Strasbourg, le 31 May 2018
EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR THE EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE (CEPEJ)
WORKING GROUP ON QUALITY OF JUSTICE (CEPEJ-GT-QUAL)
23rd meeting (Strasbourg, 14 – 15 March 2018)
Report drawn up by the Secretariat
2. appointment of the chair of CEPEJ-GT-QUAL
4. The challenges of the use of artificial intelligence algorithms in judicial systems
5. Going further with Cyberjustice Guidelines and implementation guide of electronic case management systems with a user-FRIENDLY approach
6. Justice and MEDIA
7. Evaluating judicial activity from a quality viewpoint
17. At its 22nd meeting, the Working Group had expressed the wish to study the question of the evaluation of the quality of the overall judicial activity of a court, and not only questions of performance. It had also sought the Secretariat’s assistance in identifying relevant examples in member states in time for the 23rd meeting and in deciding whether to make a presentation of a particular practice within a judicial system (such as the Netherlands).
18. The Secretariat presented an information note on the assessment of the quality of judicial activity, which presented several tools and good practices for enhancing the quality of judicial activity, in terms of both know-how and attitudes. Gilles ACCOMANDO (member, France) presented the French experience in intervision, by highlighting the important role of the National School of Judges in expanding this practice (in particular by means of an “intervision charter” and an evaluation scheme, and by drawing judges’ attention to this a peer to give an outside view of the judge’s conduct during hearings. The aim was to help judges improve their personal attitudes. This method, which was based on goodwill, trust and reciprocity, was, however, seldom applied in France, for reasons relating to both professional culture (culture of honour and judges tendency to work in isolation) and the voluntary nature of the intervision exercise.
19. The Group noted that the document presented by the Secretariat provided a good basis for continuing this work but a number of examples from other European countries were necessary. In this connection, there was considerable interest in the Danish experience of intervision, in which psychologists and communication experts were involved. Moreover, all reference to assessment in the title should be removed and the main theme of the document should be highlighted, i.e. the need to put an end to the culture of working in isolation and to foster the sharing of knowledge between judges on the one hand, and between judges and other legal professionals on the other. Finally it was suggested that the obligation for the national authorities responsible for the public justice service and for putting in place effective tools for strengthening judges’ competences be mentioned in the text.
20. The Group instructed the Secretariat and the President of the Group to draw up a questionnaire for the attention of pilot courts (and members of the CEPEJ where appropriate) and to incorporate the replies into the work document to be presented at the Group’s next meeting.
8. Ex ante and ex post regulatory impact assessment
21. At its 22nd meeting, the Working Group had expressed the wish to take a closer look at ex ante and ex post regulatory impact assessment affecting the justice sector and had instructed the Secretariat to seek experts in this field.
22. Professor Jon Fløysvik NORDRUM (technical expert, Norway) presented the Norwegian experience in this field and said that this type of assessment was firmly rooted in the legislative process, and that both the Parliament and the Government were involved. The ex ante study had to reply to a number of questions, linked to the positive and negative effects of the measures recommended with regard to a number of subjects (individuals, businesses, and state authorities) and to their sustainability. The main difficulties were encountered when it came to assessing the savings that could be made by introducing certain measures, but the evaluation of practical aspects was also problematic (for example: how to gauge in advance what the advantages of a reform of the civil procedure on the effectiveness of the courts might be) owing to the wide range of factors to be taken into account and the number of years necessary to assess their impact.
23. The members of the Group discussed the follow-up to this work and raised questions concerning the scope of the study (and in particular its relation to matters concerning the quality and efficiency of justice) and the work carried out by other international organisations on this subject. In answer to this question, the expert replied that the European Union had devised a 500-page Toolkit on this subject. There were therefore risks of overlapping.
24. While underlining the interest of the themes presented by Professor NORDRUM, the Group noted that it was difficult to become actively engaged in this filed, which concerned legislation and was far from the concrete work carried out by the CEPEJ with regard to the quality and efficiency of justice. The Group therefore decided not to continue working on this theme.
9. Review of the definitions used by CEPEJ Working Groups
25. Joao ARSENIO DE OLIVEIRA gave a brief report on the meeting of the ad hoc working group responsible for identifying the key terms and concepts used by the CEPEJ. This work appeared to be particularly important for the coming years to ensure that all CEPEJ working groups used identical concepts. A meeting had been held in Cologne in February 2018 to finalise the work already taking place. The definitions should be adopted at the plenary session of the CEPEJ in December 2018.
