Strasbourg, 23 January 2020
CEPEJ-BU(2020)3
EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR the EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE
(CEPEJ)
35th meeting of the Bureau
Paris, 23 January 2020
MEETING REPORT
Report prepared by the Secretariat
General Direction I – Human Rights and Rule of Law
1. The Bureau of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) held its 35th meeting in Strasbourg, on 23 January 2020, chaired by Mr Ramin Gurbanov (Azerbaijan), President of the CEPEJ.
2. The following members of the Bureau were also present:
§ Ms Laetitia Brunin (France), member;
§ Mr Francesco Depasquale (Malta), member;
§ Ms Ivana Borzova (Czech Republic), Vice-President of the CEPEJ.
3. The agenda is set out in Appendix I.
1. Information from the members of the Bureau and the Secretariat
4. The Bureau welcomed the recruitments that have been or will be carried out in the Secretariat, which will greatly facilitate the implementation of the activity programme. Although, the Bureau considered that more flexibility is needed in the recruitment for cooperation activities with non-ordinary budget. It considered that the functioning of the cooperation unit, which relies mainly on temporary staff, whose appointment is limited to nine months a year, is not satisfactory.
5. The President of the CEPEJ informed the Bureau of the current state of translations into the member states’ languages of the CEPEJ tools, in the framework of the project initiated by the President of the CEPEJ, in co-operation with the Institute of Law and Human Rights of the National Academy of Sciences of Azerbaijan "Bringing the CEPEJ closer to the member states and the member states closer to the CEPEJ".
6. At this stage, the CEPEJ tools have been translated into 10 out of 33 languages and the layout of the publications is currently under way. In this context, the Bureau thanked in particular the involvement of Mr Leonardo d'Urso, CEPEJ expert, for his huge work translating CEPEJ documents into Italian. In order to make this initiative known within the member states, the President proposed to prepare a short video in which he presents these various translations. This video would have subtitles in all European languages. It could be presented at the launch of CEPEJ co-operation programmes and at specific national events organised by CEPEJ members.
2. Implementation of the Programme of Activities 2020-2021
7. In the light of the increasing number of CEPEJ’s activities, the Bureau considered that it would be useful to prepare a strategic framework of activities for the upcoming five years. This framework would provide a longer-term vision for the Secretariat, member states and members of the Working Groups. The Secretariat pointed out that this was in line with the recommendations of the Internal Audit Service of the Council of Europe concerning the functioning of intergovernmental committees. In this perspective, the Bureau suggested to start by asking the Working Groups about their planned tools for the next 5 years during their forthcoming meetings.
8. The Bureau decided on the composition of the Working Groups as set out in the appendix to this document. In accordance with the CEPEJ 2020-2021 Programme of Activities adopted in December 2019, a new Group on Cyberjustice and Artificial Intelligence (CEPEJ-GT-CYBERJUST) was set up. Activities on mediation will now be carried out by the Working Group on the quality of justice (CEPEJ-GT-QUAL).
9. The Bureau expressed the wish that all the members of the Working Groups make all the necessary efforts to be active within these Groups, during and between meetings, so that their expertise and know-how could best benefit to the work of the CEPEJ.
10. The Bureau entrusted the Secretariat to organise a meeting of presidents of the Working Groups in order to ensure good co-ordination between all CEPEJ Working Groups.
3. Evaluation of judicial systems
11. The Bureau reiterated its wish to see an increased co-operation with the European Court of Human Rights. It was therefore suggested that some questions would be added to the CEPEJ's Evaluation Scheme for judicial systems, of which answers would be relevant to the Court's work, such as the number of persons in pre-trial detention in each member state. Frequent meetings on the needs for judicial statistics of the Court's Registry and the Department for the Execution of Judgments of the Court should be initiated by the Secretariat of the CEPEJ.
