EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR THE EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE
(CEPEJ)
WORKING GROUP ON JUDICIAL TIME MANAGEMENT
(CEPEJ-SATURN)
28th meeting (Strasbourg - videoconference, 9 - 10 November 2020)
Report prepared by the Secretariat
Directorate General I - Human Rights and the Rule of Law
1. INTRODUCTION
1. The Working Group on judicial time management of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ-SATURN) held its 28th meeting on 9 and 10 November 2020. Considering the sanitary situation, the meeting took place via videoconference.
2. The agenda and the list of participants are attached, as Appendices I and II respectively, to this report.
3. Giacomo OBERTO (Italy) was re-elected as Chairperson of the CEPEJ-SATURN for 2020 and 2021.
2. DASHBOARD FOR COURT MANAGEMENT
4. Shanee BENKIN (Israel) and Martin MIKUŠ (Slovak Republic) presented the draft handbook on court dashboards (CEPEJ-SATURN(2020)8) that was developed through research and collection of examples of dashboards, via the network of pilot courts of the CEPEJ. The document outlined their content and their layout and provided guidelines for the judiciary on how to set up a dashboard system. It also gave several examples while highlighting that judge-level dashboards are intended to better manage their worktime and should under no circumstances be considered tools for performance assessment of judges.
5. The Group expressed its appreciation for the document. It proposed that the draft handbook could be supplemented by templates for dashboards at court and judge-level to be made readily available to the courts. The title of the document and definitions of key performance indicators and layouts of dashboards should also be amended. Approval will be sought from the pilot courts for publication of their dashboards in the handbook.
3. ROLE FOR ACTORS OF JUSTICE IN PREVENTING DELAYS IN COURT PROCEEDINGS
6. The Group was entrusted by the CEPEJ to prepare a Report on “the role of parties and practitioners in avoiding or reducing delay in disposal of court proceedings”. As no consensus was reached on the content of this Report, it was decided to deal with this subject in a different way. Instead of producing a Report as such, it adopted a different approach to the subject by enriching the existing Revised SATURN guidelines on time management, which already constitute a well-known CEPEJ tool. The Guidelines would therefore be supplemented in order to encompass all actors of justice.
7. Joan Miquel RASCAGNERES (Andorra) presented the draft plan of the guidelines for lawyers on judicial timeframes (CEPEJ-SATURN(2020)5). The Council of Bars and Law Societies (CCBE), represented during the meeting by its Vice-president, James MACGUILL, submitted written comments on the draft guidelines ahead of the meeting. The Group expressed its appreciation for the document. It was agreed that the scientific expert would pursue the work and prepare draft guidelines for the next meeting in 2021. The draft guidelines could mention in particular (i) a possible common initial training for the various judicial professions (judges, prosecutors and lawyers), (ii) the need to encourage lawyers to give priority to negotiation and mediation before initiating judicial proceedings, (iii) strict adherence to timetables agreed between judges and lawyers, and (iv) the possibility of introducing a mechanism to ensure that lawyers comply with various obligations preventing delays in judicial proceeding.
8. Laure LUCHETTA MYIT (Switzerland) presented the draft plan of the guidelines for court staff on judicial timeframes (CEPEJ-SATURN(2020)7) which should supplement the existing SATURN guidelines for authorities responsible for administration of justice as well as those for court managers. The Group expressed its appreciation for the document. It was recognised that there exist important discrepancies in responsibilities of court staff from one country to another, though the activities required for the operation of courts and their management often remain the same. The explanatory note to the 2018-2020 evaluation scheme provided useful guidance in defining court staff. It was agreed that the scientific expert would pursue their work and prepare draft guidelines for the next meeting in 2021. The guidelines would not cover Rechtspflegers who should be subject to separate guidelines to be developed by the European Union of Rechtspfleger. Given the variety of European judicial systems, the guidelines should be structured around the tasks performed by court staff, the information on which should be collected via the network of pilot courts of the CEPEJ.
9. Mathieu CHARDON (France) presented the draft plan of the guidelines on enforcement agents on judicial timeframes (CEPEJ-SATURN(2020)6), which took into account the Council of Europe Recommendations and CEPEJ guidelines for enforcement, as well as the rich case-law generated by the European Court of Human Rights. The scientific expert proposed to structure the guidelines around themes, such as access to and collection of information, assistance to enforcement agents, management and quality of enforcement, and complaint mechanisms. The Group expressed its appreciation for the document. It was agreed that the scientific expert would pursue the work and prepare draft guidelines for the next meeting in 2021. Close attention should be paid to a different status of enforcement agents - private and public – when drafting the guidelines.
