Správa o zasadnutí Európskej asociácie sudcov vo Vilniuse

19.-20.mája 2006

SUMMARY REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD BY THE EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION OF JUDGES – REGIONAL GROUP OF THE IAJ

Vilnius (Lithuania) – 19th –20th May 2006

SESSION OF 19th MAY 2006

The meeting was chaired by Mrs. Maja Tratnik, First Vice President of the IAJ, President of the European Association of Judges–Regional Group of the IAJ. In attendance were the President of the IAJ Mr. Sidnei Beneti, the Honorary Presidents Mr. Ernst Markel and Mr. Günter Woratsch; Vice Presidents Mr. José Maria Bento Company and Mr. Gert Vrieze, the Deputy Secretaries General Mr. Giacomo Oberto, Mr. Galileo d’Agostino and Mr. Raffaele Gargiulo, as well as the following delegates, representing their respective associations, which are members of the International Association of Judges and of the European Association of Judges:

Austria – Mr. Reissner

Belgium – Mr. Denecker, Mrs. Lèbe-Dessard and Mr. Van Isegem

Bulgaria – Mrs. Koutzkova

Croatia – Mr. Besjedica

Cyprus – Mr. Paschalides

Denmark – Mr. Linde and Mr. Jensen

Estonia – Mrs. Meelis

Finland – Mr. Katajamäki France Mr. Barella, Mr. Kriegk and Mr. Thouzellier

Germany – Mr. Frank and Mr. Jünemann

Hungary – Mr. Lajos

Iceland – Ms. Hakonardottir

Israel – Mrs. Varda Liune

Italy – Mr. Aschettino and Mr. Zuccarelli

Latvia – Mr. Bickovics

Liechtenstein – Mr. Hagen

Lithuania – Mr. Valancius

Luxembourg  – Mr. Santer

Malta – Mr. Caruana-Demajo

Norway – Mr. Engstad

Netherlands – Mr. Vrieze and Mr. Westhoff

Portugal – Mr. Ventura

Romania – Mrs. Costiniu

Slovakia – Mr. Majchrak

Slovenia – Mrs. Roblek and Mr. Zalar

Spain – Mrs. Atienza, Mr. Bento Company and Mr. Obach

Sweden – Mr. Larsson and Mr. Kjellsson

The Former Yugoslav Rep. of Macedonia – Mrs. Tsatsa-Nikolovska

United Kingdom – Mr. Aikens

After the welcome address of the President of the Lithuanian Association, Mr. Valancius, Mrs Maja Tratnik, President of the European Association of Judges, opened the meeting at 1.30 p.m. by thanking the colleagues of the Lithuanian Association of Judges for the perfect organisation of the meeting and their hospitality.

Mrs. Tratnik remarked that it became more or less “usus” at the European meetings, that the hosting association is organizing also a conference with a topic usually in close connection to judges’ daily work at the courts and justice system. This year the Lithuanian association organized such event at the Vilnius University on the topic “Justice System: public approach”. But it was the first time that the meeting did not start with the “working meeting”, but with the conference and after that with the visit of the Vilnius University.

Mrs. Tratnik pointed out that delegates from 29 associations were in attendance, as colleagues from Armenia, Czech Republic, Georgia, Greece, Ireland, Moldova, Poland, Switzerland and Ukraine did not attend the meeting. She thanked then the President of the IAJ Mr. Sidnei Beneti, the Vice Presidents Jose Maria Bento Company and Gert Vrieze, Honorary Presidents Ernst Markel and Günter Woratsch for attending our meeting.

The IAJ President Beneti took the floor to thank the EAJ and the Lithuanian Association for invitation to the meeting. He informed then the assembly about the international conference organised by the IAJ and the Professional Association of Judges of Togo, to be held in Lomé on 12-16 November 2006, on the topic of judicial independence. Deputy Secretary General Mr. Oberto took subsequently the floor to provide the assembly with some organisational details on the meeting. Mrs. Tratnik presented the booklet on the IAJ, printed in Brazil following an initiative of President Beneti. She then added that the Portuguese delegate had prepared and disseminated a questionnaire for all associations. She asked all the delegates to kindly reply to this questionnaire and send it to the Portuguese delegation.