12. The Bureau took note of the ongoing work of the Evaluation Working Group, which aims to introduce the new format of the next CEPEJ evaluation report on judicial systems. Its paper version will be presented in an abridged form, which will focus on the current trends and be accompanied by country fact sheets. At the same time, the CEPEJ-STAT dynamic database will be developed, in particular through the creation of a new dashboard on efficiency.
13. Initial contacts have been made with the experts in charge of drafting the various chapters of the report. The Bureau underlined the importance of the evolution of the evaluation report and of increasing its visibility, considering the reports of the European Commission using CEPEJ data, which have better visibility. It entrusted the CEPEJ-GT-EVAL to present a draft evaluation report at the CEPEJ plenary in June 2020 which would respect this new form, according to a timetable set by the Secretariat.
14. The Bureau also took note of the difficulties mentioned by the Secretariat for some States in the collection and “quality check” of data. Some of these difficulties are due to the change of national correspondent over the same evaluation cycle, but sometimes difficulties seem more structural. The Bureau instructed the Secretariat to draft a list of countries which present the most significant difficulties, once the data “quality check” phase is carried out, in order to decide on the most appropriate way to accompany these States in the evaluation process.
15. The Bureau also instructed the CEPEJ-GT-EVAL to continue the collaboration with the European Commission in the framework of the European Union Scoreboard and the Dashboard for the Western Balkans. It underlined the importance of these activities which show that the unique expertise developed by the CEPEJ in the field of evaluation of judicial systems is recognised at European level.
16. In the context of the new mandate given to the Working Group on Evaluation, the Bureau encouraged the Working Group to explore longer-term activities that could be carried out and to consider the development of specific themes.
4. Judicial timeframes
17. The Bureau was informed that the CEPEJ-SATURN Group was organising, under the guidance of two experts, Ms Shanee Benkin (Israel) and Mr Marco Fabri (Italy), a workshop on case-weighting the day after the present meeting, during which 5 national case-weighting systems would be presented: Austria, Germany, Denmark, Estonia and Romania.
18. The Bureau noted that this work is highly anticipated by national authorities and European courts, although it is aware of the difficulty of the subject and the reluctance of some professionals in this respect.
19. With regard to the dashboards to be set up in the courts, the Bureau considered necessary for the Working Group to specify its areas of work in this field and the instrument it wishes to move towards.
20. In view of time and budgetary constraints, the Bureau decided that work on the role of the parties and articles 5 and 6 should not be pursued at this stage. The bureau thanked Professor Jon Johnson for the work already carried out at this stage and for his overall contribution to the CEPEJ. It instructed the President of CEPEJ-SATURN and the Secretariat to inform him accordingly.
21. As regards to its activities with the lawyers, the Bureau suggested to organise a new meeting with the CCBE to discuss future work; this meeting could be extended to other actors of justice through an invitation of the CCJE, the CCPE and the EUR.
22. The Bureau suggests that the CEPEJ-SATURN carry out a new reflection on:
- indicators of effectiveness,
- potential needs as regards the development of High judicial councils,
- a possible very detailed procedural scheme to make it easier to detect where the delays are in the procedure and the reasons for these delays
- the training schemes that could be developed on judicial timeframes, in particular with a view to harmonising actions in this area in cooperation programmes.
23. It also insisted on the need to better motivate the CEPEJ Pilot courts to contribute more effectively to the activity of the working groups; in particular, it was proposed to regroup these courts by jurisdiction or centre of interest, in order to improve the response rate when they are requested.
24. The Bureau instructed the SATURN Working Group, under the lead of its future Chairman, to prepare an Action Plan for the Group, including the tools to be developed for the years 2020 and 2021, and to actively pursue its ongoing work, with a view to finalising concrete tools to help reduce judicial timeframes.
