Strasbourg, 28 January 2009

CEPEJ-BU(2009)1

European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ)

13th meeting of the Bureau - Strasbourg, 26 January 2009 - Meeting report

Report prepared by the Secretariat

Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs


1.    The Bureau of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) held its 13th meeting in Strasbourg on 26 January 2009, with Mr Fausto de SANTIS (Italy), President of the CEPEJ, in the chair.

2.    The meeting was also attended by the following Bureau members:

§  Ms Ivana BORZOVA (Czech Republic);

§  Ms Elsa GARCIA MALTRAS de BLAS (Spain);

§  Mr John STACEY (United Kingdom), Vice-President of the CEPEJ.

3.    The agenda is appended.

1.   Information from the President of the CEPEJ and the Secretariat

4.    The President thanked the CEPEJ on behalf of the Catania Court of Appeal for the outstanding partnership established in connection with the European Day of Justice and the plenary meeting of the Network of Pilot Courts.  A monitoring centre on courts of second instance was being set up in Catania.  The CEPEJ would be asked to contribute to its work.

5.    Fausto de SANTIS announced that the Italian monitoring centre on tax justice had made a co-operation request.  The Bureau agreed in principle to CEPEJ experts taking part in a seminar to be held by the monitoring centre during the year.

2.   Implementation of the 2009 activity programme

2.1 Meeting timetable

6.    The meeting timetable can be consulted on the CEPEJ Internet site.  The Secretariat confirmed that the dates for the 5th meeting of the Steering Group of the Saturn Centre had been changed because the NATO Summit was being held in Strasbourg on the dates initially proposed.

2.2 Evaluation of judicial systems

7.    The Bureau decided to renew the mandates of the entire 2008 membership of the CEPEJ-GT-EVAL[1].  It noted that Ms Tatiana KOBOZEVA (Russian Federation) would also take part in the group’s activities at her authorities’ expense and thanked the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation for the special interest it was showing in this work.  It also decided that the European Union of Rechtspfleger could continue to attend group meetings as an observer.

8.    The Bureau stressed how important it was to start thinking about ways to process the new judicial data from January 2010 onwards.

It proposed that the current arrangement for processing statistics should continue, namely that an expert in statistics be appointed under contract to work with the Secretariat for the period during which the report would be prepared.  A call for tenders in this respect could be launched next summer.

The Secretariat also emphasised the need for an additional expert legal appraisal to be conducted to analyse the data and prepare the comments to be included in the report, especially in view of the fact that Pim ALBERS’ secondment was due to end in summer 2009.  It invited the Bureau members to consider the possibility of calling on the member states to make a member of their national civil service available for the task.  Another option could be to appoint a researcher or an academic for the time it took to prepare the report.

9.    The Secretariat announced that no member state had yet formally confirmed its candidature to take part in the procedure for the peer review of legal data.  The Bureau instructed the Secretariat to make contact with states which had shown an interest at the previous plenary meeting, particularly Germany, Norway and the Russian Federation, to establish a programme for 2009 and 2010.  It was agreed that the peer review procedure in Malta could be combined with the targeted co-operation activity planned for 2009 to evaluate the Maltese judicial system.  The same experts could take part in both procedures.  Bearing in mind the other bilateral activities currently already under way with Portugal, it was agreed that Portugal should be involved in this procedure later.

10.  The Bureau instructed the Secretariat to send a reminder to the CEPEJ members along with a Word version of “Key data for justice in Europe”, so that the key data (for 2007) could be updated on the CEPEJ Internet site.

2.3 SATURN Centre for the study and analysis of judicial time management

11. The Bureau decided to renew the mandates of the entire 2008 membership of the SATURN Centre steering group[2] It also decided that the European Union of Rechtspfleger could continue to attend group meetings as an observer.

12.  The Bureau confirmed that it intended to set up a monitoring centre on timeframes of judicial proceedings through the SATURN Centre, relying initially on the pilot courts to set up appropriate mechanisms and databases and then broadening the analysis to encompass a representative cross-section of courts in each member state.

2.4 Quality of justice

13. The Bureau decided to renew the mandates of the members of the CEPEJ-GT-QUAL who had asked to continue[3].  It noted that Mr André POTOCKI had not wanted his mandate to be renewed because of other activities and agreed to France’s proposal that Mr Serge PETIT should be appointed to replace him.  It also decided to make Ms Tatiana KOBOZEVA (Russian Federation) a member of the group.  It noted that Ms Carien BOONSTRA (Netherlands) would also take part in the group’s activities at her authorities’ expense and thanked the Ministry of Justice of the Netherlands for the special interest it was showing in this work.  It also decided that the European Union of Rechtspfleger and the European Network of Judicial Councils could continue to attend group meetings as observers.

