Transcript CEPEJ Court performance and quality

CEPEJ
Activities on Court Performance
Activities of CEPEJ in the field of…






Evaluation of Judicial Systems
Judicial time management
Quality of justice
Enforcement
Mediation
Targeted co-operation
CEPEJ – recommends especially




Evaluation of Judicial Systems – Report
“Time Management Checklist“
SATURN – European Uniform Guidelines
for Monitoring of Judicial Timeframes
(EUGMONT)
GOJUST – Guidelines on Judicial
Statistics
CEPEJ – recommended indicators
Type of case
1
Civil cases
1a
Litigious divorces
1b
Dismissals
Cases pending on
1.1.2008
New cases initiated
in 2008
Resolved cases
in 2008
Cases pending on
31.12.2008
Clearance Rate (%) 
resolved cases
x100
incoming cases
CEPEJ – recommended indicators
resolved cases
Clearance Rate (%) 
x100
incoming cases
Case Turnover Ratio=
Number of Resolved Cases
Number of Unresolved Cases at the End
365
Dispositio nTime 
CaseTurnov erRatio
Efficiency rate, Total backlog, Backlog resolution, Case per judge,
Standard departure …
Clearance Rate (%) 
resolved cases
x100
incoming cases
CEPEJ indicators – applied to TK I
"Ç" Courthouse Statistics
Remaining
Cases
Cases From
Filed This
the Previous
Year
Year
Cases
Returned
Total Files
by the
in Docket
Court of
Cassation
Total
Cases
Decided
Remaining
Cases
Clearance
Rate
Caseload
Backlog
Change
Average
Disposition
Time in days
240
265
7
512
329
183
121%
67%
-24%
203,02
862
589
18
1.469
519
950
86%
157%
10%
668,11
884
576
7
1.467
637
830
109%
142%
-6%
475,59
917
590
5
1.512
643
869
108%
146%
-5%
493,29
1.087
2.695
0
3.782
2.043
1.739
76%
65%
60%
310,69
384
1.416
18
1.818
1.082
736
75%
51%
92%
248,28
Totals CC Ç
1.471
4.111
18
5.600
3.125
2.475
76%
60%
68%
289,08
Totals CC Ç per
judge
183,88
513,88
2,25
700,00
390,63
309,38
76%
60%
68%
289,08
Criminal Courts
Clearance Rate (%) 
resolved cases
x100
incoming cases
CEPEJ indicators – applied to TK II
Workload and efficiency of visited courts
500
450
Court 1
400
Court 2
350
Court 3
300
Court 4
250
Court 5
200
Court 6
Court 7
150
Average of courts
100
Austria
50
Bosnia i Herzegovina
0
Workload/Efficiency (cases per head)
And what about the Quality?
Comprehensive court quality models

The Netherlands: measurement system court
quality and RechtspraaQ

Finland: Quality Benchmarks Rovaniemi Courts
NL Quality indicators for evaluating courts (and
judges): measurement system court quality

Independence and impartiality

Timeliness of proceedings

Expertise of the judges

Treatment of the parties at
court sessions

Judicial quality

Tested in three district courts
(1999 – 2001)
NL RechtspraaQ (2002)

Normative framework;



Measuring instruments:





Quality regulations
Measurement system for
court quality
Court-wide positioning
study
Client satisfaction survey
Visitation
Audit
Other elements:


Complaints procedure
Peer review
Finland: Quality Benchmarks (2003)






The process
The judicial decision
The treatment of the
parties and the public
Promptness of the
proceedings
Competence and
professional skills of the
judge
Organisation and
management of
adjudication
Finland: Methods of evaluation





Self-evaluation
Surveys
Evaluation by a group of expert evaluators
Statistics
Statement by the courts itself
In 2005 the courts
received the
European Crystal
Scales of Justice
Award
Thanks for your attention!