5. Quality of justice
25. The Bureau took note of the ongoing work on the operationalisation of the principles of the CEPEJ European Ethical Charter on the use of Artificial Intelligence in judicial systems and their environment and of the launching of the feasibility study on the certification of Artificial Intelligence solutions in judicial systems. The Bureau took note of the work to be carried out by the CEPEJ-GT-QUAL over the year as regards the centrality [MP1]of the user in judicial proceedings, the simplification of communication with the litigant and the question of parity in the recruitment and promotion of magistrates. The Bureau also invited the CEPEJ-GT-QUAL to ensure the best possible dissemination of the tool on the isolation of judges.
26. It also instructed the CEPEJ-GT-QUAL to continue, where appropriate, the work of the CEPEJ-GT-MED in the field of mediation, in particular by involving mediation experts, and to ensure the existence of the network of contact points for mediation. To this end, a meeting with a representative of the CEPEJ-GT-MED should be organised during the first meeting of the CEPEJ-GT-QUAL in 2020.
27. The Bureau also underlined the importance of ensuring co-ordination with the new CEPEJ-GT-CYBERJUST Group and welcomed the Secretariat's proposition to organise the meeting of these two working groups on the same dates in order to promote an exchange between the members of the groups.
6. Cyberjustice and artificial intelligence
28. The Bureau noted the relevance of the themes contained in the terms of reference of the new Working Group on Cyberjustice and Artificial Intelligence (CEPEJ-GT-CYBERJUST), in particular:
- the development of quality criteria for the use of videoconferencing in judicial proceedings: consent of accused persons in criminal proceedings, procedures, techniques, etc.,
- alternative dispute resolution methods in which artificial intelligence is present.
29. As agreed, the 1st meeting of the CEPEJ-GT-CYBERJUST will be held on the same dates as the CEPEJ-GT-QUAL so that the two Groups can have an exchange of views on their respective activities.
7. Cooperation programmes
30. The Secretariat informed the Bureau of the implementation of the various ongoing cooperation programmes (Latvia, Malta, Slovakia, Tunisia, Azerbaijan, Albania, Georgia, Kosovo*, Republic of Moldova, South III Programme), forthcoming (Spain, Malta) and under discussion (Kazakhstan).
31. The Bureau welcomed the growing number of co-operation programmes which contribute to the visibility of the CEPEJ and allow for a useful implementation of CEPEJ tools in partner judicial systems.
32. The Bureau asked the Secretariat to collect and share with the different working groups the training modules on CEPEJ tools, which were sometimes developed in the framework of co-operation activities. This way, the working groups can take note of them and possibly use them in the task entrusted to them which regards training in their respective mandates.
8. CEPEJ’s representation in other fora
33. The Bureau recalled that it relies on the Secretariat to examine requests for representation of the CEPEJ at various events related to the functioning of justice, organised in Europe and throughout the world.
34. The CEPEJ has been represented in more than 70 fora to date, which is a significant increase requiring ever greater availability of CEPEJ members, its Working Groups and the Secretariat. This however contributed effectively to the dissemination of CEPEJ tools throughout Europe and beyond.
9. Individual complaints addressed to the CEPEJ on issues related to the functioning of justice
35. The Secretariat indicated that it did not receive any other specific complaints within its remit that require further consideration by the Bureau.
10. Other questions
· CEPEJ Website
36. The Bureau thanked Annette Sattel for her excellent work in updating the CEPEJ website, which recently led to the creation of a special section compiling all the CEPEJ tools. This section had been suggested by the members of the Bureau because it allows to find much more easily than before a given instrument on a specific theme.
· Plenary meeting (10-11 June 2020)
37. The Bureau thanked the French authorities, through Laetitia Brunin, for their efforts to organise the June 2020 plenary meeting in Versailles and took note that it would finally be held in Strasbourg on the same dates.
· The next Bureau meeting
38. The next meeting of the Bureau will take place on 7 October 2020, at the same time as the President's hearing by the Committee of Ministers.
