPEJ attended the 26^th Conference of European Justice Ministers (Helsinki, 7 – 8 April) on the “social aspects of justice".

39.  The CEPEJ was also represented by its Chair at the Forum on information technologies and justice held in Madrid (12-13 June), at the annual meeting of the European Union of Rechtspfleger (EUR) (Lisbon, 28 - 30 September) and at the annual seminar of the International Union of Judicial Officers (UIHJ) on the contribution made by institutions to the creation of an area of freedom, security and justice (Reims, 3 - 4 November).

2.2.2 Bringing justice systems and their users closer

40.  At its study session (Strasbourg, 7 December) on "The evaluation of the quality of justice and the independence of judges: how far can we go?", the CEPEJ took a preliminary look at ways of conciling the independence of judges and the need for an objective evaluation of the quality of the justice system to improve both the efficiency of judicial policies and user satisfaction and to increase public confidence in the justice system. The calibre of the speeches and debates on new methods of assessing the work of the judge was considered a useful contribution to the work of the CEPEJ, to be developed further.

2.2.3 Playing an active role in the debate about the efficiency of human rights protection mechanisms

41.  The CEPEJ held an exchange of views with the President of the European Court of Human Rights, Mr Luzius WILDHABER, on the prospects for developing human rights protection mechanisms and the potential for the CEPEJ to contribute to effective implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights. It agreed to continue developing appropriate relations with the European Court of Human Rights and the other Council of Europe bodies responsible for the protection of human rights.