Strasbourg, 12 October 2016

CEPEJ-BU(2016)2

EUROPEAN commission for the efficiency of justice

(CEPEJ)

28th meeting of the Bureau

Paris, 6 October 2016

MEETING REPORT

Report prepared by the Secretariat

 Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law


1.     The Bureau of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) held its 28th meeting in Paris on 6 October 2016, chaired by Georg Stawa (Austria), President of the CEPEJ.

2.     The following Bureau members were also present:

§  Mr Ramin Gurbanov (Azerbaijan), Vice-President of the CEPEJ;

§  Ms Ivana Borzova (Czech Republic), Member;

§  Mr Noel Rudbotham (Ireland), Member.

3.     The agenda appears in the Appendix.

1.   Information from Bureau members and the Secretariat

4.     Ivana Borzova informed the Bureau about her participation in the conference held by the International Association for Court Administration (IACA) in The Hague (Netherlands) from 18 to 20 May 2016.

2.   Process for evaluating European judicial systems

5.     The Bureau was informed about the exchange of views between the Chair of the CEPEJ and the Ministers’ Deputies in Strasbourg on 5 October. A large number of delegations had expressed their appreciation for the outcome of the 2014-2016 evaluation cycle and indicated their clear support for the CEPEJ. The Deputies had decided to “welcome” the publication of the reports rather than “take note” of them.

6.     The Secretariat announced that the Russian Federation had officially criticised the CEPEJ for showing Crimea and Sevastopol as part of Ukraine on the maps in the report. For its part, Ukraine had confirmed that this representation was in conformity with the decisions taken by the Committee of Ministers.

7.     The Secretariat also mentioned that a first press conference had been held, under embargo, in Strasbourg on 4 October, with members of the press accredited by the Council of Europe.

8.     It was agreed that, at the next plenary meeting, the members of the CEPEJ would be questioned about the impact of the reports in their countries. The Secretariat was instructed to inform members ahead of time so that they could prepare themselves. The Bureau wanted CEPEJ members to be encouraged to ensure media coverage of the publication of the results of the evaluation cycle.

9.     The Bureau confirmed that it wished to continue co-operating with the European Commission to prepare the “EU Justice Scoreboard”.

10.  The Bureau instructed the CEPEJ-GT-EVAL to prepare the next evaluation cycle.

3.   SATURN Centre

11.  The Secretariat reported to the Bureau on the progress made by the Steering group of the SATURN Centre.

 

12.  Referring back to his remarks at the last plenary meeting, Noel Rudbotham stressed the importance of the document under preparation on time-frame indicators for dealing with courts' caseloads. So that the plenary meeting could adopt this document on a fully-informed basis, he wanted the latest version of the draft, prepared at the Steering group meeting of 20-22 September, to be made accessible to the CEPEJ members as quickly as possible.

3.   Quality of justice

13.  The Secretariat informed the Bureau of the progress made by the CEPEJ-GT-QUAL. Four documents would be submitted for adoption at the next plenary meeting: the report on structural measures aiming to guarantee the right to an effective remedy; the plan for indicators of the quality of justice; guidelines for the management of the transition towards cyber justice; and the updated Handbook for conducting satisfaction surveys.

14.  The Bureau emphasised the need to finalise the work in these areas, particularly regarding the indicators of the quality of justice, which had been under discussion for a number of years.

4.   Network of pilot courts

15.  The Bureau was informed about the last plenary meeting of the network of pilot courts. The Bureau instructed the Secretariat to update the list of the network's members in co-ordination with the CEPEJ members.

5.   Crystal Scales of Justice

16.  The Bureau confirmed the holding of the “Crystal Scales of Justice” Award in 2017 and instructed the Secretariat to organise it.

6.   Co-operation programmes

17.  The Bureau agreed that a key focus of the next plenary meeting would be informing the CEPEJ about the implementation of the different programmes. It reiterated the pressing need to supplement the pool of experts trained in use of the CEPEJ's tools and able to participate in its programme activities, including representatives of the pilot courts.

 

18.  The Secretariat informed the Bureau that the Secretary General wished to extend the co-operation programme with the southern neighbourhood to Palestine. The Bureau agreed in principle to the CEPEJ's participating in this co-operation, particularly as part of a project with a pilot court.

7.   Report by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe: “The State of Democracy,

Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Europe”

19.  The Bureau reiterated that the CEPEJ was fully available to co-operate in the follow-up given to the Secretary General’s report: “The State of Democracy, Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Europe”, as well as in the preparation of future reports.