APPENDIX I
AGENDA
1. Adoption of the agenda / Adoption de l’ordre du jour
2. Information by the President of the CEPEJ, members of the Bureau and the Secretariat / Informations du Président de la CEPEJ, des membres du Bureau et du Secrétariat
3. Implementation of the 2020-2021 Activity Programme / Mise en oeuvre du Programme d’activité 2020-2021
a. Calendar of the meetings / Calendrier des réunions
b. Appointment of the members of the Working Groups / Désignation des membres des Groupes de travail
§ CEPEJ-GT-EVAL
§ CEPEJ-SATURN
§ CEPEJ-GT-QUAL
§ CEPEJ CYBER-JUST
c. Evaluation of judicial systems / Evaluation des systèmes judiciaires
§ Situation of the answers to the Evaluation Scheme – CEPEJ-COLLECT / Situation des réponses à la Grille d'évaluation - CEPEJ-COLLECT
§ Evaluation report / Rapport d’évaluation
§ Working schedule until publication / Calendrier des travaux jusqu’à la publication
§ Cooperation with the EC for the « EU Justice Scoreboard » and for the Dashboard / Coopération avec la CE pour le « Tableau de bord de l’UE sur la justice » et le Dashboard
§ Peer review process / Processus d’évaluation par les pairs
d. SATURN Centre / Centre SATURN
§ Information on the ongoing activities / Information sur les activités en cours
§ Plenary meeting of the Network of pilot courts / Réunion plénière du Réseau de tribunaux-référents
e. Quality of Justice / Qualité de la Justice
§ Information on the ongoing activities / Information sur les activités en cours
§ Coordination with CEPEJ-CYBER-JUST/ Coordination avec CEPEJ-CYBER-JUST
f. Cyberjustice and artificial intelligence / Cyberjustice et intelligence artificielle
§ Exchange of views on the future activities / Echange de vues sur les activités futures
g. Co-operation programmes / Programmes de coopération
· ALBANIA, "Strengthening the Quality and Efficiency of Justice in Albania" (SEJ III) - Joint programme with the European Union in the framework of the "Horizontal Facility for the Western Balkans and Turkey" / « Améliorer la qualité et l’efficacité de la justice en Albanie » (SEJ III) - Programme conjoint avec l’Union européenne dans le cadre de la « Facilité horizontale pour les Balkans occidentaux et la Turquie» ;
· AZERBAIJAN, ‘Strengthening the efficiency and quality of the judicial system in Azerbaijan” - Joint programme with the European Union within the framework of the "Partnership for Good Governance” (PGG II) / « Renforcement de l'efficacité et de la qualité du système judiciaire en Azerbaïdjan » - Programme conjoint avec l’Union européenne dans le cadre du « Partenariat pour la Bonne Gouvernance » (PGG II) ;
· GEORGIA, "Support for judicial reform in Georgia" - Draft joint programme with the European Union within the framework of the "Partnership for Good Governance" (PGG II) / « Appui à la réforme judiciaire en Géorgie » – Projet de programme conjoint avec l’Union européenne dans le cadre du « Partenariat pour la Bonne Gouvernance » (PGG II) ;
· KOSOVO*[1], ‘Strengthening the Quality and Efficiency of Justice in Kosovo (KoSEJ II) - Joint programme with the European Union in the framework of the "Horizontal Facility for the Western Balkans and Turkey" / « Améliorer la qualité et l’efficacité de la justice au Kosovo » (KoSEJ II) - Programme conjoint avec l’Union européenne dans le cadre de la « Facilité horizontale pour les Balkans occidentaux et la Turquie » ;