14. It was announced that a seminar bringing together the researchers commissioned to conduct a study on quality systems in Europe had been held in Strasbourg on 20 January 2009.  The study should be finalised by autumn 2009.  Jean-Paul JEAN had been appointed as the scientific expert charged with drafting a handbook on satisfaction surveys, which should be adopted by the CEPEJ before the end of the year.  Julien LHUILLER had been appointed as the scientific expert charged with preparing a report on the contractualisation of some types of judicial processes.

2.5   Execution of court decisions

15. Bearing in mind how little time there had been to arrange a meeting of the group, the Bureau had appointed the CEPEJ-GT-EXE by means of a written consultation based on applications received by the Secretariat by 15 January 2009.  A list of the members of the group is set out in document CEPEJ(2009)1 The Bureau also confirmed that the International Union of Judicial Officers could continue to attend group meetings as an observer.

2.6   Targeted co-operation

16.  The Bureau took note of the current co-operation with Bulgaria, in connection with which a working visit to Sofia had been scheduled for 21 and 22 February 2009.

17.  It approved the membership of the teams of experts responsible for targeted co-operation with Portugal, for which there would be working visits to Lisbon from 25 to 27 February to assess policies relating to the flow of judicial proceedings and measures to counter backlogs in the courts and on 16 and 17 March to assess policies relating to the dematerialisation of judicial proceedings and the use of ICTs in courts.

18. The Bureau agreed that the assessment of the functioning of the judicial system in Malta should be combined with a peer review visit looking into Malta’s judicial statistics.  It was suggested in particular that these data should be compared with the Council of Europe’s other small member states.

19.  The Bureau appointed John STACEY to head the group of experts responsible for targeted co-operation with Armenia, focusing on the allocation of cases between courts.  It was suggested that the group should be joined by members of the CEPEJ-GT-QUAL and by an expert from the Netherlands.

20. The Secretariat announced that the Russian Federation might be asking to continue the co-operation work on the execution of court decisions, possibly by means of an expert appraisal of its draft Code of Execution.  The Bureau agreed in principle to continuing this co-operation, working in partnership with the Department for the Execution of the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights.  It suggested that the experts should be selected from those who had taken part in the previous work and in the activities of the CEPEJ-GT-EXE.

2.7   European Day of Justice and Crystal Scales of Justice

21. The Bureau emphasised the need to encourage the judicial institutions of the member states to take a more active part in the European Day of Justice, using the members of the CEPEJ and the pilot courts as reference points.  The Secretariat was invited to ask them in June what activities they were planning for October.  The Bureau also stressed how useful it was for the communication material prepared by the European Commission to be available well in advance.

22. The Secretariat confirmed that the jury of the Crystal Scales of Justice would meet in Brussels on 17 April 2009.  The prize would be awarded at the Justice Forum in Brussels, probably on 14 May 2009.

2.8   2009 study session

23. The Bureau agreed that the study session on the funding of courts could be held on the first morning of the plenary CEPEJ meeting on 9 December 2009.  The Austrian and Dutch systems could be presented on this occasion.  The Bureau asked the Secretariat to organise the session.

3.    Representation of the CEPEJ in other forums

24.  The Bureau instructed the Secretariat to assess on a case-by-case basis whether, and at which level, the CEPEJ should be represented at other Council of Europe meetings (such as those of the CCJE, CCPE, CDCJ, CDPC or CDDH) depending on what was on the agenda.

25. The Bureau appointed Jean-Paul SUDRE (France) to represent the CEPEJ on the CDCJ’s group of specialists responsible for revising Recommendation Rec(94)12.  It appointed Elsa GARCIA MALTRAS de BLAS to represent the CEPEJ on the group of specialists on child-friendly justice.

26.  The President of the CEPEJ, Fausto de SANTIS, would be attending the UIHJ colloquy in Sibiu (Romania) from 13 to 15 May.

27.  John STACEY would represent the CEPEJ at the European Union’s Justice Forum in Brussels, probably on 14 May.

4.    Dissemination and use of the CEPEJ’s documents     

28. The Bureau agreed that every effort should be made to ensure that as many as possible of the most important documents adopted by the CEPEJ were translated.  Mailing lists for judges and public prosecutors in the member states should also be extended so that more were sent documents concerning them directly.

5.    Medium-term activity programme

29.  The Bureau instructed the Secretariat to prepare for its next meeting the draft of a new CEPEJ activity programme for the next four years.  This draft would have to be prepared in consultation with the various CEPEJ working groups.