4. TOOLS ENABLING TO BETTER ANALYSE TIMEFRAMES OF JUDICIAL PROCEDURES
10. Ruth STRAGANZ-SCHRŐFL (Austria) presented the Austrian experience in developing a system of judicial timeframes and case-weighting that was used to determine the number of judges necessary for the functioning of the Austrian judicial system. Austria put in place a system to measure the estimated time necessary to handle cases in pre-trial, trial and post-trial stages, that implied the collection, via case management system and by other means, of reliable information on the estimated working time per case category, tasks involved in handling cases, and their complexity. Based on the collected information, a business model was drawn up and implemented throughout courts after being successfully tested in a pilot project.
11. This high-quality presentation could help the Group to develop a methodological tool to help to identify the delays in judicial procedures as well as the reasons behind these delays. It was agreed that the scientific expert would pursue the work for the next meeting in 2021and draw up a questionnaire to collect the necessary information via the network of pilot courts of CEPEJ which should provide the basis for developing the tool.
5. CASE-WEIGHTING IN JUDICIAL SYSTEMS
12. The Group discussed the follow up to the Report on case-weighting in judicial systems published in July 2020. In this respect, the Secretariat presented preliminary draft guidelines (CEPEJ-SATURN(2020)10) aimed at guiding member States in setting up case-weighting systems. It was decided that the Secretariat would pursue its work for the forthcoming meeting. Participants in the meeting are already invited to submit any written comments to the existing document. In this context, it was specified that this document is a separate document from the existing CEPEJ Report on case-weighting systems.
6. EXCHANGES OF VIEWS REGARDING TRAINING ON CEPEJ TOOLS ON TIMEFRAMES
13. The terms of reference for 2020 – 2021 of the CEPEJ-SATURN provides for the development of training curricula concerning CEPEJ tools on judicial timeframes. The Secretariat explained that this could be useful to better disseminate the tools developed by the CEPEJ, including through co-operation projects. It was suggested to develop a general training curriculum on tools developed by SATURN that could be easily adapted to national needs and contexts. The guide to implementing the SATURN time management tools in courts should be considered when developing the training curriculum.
14. Marco FABRI (Italy), scientific expert, was entrusted with the development of a concept note to be presented to the Group at its next meeting in 2021. The concept note should outline the structure and the content of the training curriculum, including its individual courses/modules and selected tools. This note would be followed by the development of the draft training curriculum, providing a detailed description of the identified modules/courses, designed to provide specialised knowledge and practical skills to facilitate the performance of the target group(s). The concept note should be developed by 31 January 2021 and the draft curriculum by 31 March 2021.
7. FOLLOW-UP TO THE CEPEJ DECLARATION RELATED TO COVID-19 PANDEMIC
15. The Group discussed the possible follow up to the CEPEJ Declaration related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The discussion focussed on judicial time management during the crisis, the questioning of the traditional court management and judicial rituals with consequences for access to justice, and an increasing reliance of the judicial systems on new technologies.
16. It appeared that the level of new technology equipment often determined the functioning of judicial systems. Courts suspended face-to-face hearings which were replaced by video hearings and that all these factors affected relations between different actors of justice.
17. The Group welcomed the idea of pursuing the work with the assistance of scientific experts who will develop more detailed guidelines, in particular on principle 4 of the CEPEJ Declaration related to monitoring, case flow, quality and performance.
8. OTHER BUSINESS
18. The next meeting of the CEPEJ-SATURN should take place in March 2021. Until then it was agreed ad hoc meetings should be organised on different themes, according to the needs and progress of the work.