· LATVIA, “Strengthening the access to justice in Latvia through fostering mediation and legal aid services, as well as support to the development of judicial policies and to increased quality of court management” – Programme with the Structural Reform Support Service of the European Commission (SRSS) / « Renforcement de l’accès à la justice en Lettonie par la consolidation des services de médiation et d’aide juridique, ainsi que le soutien au développement des politiques judiciaires et l’amélioration de la qualité de gestion des tribunaux » –Programme avec le Service d'appui à la réforme structurelle de la Commission Européenne (SRSS);
· REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA, “Support to further strengthening the efficiency and quality of the judicial system in the Republic of Moldova "- Joint programme with the European Union in the framework of the "Partnership for Good Governance" (PGG II) / « Soutien au renforcement de l'efficacité et de la qualité du système judiciaire en République de Moldova »- Programme conjoint avec l’Union européenne dans le cadre du « Partenariat pour la Bonne Gouvernance» (PGG II);
· SLOVAKIA, “Continued support to a well performing Slovak judiciary”– Programme with the Structural Reform Support Service of the European Commission (SRSS) / « Poursuite de l’appui à un système judiciaire performant en Slovaquie » –Programme avec le Service d'appui à la réforme structurelle de la Commission Européenne (SRSS);
· TUNISIA, “Improving the functioning, performance and access to justice in Tunisia (AP- JUST)” – Joint programme with the European Union / « Amélioration du fonctionnement, de la performance et de l’accès à la justice en Tunisie » (AP-JUST) – Programme conjoint avec l’Union Européenne ;
· EGYPT, "Support to the Council of State of Egypt" - Joint programme with the European Union "Ensuring sustainable democratic governance and human rights in the southern Mediterranean" (South Programme III) / « Soutien au Conseil d’Etat d’Egypte » - Programme conjoint avec l’Union européenne « Assurer une gouvernance démocratique durable et les droits de l’homme dans le Sud de la Méditerranée » (Programme Sud III)
· SPAIN – Follow-up Project to Cyberjustice project– Draft Programme with the Structural Reform Support Service of the European Commission (SRSS) / « Promouvoir la cyberjustice en Espagne par la gestion du changement et l'amélioration de la collecte de données » – Programme avec le Service d'appui à la réforme structurelle de la Commission Européenne (SRSS);
· MALTA, “Development of a digital strategy for the Maltese judicial system” - Draft Programme with the Structural Reform Support Service of the European Commission (SRSS) / « Développement d’une stratégie digitale pour le système judiciaire maltais » - Projet de Programme avec le Service d'appui à la réforme structurelle de la Commission Européenne (SRSS) ;
· KAZAKHSTAN, "Support for the functioning of courts in Kazakhstan" - Draft programme with the support of the World Bank / « Soutien au fonctionnement des tribunaux au Kazakhstan » - Projet de programme avec le soutien de la Banque Mondiale.
4. 34th CEPEJ Plenary in Paris (Versailles) / 34ème réunion plénière de la CEPEJ à Paris (Versailles)
5. Representation of the CEPEJ in other fora / Représentation de la CEPEJ dans d'autres fora
6. Any other business / Questions diverses
APPENDIX II
|
WORKING GROUP ON EVALUATION OF JUDICIAL SYSTEMS/ GROUPE DE TRAVAIL SUR L'EVALUATION DES SYSTEMES JUDICIAIRES (CEPEJ-GT-EVAL) |
|
Membres |
|
Juan Fernando ARMENGOT IBORRA Advisor, Directorate General for International Legal Cooperation and Religious Affairs, Ministry of Justice, Madrid, SPAIN |
|
Joanne BATTISTINO Officer in Scale 5, Department of Justice, Ministry for justice, Culture & local Govt., Valletta, MALTA |
|
Simone KRESS Juge, Vice-Présidente du Tribunal Cologne, ALLEMAGNE |