20.  It stressed that, while comparisons between comparable countries could be a source of genuine added value in guiding public justice policies, no attempt should be made to categorise countries according to their indicators regarding the functioning of justice, so as to preserve the scientific credibility of the indicators and to take into account the differences in the organisation of judicial systems. It called for caution with regard to any over simplification in the presentation of analyses relating to the functioning of judicial systems, both in terms of independence and effectiveness.

8.   CEPEJ Innovation Centre

21.  The Bureau wanted a specific online portal to be dedicated to “innovation projects” implemented by member States to improve the functioning of their judicial systems. It insisted on the need to work on the search engine optimisation of this portal.

22.  The projects submitted for the “Crystal Scales of Justice” award and good practices notified by the pilot courts constituted sources to be prioritised, but were not the only ones.

23.  The Bureau decided that this matter should be discussed further at the next plenary meeting.

  1. Preparation of the 28th plenary meeting of the CEPEJ (6-7 December 2016)

24.  The Bureau instructed the Secretariat to draw up the agenda for the next plenary meeting, taking into account the above-mentioned points. Elections should also be held to renew the entire membership of the Bureau, on the understanding that each outgoing member could be re-elected in the same capacity for a period of two years.

  1. Public Forum on Cyber Justice (5 December) 

25.  The Bureau approved the organisation of the Forum on Cyber Justice in Strasbourg on 5 December, in parallel with the CEPEJ plenary meeting, which would be extended by an extra day. This Forum, open to the public (by registration) would be an opportunity to present the CEPEJ 's draft Guidelines for guiding the change towards cyber justice, as well as the CEPEJ Report on the use of ICT in courts, published as part of the 2014-2016 evaluation cycle.

11.  Representation of the CEPEJ in other fora

26.  The Bureau reiterated that it relied on the Secretariat to screen requests for CEPEJ representation in different events organised in Europe and world-wide concerning the functioning of justice. When necessary, the Bureau members were to be consulted first and foremost.

12.  Individual complaints submitted to the CEPEJ concerning justice matters

27.  The Secretariat stated that no specific complaints had been received for further examination by the Bureau. It nonetheless pointed out that dozens of complaints had recently been sent to the Secretariat concerning the dismissals and arrests of a large number of judges and prosecutors in Turkey following the attempted coup.

13.  Any other business

28.  Ramin Gurbanov suggested that the CEPEJ carry out a study covering the evaluation of the functioning of judicial systems in different continents. It was agreed to refer the matter to the CEPEJ-GT-EVAL, while emphasising that, if such a study were carried out, it could not add to the workload of the CEPEJ itself.

 

29.  The Secretariat wondered whether it was appropriate to extend the field of research to a global level given the European role of the Council of Europe. It had doubts whether this initiative would be well accepted by the Committee of Ministers.

 


Appendix

AGENDA / ORDRE DU JOUR

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

15.  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

16.  Process for evaluating European judicial systems / Processus pour l’évaluation des systèmes judiciaires européens

o    debriefing on the process / bilan du processus

o    preparation of the press conference / préparation de la conférence de presse

o    measuring the impact of the reports / mesurer l’impact des rapports

17.  SATURN Centre / Centre SATURN

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

18.  Quality of Justice / Qualité de la Justice

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

19.  Network of pilot courts / Réseau de tribunaux-référents

§  Updating of the composition / Mise à jour de la composition

20.  2017Crystal Scales of Justice / « Balance de cristal » 2017

21.  Co-operation programmes / Programmes de coopération

§  State of affairs of the various programmes / Etat des lieux des différents programmes

§  Identification and training of new experts / Identification et formation de nouveaux experts

22.  Report by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe: “The state of democracy, human rights and the rule of law in Europe”: role of the CEPEJ / Rapport du Secrétaire Général du Conseil de l'Europe: « Situation de la démocratie, des droits de l’Homme et de l’Etat de droit en Europe »

23.  CEPEJ Innovation Centre / Centre d’Innovation de la CEPEJ

24.  Preparation of the 28th plenary meeting of the CEPEJ (6-7 December 2016) / Préparation de la 28ème réunion plénière de la CEPEJ (6-7 décembre 2016)

25.  Public Forum on Cyberjustice (5 December) / Forum public sur la cyberjustice (5 décembre)  

26.  Representation of CEPEJ in other fora / Représentation de la CEPEJ dans d’autres fora

27.  Individual complaints submitted to the CEPEJ concerning justice matters / Plaintes individuelles adressées à la CEPEJ sur des questions de justice

28.  Any other business / Questions diverses