ANNEX I
DRAFT AGENDA / PROJET D’ORDRE DU JOUR
MONDAY / LUNDI – 9 – 10 November / novembre - 9:30 - 12:00
1. Opening of the meeting / Ouverture de la réunion
2. Appointment of the Chairperson of the CEPEJ-SATURN for 2020-2021 /
Désignation du Président du CEPEJ-SATURN pour 2020-2021
3. Dashboards for court management / Tableaux de bord pour la gestion des tribunaux
Discussion on the draft guidelines on how to develop dashboards in courts / Discussion sur le projet de lignes directrices sur la manière de développer des tableaux de bord au service des tribunaux
Experts in charge of this item: Shanee Benkin (Israel) and Martin Mikus (Slovak Republic)
Experts en charge de cette question : Shanee Benkin (Israël) et Martin MikuŠ (République slovaque)
MONDAY / LUNDI – 9 November / novembre - 14:30 - 17:00
4. Tool enabling to better analyse the various timeframes according to the steps of the procedures / Outil permettant de mieux analyser les différents délais en fonction des étapes de la procédure
Presentation of a tool available to the judicial system in Austria to measure judicial timeframes / Présentation d’un outil à disposition du système judiciaire en Autriche pour mesurer les délais des procédures
Discussion on the work to be undertaken on this thematic / Discussion de travail à réaliser sur ce theme
Experts in charge of this item: Ruth STRAGANZ-SCHRŐFL (Austria)
Experts en charge de cette question : Ruth STRAGANZ-SCHRŐFL (Autriche)
5. Case weighting in judicial systems / Pondération des affaires dans les systèmes judiciaires
Discussion on the draft guidelines / Discussions sur le projet des lignes directrices
TUESDAY / MARDI – 10 November / novembre - 9:30 - 12:00
6. Role for actors of justice in preventing delays in court proceedings / Rôle des parties et des praticiens afin de prévenir les retards dans les procédures judiciaires
a) Discussion on the draft plan on the content of the guidelines for lawyers on judicial timeframes / Discussion sur le projet de plan relatif au contenu des lignes directrices pour les avocats en matière de délais des procédures
Experts in charge of this item: Joan Miquel RASCAGNERES (Andorra)
Experts en charge de cette question : Joan Miquel RASCAGNERES (Andorre)
b) Discussion on the draft plan on the content of the guidelines for court staff on judicial timeframes /
Discussion sur le projet de plan relatif au contenu des lignes directrices pour le personnel des tribunaux en matière de délais de procédures
Experts in charge of this item: Laure LUCHETTA MYIT (Switzerland)
Experts en charge de cette question : Laure LUCHETTA MYIT (Suisse)
c) Discussion on the draft plan on the content of the guidelines for bailiffs on judicial timeframes /
Discussion sur le projet de plan relatif aux lignes directrices pour les agents d’exécution en matière de délais de procédures
Experts in charge of this item: Mathieu CHARDON (France)
Experts en charge de cette question : Mathieu CHARDON (France)
TUESDAY / MARDI – 10 November / novembre - 14:30 - 17:00
7. Training curriculum concerning CEPEJ tools for judicial timeframes / Programme de formation concernant les outils de la CEPEJ en matière de délais judiciaires
Discussion on the work to be undertaken on this item / Discussion de travail à réaliser sur ce theme
8. Follow-up to the CEPEJ Declaration on the lessons learnt and challenges faced by the judiciary during and after the COVID-19 pandemic / Suivi à la Déclaration de la CEPEJ sur les leçons et défis pour le système judiciaire pendant et après la pandémie du COVID-19
Discussion on the work to be undertaken to follow up on the Declaration concerning judicial timeframes / Discussion de travail à réaliser sur le suivi à la Déclaration en matière de délais judiciaires
ANNEX II
LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS
***
MEMBERS / MEMBRES
Ivana BORZOVÁ, Head of Department of Civil Supervision, Ministry of Justice, Vysehradská 16, 128 10 PRAGUE 2, CZECH REPUBLIC Appologised/ Excusée