30.  It should place particular emphasis on access to justice and the financing of courts.  Questions relating to the organisation of courts and their geographical distribution could also be considered.

31.  There should also be a new section relating to the dissemination and use of the CEPEJ’s documents.

6.    Preparation of the 2008 activity report

32. The Bureau instructed the Secretariat to prepare a draft 2008 activity report on the basis of the 2007 report.  The draft would be sent by e-mail to the Bureau members for approval before being submitted to the 13th plenary CEPEJ meeting.

33. The report should be presented by Fausto de SANTIS to the Rapporteur Group on Legal Co-operation (GR‑J) of the Ministers’ Deputies on 8 October 2009.  It was proposed that the CEPEJ Bureau should meet the same day or even attend the discussion with the GR‑J if the rules allowed this.

7.    Setting up of a CEPEJ scientific network

34. Owing to a lack of time and human resources, the CEPEJ Secretariat had not yet made any progress on setting up a CEPEJ scientific network.  The Bureau agreed to keep this aim on the agenda.

35. The network should include at least one research institute, university or other relevant body per member state.  Candidatures would be examined by the Bureau, which would decide which bodies should be members.

36.  Fausto de SANTIS suggested that the Catania monitoring centre on courts of second instance should take part in the network.

8.    Individual complaints to the CEPEJ about judicial matters

37.  There were no specific complaints to be examined by the Bureau.

9.    Other business

38. Elsa GARCIA MALTRAS de BLAS proposed that a study visit to the CEPEJ Secretariat in Strasbourg should be organised for Spanish registrars.  This would be an opportunity to attend a working meeting of the CEPEJ (for example a CEPEJ-GT-EVAL meeting) and to meet representatives of other Council of Europe bodies with expertise in the justice field.  The Bureau agreed to the proposal.


Annexe

AGENDA / ORDRE DU JOUR

1.    Adoption of the agenda / Adoption de l’ordre du jour

2.    Information by the President of the CEPEJ and the Secretariat /

Informations du Président de la CEPEJ et du Secrétariat

3.    Implementation of the 2009 Activity programme /

Mise en oeuvre du Programme d’activité 2009

a.    Calendar of the meetings / Calendrier des réunions

b.    Evaluation of judicial systems / Evaluation des systèmes judiciaires          

§  Appointment of the experts of the CEPEJ-GT-EVAL /

Nomination de experts du CEPEJ-GT-EVAL

§  Calendar for the 2008 – 2010 evaluation cycle /

Calendrier opur le cycle d'évaluation 2008 - 2010

§  Peer review cooperation process /

Processus de coopération à travers une évaluation par les pairs

c.    SATURN Centre / Centre SATURN

§  Appointment of the experts of the CEPEJ-GT-EVAL /

Nomination de experts du CEPEJ-GT-EVAL

§  Towards an observatory of judicial timeframes /

Vers un observatoire des délais de procédure

d.  Quality of Justice / Qualité de la Justice

§  Appointment of the experts of the CEPEJ-GT-QUAL /

Nomination de experts du CEPEJ-GT-QUAL

§  Information on the ongoing activities / Information sur les activités en cours

e.  Execution of court decisions / Exécution des décisions de justice

§  Appointment of the experts of the CEPEJ-GT-EXE /

Nomination de experts du CEPEJ-GT-EXE

f. Targeted cooperation / Coopération ciblée

§  Armenia / Arménie

§  Malta / Malte

§  Bulgaria / Bulgarie

§  Portugal

§  Russian Federation / Fédération de Russie

h.  European Day of Justice and "Crystal Scales of Justice" /

Journée Européenne de la Justice et "Balance de Cristal"

i.   Study Session 2009 / Session d'étude 2009

j.   Representation of the CEPEJ in other meetings /

Représentation de la CEPEJ dans d'autres réunions

4.    Dissemination and use of the CEPEJ's documents / Diffusion et utilisation des documents de la CEPEJ

5.    Medium-term activity programme / Programme d'actvités à moyen terme

6.    Preparation of the Activity Report 2008 / Préparation du Rapport d'activités 2008

7.    Co-operation with the European Union / Coopération avec l’Union européenne

8.    Setting up of a CEPEJ's Scientific Network / Mise en place d'un Réseau scientifique de la CEPEJ

9.    Individual complaints submitted to the CEPEJ concerning justice matters /

Plaintes individuelles adressées à la CEPEJ sur des questions de justice

10.  Any other business / Questions diverses



[1] See document CEPEJ(2009)1.

[2] See document CEPEJ(2009)1.

[3]  See document CEPEJ(2009)1.