Mrs. Tratnik added that the agenda of the meeting had been delivered by the Secretariat on 12th April 2006. After the agenda had been distributed, she received following documents:

    • Report of the WG on the general issue of salary system related to discretionary performance bonus that was distributed by the Secretariat to all EAJ members on 2nd May 2006.
    • Report of the WG on the future work of the EAJ in EU matters (“Ways to Brussels”) that was distributed by the Secretariat to all EAJ members on 2nd May 2006.
    • Letter from the French Association of Judges (USM) on the situation in France with the draft resolution that was distributed by the Secretariat to all EAJ members on 3rd May 2006. She had also prepared a written report that had been delivered to all EAJ members on 10th May 2006.

On 17th May she had received following documents:

    • From the German Association of Judges information on Georgia;
    • From the Spanish Association of Judges information on “Proximity Justice”;
    • From the Slovenian Association of Judges information on judicial salary reform in Slovenia.

All three documents were forwarded to all EAJ members on 17 May and she proposed to deal with them under point 3 of the Agenda.

Mrs. Tratnik then asked if there were any additional proposals for the agenda. No additional proposal was submitted. She then passed to examine the points of the Agenda.

1. Approval of the minutes of the EAJ meeting in Montevideo, 20th November 2005

President Tratnik pointed out that the draft minutes from the meeting in Montevideo were sent to all member associations on 11th January 2006 by the Secretariat. In a month after the delivery of the minutes, one remark was received. On 17 January 2006 the French delegate Mrs. Veronique Imbert reacted on the draft minutes (under Point 3, France), explaining that no commission on judicial accountability had been set up, but that they feared that a new commission on judicial ethics could be set up in France.

After the consultation with Deputy Secretary General Mr. Giacomo Oberto, who relistened to the tape records of this meeting, she proposed that the last sentence at the end of the first paragraph on page 7 of the minutes (Point 3. France) beginning with “She informed the assembly that a new commission on judicial ethics had been set up in France and that they would inform with a written report (in English) the EAJ as soon as they would get information on possible new initiatives or draft laws” be replaced by the following text:

English version: “She informed the assembly that the French Association feared that a new commission on judicial ethics could be set up in France and that they would inform with a written report (in English) the EAJ as soon as they would get information on possible new initiatives or draft laws”.

French version: “Elle informe l’assemblée que l’association française craint qu’une nouvelle commissison sur l’éthique judiciare pourrait étre installé en France et que l’association enverra un rapport écrit (en anglais) à l’AEM dès qu’elle obtiendra des informations sur les nouvelles initiatives ou sur des possibles projets de loi”.

Mrs. Tratnik then asked if the French delegation agreed with this new text. The French delegates said they had no remarks. The assembly unanimously approved the correction of the minutes.

Vice-President Vrieze took the floor to explain that the Dutch delegate, Mr. Frans Bauduin, was in attendance of the meeting in Montevideo. Deputy Secretary General Mr. Oberto remarked that the delegate had not signed his name on the list. The Assembly unanimously approved the correction of the minutes. Mrs. Tratnik underlined the need for all delegates to sign their names on the list of attendance.

With these amendments the minutes of the meeting in Montevideo were unanimously approved.

2. Reports on the activities:

2.1. European Association of Judges

For the activities of the EAJ Mrs. Tratnik asked the permission of the assembly to refer to her written report prepared for the meeting on 10th May 2006, and which had been sent to all delegates before the meeting. To accelerate the meeting and to save time for the discussion, she decided not to repeat what was already in her report regarding the activities of the EAJ and information on seminars, unless there were some questions, which she could answer. For the minutes of the meeting she proposed that the Deputy Secretary General summarise these points very briefly from the President’s written report.

This information can be summarised as follows:

    • European Network of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ), Rome, 3rd February 2006. Vice President of the EAJ Mr. Gert Vrieze participated, on behalf of the Dutch Council for the Judiciary, to the meeting of the ENCJ’s WG on judicial code conduct (the WG is composed of 12 participants from Belgium, Finland, France, Hungary, Ireland, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia and Spain). The task of the WG is to ponder on the deontology of judges. After the meeting Mr. 4 Vrieze prepared a written report that was sent by the Secretariat to all EAJ members on 16th February 2006.
    • Forum for Members of the Judiciary of the Member States, Court of Justice of the European Communities, Luxembourg 20th-21st February 2006. On the invitation of the President of the Court Mr. V. Skouris, the President of the EAJ (among – other participants, judges from Austria, Czech Republic, France, Ireland, Italy, Hungary, Malta, Slovak Republic, Spain and Sweden) participated at the Forum.
    • Meeting of the Trustees of the Justice of the World Foundation, Madrid, 27th March 2006. The meeting was (in absence of the President of the IAJ) chaired by the Vice President of the Foundation Mr. Günter Woratsch. The Jury of the International Award “Justice in the World” decided to award the prize to Prof. dr. Nicola Picardi from Italy. The award ceremony took place on 28th March 2006 in Madrid.
    • Meeting of the Ibero American Group, Panama 16th to 21 April 2006. On the invitation of the Panama Association of Judges the President of the EAJ had the opportunity to participate to the meeting of the Ibero American group of the IAJ.
    • Meeting with the Austrian Federal Minister of Justice, Vienna, 5th May 2006. The Austrian Association of Judges organized a meeting of the President of the EAJ with Mrs. Karin Gastinger, Austrian Federal Ministry of Justice and current chair of the EU Justice Ministers’ Council. Mr. Gerhard Reissner from Austrian Association of Judges and Mr. Wolfgang Fellner, Director General of Directorate for Central Administration and Co-ordination from the Ministry participated as well to the meeting. The main purpose of the meeting was to establish and maintain the contact between the EAJ and EU Justice Ministers’ Council. The Minister showed interest in future contacts, informed President Tratnik on the projects council is discussing and will inform Finland Ministry of Justice (the next chair of the Council) on our meeting.

President Tratnik asked the Finnish association for co-operation in establishing this contact during the Finnish presidency in the second half of 2006. Additionally to her written report, President Tratnik pointed out that she had accomplished following activities:

    • On behalf of the EAJ and on her name she had sent a letter of congratulation–as decided by the EAJ in Montevideo–to the delegate of Israel, Mr. Micha Lindenstrauss, regarding his appointment to the position of Ombudsman of Israel. With the letter on 26 January, Mr. Lindenstauss answered and thanked for our good wished.
    • The EAJ will be invited to take part in the Conference for the West Balkans, which will be held in October this year and will deal with training for judges and prosecutors. With reference to this event, Mrs. Tratnik asked the assembly whether any of the delegates would like to be involved in this conference. Delegates from Germany (Mr. Jünemann), Italy (Mr. Zuccarelli), Romania (Mrs. Costiniu), and United Kingdom (Mr. Aikens) declared themselves ready to participate in the initiative. The delegations of Belgium and of the Former Yougoslav Republic of Macedonia will provide the President with a possible name of an expert.
    • Meeting of the Board of Trustees, ERA, Trier 13 May 2006. At the meeting the General Report for 2005 was presented, in 2005 three new patrons joined the foundation (Slovakia, France, and Scotland). Several seminars were organized in co-operation with the national training institutions, where in 2005 more than 500 judges participated at the seminars organized by ERA. In 2007 ERA will celebrate 5 the 15th anniversary and a large conference will be held from 27.-29.9.2007 on the topic “The future of legal Europe”.

2.2. Working group on the Salaries of the European Judges

The President pointed out that the EAJ made the first research on salaries (based on answers from 29 member associations) in 2001.

At the meeting in Naples (May 2004) the WG was updated and is composed of Austria (Gerhard Reissner), Germany (Mr. Jünemann), Belgium (Mrs. Drèze), Czech Republic (Mr. Viclicky) and Spain (Mr. Suares).

The second research started in February 2005, when all members received the questionnaire prepared by the WG. At the EAJ meeting in Bruges (April 2005) Mr. Reissner, the head of the WG, informed the assembly that only 12 associations answered the questionnaire. At the EAJ meeting in Montevideo (November 2005) Mr. Reissner explained the prepared draft report of the WG, based on answers from 21 associations (less than 2/3 of EAJ members). The assembly of the EAJ therefore decided to extend the work of the WG to the countries, which had not yet answered the questionnaire. In December 2005 the President of the EAJ send a letter to all associations that did not answer the questionnaire, asking them to send their replies to Mr. Reissner before the end of January.

With the letter on 12th April 2006 Mrs. Tratnik asked the head of the WG for the information on the result of the work of the WG.

On 8th May 2006 the head of the WG informed Mrs. Tratnik that 9 associations (Cyprus, France, Georgia, Greece, Ireland, Moldova, Romania, Sweden and Switzerland) did not answer the questionnaire, therefore she asked those associations that did not answer yet, to do it before 12 May, so that the WG could prepare the report for the EAJ meeting in Vilnius. The Swedish Association reacted that they already sent the report, and they immediately resend it (in the later communication it turned out, that the WG had the Swedish report); the President of the Swiss association reacted also, promising that they will send the report before the meeting in Vilnius; the Executive legal officer to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Ireland, John Murray, also promised to send the report before the meeting in Vilnius. The Romanian delegation sent its report two days before the meeting.