Ivan CRNČEC, Assistant Minister of Justice, Ulica grada Vukovara 49, 10 000 ZAGREB, CROATIA
Francesco DEPASQUALE, Magistrate, Legal Advisor to the Director General, Ministry of Justice and Home Affairs, 184 St Lucia Street, VALLETTA 1189, MALTA,
Vassilis ANDROULAKIS, Judge at the Council of State, ATHENS, GREECE
Giacomo OBERTO, Magistrat, Tribunal de Grande Instance, via San Francesco d'Assisi 14, 10122 TURIN, ITALIE, (President of SATURN / Président du SATURN)
Xavier RONSIN, Premier président de la cour d’appel de RENNES, France
***
Scientific ExpertS / Experts scientifiques
Shanee BENKIN, Scientific expert, Moshav Ein Iron 039, HADERA, ISRAEL
Michal DABROWSKI, District Court Judge delegated to the Ministry of Justice, Department of International Co-operation, and Human Rights, WARSAW, POLAND
Marco FABRI, Director, Research Institute on Judicial Systems, National Research Council (IRSIG-CNR), Via Zamboni 26, 40126 BOLOGNA, ITALY
Martin MIKUŠ, Analytical Centre, Ministry of Justice, BRATISLAVA, SLOVAK REPUBLIC,
Ruth STRAGANZ-SCHROEFL, Deputy Head, Organisational development, personnel planning and controlling Department, Federal Ministry of Constitution, Reforms, Deregulation and Justice, VIENNA, AUSTRIA
Joan Miquel RASCAGNERES, Avocat, ANDORRE
Laure LUCHETTA MYIT, Directrice, Direction juridique, Département de la sécurité, de l'emploi et de la santé (DSES), GENEVE, SUISSE
Mathieu CHARDON, Huissier de Justice, PARIS, FRANCE
***
INVITED DELEGATIONS / DELEGATIONS INVITEES
LATVIA / LETTONIE
Inese SILIŅEVIČA, Riga District Court, President
Adrija BULIŅA, City of Riga Pārdaugava District Court
Daiga VILSONE, Riga Appeal Court, President
Svetlana BEĻAJEVA, Riga Appeal Court
Elita STIVRIŅA, Riga District Court
Pēteris NOVIČENOKS, Rēzekne District Court
Anna SKRJABINA, ESF project leader
Ilze GRAVA, ESF project coordinator
Karmena JURDŽE, ESF project coordinator
SLOVAK REPUBLIC / REPUBLIQUE SLOVAQUIE
Danka KOVALOVA, Director, Analytical Centre of the Ministry of Justice, BRATISLAVA
Zuzana SCHURER PIOVARČIOVÁ, Adviser of the Analytical Unit, Ministry of Justice, BRATISLAVA
REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA / REPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA
Oxana NOVICOV, National Union of Enforcement Agents
Olga CEBAN, National Union of Enforcement Agents
Alexandru VOLOSIN, Agency for Courts Administration
Liuba GAVRILITA, Agency for Courts Administration
MOROCCO / MAROC
Abdeljabbar SADIK, Chef de la Division des Etudes, Direction des Etudes Coopération et Modernisation, Ministère de la Justice, RABAT
Mohamed OUKHLIFA, Chef d'unité de la Coopération technique, Présidence du Ministère Public, RABAT
Mohamed LAMRABET, Chef d'unité de contrôle judiciaire et suivi des rapports d'évaluation des performances, Présidence du Ministère Public, RABAT
Abdelhak DAHBI, Chef d'unité de Contentieux, Présidence du Ministère Public, RABAT
EGYPT / EGYPTE
Mohamed RASLAN, Vice-président, Conseil d’Etat, CAIRO
***
OBSERVERS / OBSERVATEURS
EUROPEAN UNION OF RECHTSPFLEGER AND COURT CLERKS / UNION EUROPEENNE DES GREFFIERS DE JUSTICE (EUR)
Jean-Jacques KUSTER, 24, rue de la Canardière, 67100 Strasbourg, FRANCE
COUNCIL OF THE BARS AND LAW SOCIETIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION / CONSEIL DES BARREAUX EUROPÉENS (CCBE)
Peter McNAMEE, Senior Legal Advisor
James MacGUILL, CCBE Vice-President
***
COUNCIL OF EUROPE / CONSEIL DE L’EUROPE
SECRETARIAT
Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law (DGI)
Direction générale droits de l’Homme et Etat de droit (DGI)
E-mail : [email protected]
Muriel DECOT, Secretary of the CEPEJ / Secrétaire de la CEPEJ
Eva KONECNA, Secretary of the Group CEPEJ-SATURN / Secrétaire du groupe CEPEJ-SATURN
Milan NIKOLIC, Co-Secretary of the Group CEPEJ-SATURN / Co-Secrétaire du groupe CEPEJ-SATURN
INTERPRETERS / INTERPRETES
Eline AITKEN
Lea OUEDRAOGO