APPENDIX I / ANNEXE I
Agenda / Ordre du jour
3. Information by the Chairman, the experts and the Secretariat / Information du Président, des experts et du Secrétariat
Presentation by Harold Epineuse (scientific expert, France) of a toolkit to support the implementation of the Guidelines on driving changes towards cyberjustice, as well as of an outline on building a case management system that serves the users / Présentation par Harold Epineuse (expert scientifique, France) d’une boite à outils pour renforcer la mise en œuvre des Lignes directrices sur la conduite du changement vers la cyberjustice, ainsi que d’un aperçu sur la construction d’un système informatique de gestion des dossiers au service des usagers
Presentation by Pierre Cornu, scientific expert (Switzerland) / Présentation par Pierre Cornu, expert scientifique (Suisse)
Presentation by Gilles Accomando (France) of the French experience of « intervision »/ Présentation par M. Gilles Accomando (membre, France) de l'expérience française de "l'intervision".
Discussion / Discussion
Presentation of the Norwegian experience by Mr Jon Christian F. Nordrum, assistant professor at the Norwegian institute of Public Law / Présentation de l'expérience norvégienne par M. Jon Christian F. Nordrum, professeur assistant à l'Institut norvégien de droit public
Discussion / Discussion
Summary of the ad hoc meeting / Rapport de la réunion ad hoc
APPENDIX II / ANNEXE II
List of participants / Liste des participants
MEMBERS / MEMBRES
Gilles ACCOMANDO, Premier Président de la cour d’appel de Pau, FRANCE
Joao ARSENIO DE OLIVEIRA, Head of Department, International Affairs Department, Directorate General for Justice Policy, Ministry of Justice, PORTUGAL (Chair of the GT-QUAL / Président du GT-QUAL)
Nino BAKAKURI, Judge, Supreme Court of Georgia, GEORGIA
Merethe ECKHARD, Director of Development, The Danish Court Administration, Centre for Law, Training and Communication, DENMARK
Anke EILERS, Presiding Judge of the Court of Appeal, Koln, GERMANY: Apologised / Excusée
Mitja KOZAR, District Court, SLOVENIA
Georg STAWA, Secretary General, Federal Ministry of Justice, AUSTRIA, (President of the CEPEJ /Président de la CEPEJ): Apologised / Excusé
Ioannis SYMEONIDIS, Judge, Court of Appeal, Professor at the Law School, University of Thessaloniki, GREECE
SCIENTIFIC EXPERTS / EXPERTS SCIENTIFIQUES
Pierre CORNU, Juge, Tribunal cantonal, SUISSE
Harold EPINEUSE,Chargé de mission, Institut des Hautes Etudes sur la justice, FRANCE
Mr Jon Christian F. NORDRUM, Assistant Professor at the Norwegian institute of Public Law, NORWAY
INVITED DELEGATIONS / DELEGATIONS INVITEES
MOROCCO / MAROC
Hajiba El BOUKHARI, magistrat, membre du Conseil Supérieur du Pouvoir Judiciaire
Youssef OUSTOUH, chef de la Division des systèmes d'information à la Direction des Etudes, de la Coopération et de la Modernisation, Ministère de la Justice
SLOVAK REPUBLIC / REPUBLIQUE SLOVAQUE
Erik KOTLÁRIK, Chancery of the Secretary of State I., Ministry of Justice of the Slovak Republic
LATVIA / LETTONIE
Anna SKRJABINA, ESF Project Leader, Court Administration of the Republic of Latvia
OBSERVERS / OBSERVATEURS
EUROPEAN NETWORK OF COUNCILS OF THE JUDICIAIRY / RESEAU EUROPEEN DES CONSEILS DE LA JUSTICE (ENCJ / RECJ): Apologised / Excusé
EUROPEAN UNION OF RECHTSPFLEGER AND COURT CLERKS / UNION EUROPEENNE DES GREFFIERS DE JUSTICE (EUR)
Jean-Jacques KUSTER, Représentant de l’EUR, FRANCE
EUROPEAN COMMISSION / COMMISSION EUROPEENNE: Apologised / Excusée
DGI - Human Rights and Rule of Law, Division for the independence and efficiency of justice /
DGI - Droits de l’Homme et Etat de droit, Division pour l’indépendance et l’efficacité de la justice
Hanne JUNCHER, Head of the Justice and Legal Co-operation Department / Chef du Service de la coopération judiciaire et juridique, e-mail: email@example.com
Stéphane LEYENBERGER, Head of Division, Executive Secretary of the CEPEJ / Chef de la Division, Secrétaire exécutif de la CEPEJ, Tel: + 33 3 88 41 34 12, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Clementina BARBARO, Secretary of / Secrétaire du CEPEJ-GT-QUAL Tél: +33 3 90 21 55 04, e-mail: email@example.com
Yannick MENECEUR, Administrator / Administrateur, Tél. : 33 (0)3 90 21 53 59, e-mail: Yannick.firstname.lastname@example.org
Annette SATTEL, Administration et réseaux, Tel: + 33 (0)3 88 41 39 04, e-mail: email@example.com
Anna KHROMOVA, Assistant / Assistante, Tél. +33 (0)3 88 41 21 68, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
OTHER PARTICIPANTS / AUTRES PARTICIPANTS
Emeline LLAS, Chercheur CNRS, FRANCE
Interpreters / Interprètes