|
Christophe KOLLER Director ESEHA1, Center for counselling and comparative analysis, Bern, SUISSE |
|
Jaša VRABEC Head of the Office for Court Management Development, Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana, SLOVENIA |
|
Martina VRDOLJAK Head of the Department for statistics, analytics and strategic development of judiciary, Ministry of Justice, Zagreb, CROATIA |
|
Scientific experts |
|
Victoria MERTIKOPOULOU Advisor, EU & Competition, Regulatory, Compliance, KYRIAKIDES GEORGOPOULOS Law Firm, Athens, GREECE |
|
CALLO Raffaella Judge, Ministry of Justice, Rome, ITALY |
|
Deputy Working group members / Membres suppléants du Groupe de travail |
|
Ivana NINCIC Consultant for Reform of Legal professions, Ministry of Justice, Belgrade, SERBIA |
|
Seçkin KOÇER Rapporteur Judge, Ministry of Justice, Ankara, TURKEY |
|
Observers / Observateurs |
|
European Union institutions / Institutions de l’Union européenne
|
|
European Expertise and Expert Institute / Institut Européen de l’Expertise et de l’Expert (EEEI) |
|
International Union of Bailiffs / Union Internationale des Huissiers de Justice et Officiers Judiciaires (UIHJ) |
|
European Union of Rechtspfleger / Union européenne des greffiers de justice et Rechtspfleger (EUR) |
|
Council of the Notariats of the European union (CNEU) / Conseil des Notariats de l’Union européenne (CNUE) |
|
Council of the Bars and Law Societies of Europe / Conseil des Barreaux européens (CCBE) |
|
Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les Libertés (MEDEL) |
|
European Association of Judges / Association européenne des Magistrats (EAJ) |
|
Maroc |
|
STEERING GROUP OF THE SATURN CENTRE FOR JUDICIAL TIME MANAGEMENT/ GROUPE DE PILOTAGE DU CENTRE SATURN_POUR LA GESTION DU TEMPS JUDICIAIRE ( CEPEJ-SATURN) |
|
Membres |
|
Vassilis ADROULAKIS Judge at the Council of State, Athens, GREECE |
|
Ivana BORZOVA Head of the Department of Civil Supervision, Ministry of Justice, Prague, CZECH REPUBLIC |
|
Ivan CRNCEC Assistant Minister, Ministry of Justice, Zagreb, CROATIA |
|
Francesco DEPASQUALE The Honourable Mr Justice, Superior Courts, Republic Street, VALLETTA, MALTA |
|
Giacomo OBERTO Judge, First instance court of Torino (civil court), ITALY |
|
Xavier RONSIN Premier président de la cour d'appel de Rennes, FRANCE |
|
Scientific experts |
|
Marco FABRI Research director, National Research Council of Italy, BOLOGNA, ITALY |
|
Michal DABROWSKI District Court Judge delegated to the Ministry of Justice, Department of International Cooperation and Human Rights. |
|
Deputy Working group members / Membres suppléants du Groupe de travail |
|
Mitja KOZAR Judicial Councillor at the District Court of Maribor, SLOVENIA |
|
Observers / Observateurs |
|
European Union institutions / Institutions de l’Union européenne
|
|
European Union of Rechtspfleger / Union européenne des greffiers de justice et Rechtspfleger (EUR) |
|
Council of the Bars and Law Societies of Europe / Conseil des Barreaux européens (CCBE) |
|
Maroc |
|
WORKING GROUP ON QUALITY OF JUSTICE / GROUPE DE TRAVAIL SUR LA QUALITE DE LA JUSTICE (CEPEJ-GT-QUAL) |
|
Membres |
|
Joao ARSENIO DE OLIVEIRA Head of Department, International Affairs Department, Directorate-General for Justice Policy - Ministry of Justice, Lisbon, Portugal |
|
Gilles ACCOMANDO Président de la Cour d’Appel de Pau, FRANCE |
|
Nino BAKAKURI Justice of the Supreme Court of Georgia, Tbilisi, GEORGIA |
|
Anke EILERS Judge, Appeal Court of Köln, GERMANY |
|
Merethe ECKHARDT Director of Development, The Danish Court Administration, Centre for Law, Training and Communication, Copenhagen, DENMARK |
