HUMAN RESOURCE CAPACITY
ACCESS TO JUSTICE
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY
JUDICIAL SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE
Full recordShow full item record
AbstractThis review is one of a series of functional reviews commissioned by the Government of Romania (GOR), funded by the European Union, and carried out by the World Bank. It is an element agreed on by the European Union and the Government as part of the post-accession Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM) established to assess further need for reform in the judicial system and to suggest reforms that would ensure Romania's full integration into the European Union system. The objective of the review is to analyze the functioning of institutions of the judicial system in Romania with a view to providing analytical and advisory input to the Romanian authorities as they formulate an action program to improve the performance of the judicial system. The present report covers a large part of Romania's judicial system, a term used here with broad scope. In accord with the terms of reference (appendix one), in addition to the courts, the review covers the Ministry of Justice, focusing on those functions most directly related to the judiciary and to the Public Ministry (PM), the PM itself, and a range of independent legal professionals whose work complements and in some cases replaces that of judges and prosecutors. Within the judiciary, aside from the ordinary courts, the review also addressed the operations of the Superior Council of Magistracy, the Judicial Inspectorate, and the High Court of Cassation and Justice, all of which operate quasi-independently. They have their own budgets and administrative structures, although are still governed by laws on staffing set by Parliament and staffing levels approved by the cabinet. Within the PM, the team also looked at the quasi-independent National Anti-Corruption Directorate.
Copyright/LicenseCC BY 3.0 IGO
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Bulgaria - Resourcing the Judiciary for Performance and Accountability : A Judicial Public Expenditure and Institutional ReviewWorld Bank (Washington, DC, 2008-06)This report examines why, given the increasing resources allocated to the judiciary, there seem to have been only modest improvements in judicial performance. It lifts the veil on the conflicting opinions on the reasons for slow progress on performance and efficiency by analyzing the institutional environment within which the judiciary functions and the key incentives propelling the policy stances and actions of major institutional actors. A supply-demand approach is then used to review the challenges behind improving judicial performance, focusing on resource allocation and management issues on the supply side and on case inflow on the demand side. This perspective enables consideration of both supply and demand issues impacting judicial performance and offers an opportunity to suggest actions and policy responses that could enable policy makers to manage demand more effectively while strengthening access to justice. Overall, therefore, improving judicial performance now requires a shift from increasing the overall level of resources to approaches that do not increase the burden on the central budget. The key challenge now confronting Bulgaria's judiciary is to build on the reforms so far by developing, financing and implementing a judiciary-wide modernization program to sustain the transformation and demonstrate impact through monitor able indicators of performance. The information and analysis in this report much of it familiar to the leadership of Bulgaria's judiciary, executive and legislature could facilitate a consensus between the three branches of power on the resources that the judiciary could realistically expect to receive, and on the results that it can be expected to achieve, given existing resource and capacity constraints. In this dialogue, an exclusive focus on judicial independence could risk diverting attention from concrete measures needed to ensure that the judiciary is adequately resourced and that mechanisms to ensure the efficient use of resources and improved performance are in place. Indeed, judicial independence is a fundamental principle guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of Bulgaria, and unconditionally respected with regard to the judiciary's adjudicative functions. However, sustained focus on the achievement of performance goals could have important potential long-term benefits for the judicial system, not only in terms of increased budgetary resources, but more importantly in terms of increased public trust and confidence.
Bulgaria Judicial Performance, Caseload and Expenditure Review (2008-2014)World Bank (Washington, DC, 2015-12-08)The World Bank published a Public Expenditure and Institutional Review (PEIR) of the Bulgarian justice sector entitled “Resourcing the Judiciary for Performance and Accountability: A Judicial Public Expenditure and Institutional Review” in 2008. The objective of the present study is to conduct an assessment of the spending and institutional changes in Bulgaria’s judiciary from 2008 onwards. The current report examines the principal trends in resourcing Bulgaria’s judiciary since 2008, while comparing the expenditure and judicial performance with those of other European countries. The report provides a set of conclusion and recommendations for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of Bulgaria’s judiciary and the judicial budget process.
In Search of Success : Case Studies in Justice Sector Development in Sub-Saharan AfricaWalsh, Barry (World Bank, 2012-03-19)The World Bank, Department for International Development (DFID) and other donors have long been engaged in legal and judicial reform in sub-Saharan Africa in such areas as legal drafting, strengthening court administration, judicial training, and the empowerment of citizens through a better understanding of the legal system. This has often been done on an ad hoc basis with only limited review of other reform efforts in the region. In order to foster a more responsive approach to justice sector development programs, a collection of case studies was commissioned. One of the more daunting tasks was identifying notable justice sector developments or reforms, which offered specific impacts and which could be examined through both a desk review and field research. Independent of the funding source, the evidence base was not only limited but revealed a need for donors themselves to invest in better data collection, which could then be analyzed and measured against benchmarks or objectives such as improved access to justice. There is a significant need to review and learn from experiences, including controversial ones, in Africa's justice sectors. These case studies are not homogenous largely because their subjects vary and span a wide array of developments that reflect the realities of the region. Each story stands alone and is in no particular order. In the final chapter, the conclusions offered in each story are digested into ideas for future actions. The collection also represents a modest range of stories and it is to be hoped that other cases will be identified and shared. A comparison of experiences of sector-wide programs (SWAPs), for example, could help both donors and governments enhance socio-economic impact. It should be noted that the emphasis in this report is on providing information about positive directions in justice sector development and the ways in which lessons learned might be applied to achieve greater impact in the future. The anticipated value of this collection is that some of the conclusions or actions may be taken up and used to contribute to improvements by those committed to improving the rule of law in sub-Saharan Africa and is in search of 'success'.