|
Ioannis SYMEONIDIS The General Commission of the |
|
Scientific experts |
|
JELEN-KOSI Valeria Court of Appeal Judge, High Court of Ljubljana SLOVENIA |
|
Maria DA CONCEIÇAO OLIVEIRA (on MEDIATION TOPICS) Lawyer and Mediator, Lisbon, PORTUGAL |
|
Deputy Working group members / Membres suppléants du Groupe de travail |
|
Antoni BATKO Judge, District court in Zamosc, delegated to the Ministry of Justice, POLAND |
|
Javier SAMPER Head of the Support Unit, Directorate-General for International Legal, Cooperation, Interfaith Relations and Human Rights, Ministry of Justice, Madrid, SPAIN |
|
Observers / Observateurs |
|
European Union institutions / Institutions de l’Union européenne
|
|
European Expertise and Expert Institute / Institut Européen de l’Expertise et de l’Expert (EEEI) |
|
International Union of Bailiffs / Union Internationale des Huissiers de Justice et Officiers Judiciaires (UIHJ) |
|
European Union of Rechtspfleger / Union européenne des greffiers de justice et Rechtspfleger (EUR) |
|
Council of the Notariats of the European union (CNEU) / Conseil des Notariats de l’Union européenne (CNUE) |
|
Council of the Bars and Law Societies of Europe / Conseil des Barreaux européens (CCBE) |
|
Maroc |
|
WORKING GROUP ON CYBER-JUSTICE / GROUPE DE TRAVAIL SUR LA CYBER-JUSTICE (CEPEJ-GT-CYBERJUST) |
|
Membres |
|
Pedro ALMEIDA Legal Adviser − European Affairs Coordination Unit, Directorate-General for Justice Policy,Portuguese Ministry of Justice, PORTUGAL |
|
Giuliana CIVININI Judge, member of the Italian Judiciary, President of the Tribunal of Pisa, ITALY |
|
Adis HODZIC Senior Advisor for Statistics, Secretariat of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Sarajevo, BOSNIA AND HERZGOVINA |
|
Martin SCHNEIDER Counsellor in the Austrian Federal Ministry of Justice, AUSTRIA |
|
Rimantas SIMAITIS Partner, Cobalt law firm, Head of the firm’s Dispute Resolution Practice Group, Attorney-at-Law, Arbitrator, Mediator, LITHUANIA |
|
Gregor STROJIN State Secretary, Ministry of Justice, SLOVENIA |
|
Scientific experts |
|
Martin HACKL Chief Digital Officer at the Austrian Federal Ministry of Constitutional Affairs, Reforms, Deregulation and Justice, AUSTRIA |
|
MURSEC Bojan Present Director, Centre of Information Technology, Supreme Court, SLOVENIA |
|
Ruslan MIRZAYEV (on MEDIATION topics) Partner, Adrem Attorneys Law Firm and Office of Compliance Advisor Ombudsman of the World Bank Group, AZERBAIJAN |
|
Deputy Working group members / Membres suppléants du Groupe de travail |
|
FOUQUET Flavien (FR) Chargé de mission pour la transition numérique, Ministère de la Justice, FRANCE |
|
KUZMANOVIC Dusan (Serbie) Personal Data Protection Officer, Ministry of Justice, Belgrade, SERBIA |
|
Observers / Observateurs |
|
European Union institutions / Institutions de l’Union européenne
|
|
European Expertise and Expert Institute / Institut Européen de l’Expertise et de l’Expert (EEEI) |
|
International Union of Bailiffs / Union Internationale des Huissiers de Justice et Officiers Judiciaires (UIHJ) |
|
European Union of Rechtspfleger / Union européenne des greffiers de justice et Rechtspfleger (EUR) |
|
Council of the Bars and Law Societies of Europe / Conseil des Barreaux européens (CCBE) |
|
Maroc |
|
Jacques BUHLER Secrétaire général suppléant du Tribunal fédéral suisse, Chef des services scientifiques: informatique, bibliothèque et documentation juridique, Chef de projet pour l'introduction du dossier judiciaire électronique et de la communication électronique en Suisse (niveau Confédération et dans les 26 cantons) |
[MP1]Importance ? Role?