The delegate from Cyprus explained that his association had not received the questionnaire and promised to send as soon as possible the reply. Delegates from France explained the reasons for which they had not sent their report and assured they will send it. Mrs. Tratnik gave then the floor to Mr. Reissner, who explained the contents of the report distributed to all delegates. Mrs. Tratnik thanked the WG for the good work they have done and Mr. Reissner for his report.

Upon proposal of the President, the assembly decided to invite all associations, which had not yet answered to the questionnaire, to send prior to 31st May their reports to Mr. Reissner. The assembly unanimously adopted the report of the WG as it was presented, asking the WG to finalize it with the new replies. Before the final version of the report will be distributed to the member associations (possibly before 30 June), the English text could be verified by Mr. Aikens. The final report should be adopted during the next meeting in Hungary.

2.3. Working group on the general issue of salary systems related to discretionary performance bonus

President Tratnik pointed out that the discussion at the meeting in Bruges showed that in several member states the salary system for judges changed with the introduction of a system of salaries partly based on performance bonuses. A special working group was set up, composed of France (head of the group), Sweden, Spain, Malta and Germany to prepare a 6 report on the general issue of salary system related to discretionary performance bonus. Mrs. Veronique Imbert prepared a report, based on answers from France, Malta and Spain that was distributed to all EAJ in November 2005 and discussed at the EAJ meeting in Montevideo. The assembly of the EAJ during the meeting in Montevideo decided that the WG would prepare a new written report, which will comprise as well information from Germany and Sweden and will specify criteria for the allocation of performance bonuses in all concerned countries, for the next meeting.

In April 2006 Mrs. Veronique Imbert and Mr. Bruno Thouzellier (France) prepared the written report (in English and French) based on answers from France, Spain and Malta that was distributed by the Secretariat to all EAJ members on 2nd May 2006.

After the report was distributed the Association of Judges and Magistrates of Malta reacted (e-mail communication on 4th May) and referring to the last paragraph of the report suggested a rewording of this paragraph as follows: “The rest of the remuneration consists of an allowance which is paid, in equal amount, to all judges independently of any criterion of productivity. However, whereas the salary payable to judges is protected by the Constitution, and may not be altered to their disadvantage, the allowance is not so protected.”

Mrs. Tratnik underlined that the reaction of Malta showed that the report was not discussed in the WG prior to be distributed to all member associations. The question of salary systems related to discretionary performance bonus is important, because each year similar changes are discussed or already implemented in different countries. Therefore, Mrs. Tratnik noted that the text prepared by the WG was more an information from the 3 countries, than a report, which could be used by all EAJ members. Furthermore, replies from Germany and Sweden were missing, an also the English text should be revised by a native English speaker.

Mr. Thouzellier took the floor to explain the works of the WG. A long discussion took subsequently place, during which delegates from France, Spain, Sweden, Austria, Malta, Germany, Romania, Slovenia, the Netherlands and Honorary President Mr. Markel took the floor. At the end of the discussion, upon proposal of the President, a special WG group was set up to draft a resolution on the topic, to be submitted to the assembly. This group was composed of delegates from France, Malta, Spain, United Kingdom, under the chairmanship of Honorary President Markel.

After this WG had prepared a resolution in English and French, the assembly discussed this proposal. During this discussion delegates from Austria and Romania, as well as Honorary President Woratsch took the floor. Finally the assembly unanimously adopted the resolution, which is joined to this summary report as an enclosure (see enclosure No. 1).

2.4. Working group on the future work of the EAJ in EU matters (“Ways to Brussels”)

President Tratnik opened this subject by recalling that, on the initiative of the German Association of Judges regarding the possible future work of the EAJ in EU matters, the assembly of the EAJ decided at the meeting in Montevideo to resume the works of the “Ways to Brussels” WG, composed of delegates from Germany (head of the WG), Belgium, Estonia, France, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and the Netherlands. The WG has focused on the proposal of setting up a clearing point (the idea is to set up a body where all member associations of the EAJ and EAJ itself could obtain relevant information on comments, statements that one member association or expert of the EAJ has made towards EU institutions or information they have obtained from EU institutions).

In April 2006 the WG prepared a written report that was distributed by the Secretariat to all EAJ members on 2nd May 2006. Mrs. Tratnik thanked the WG for the good work they have done. The German delegate, Mr. Jünemann took then the floor to explain the purposes of his proposal. He added that 3 members of the German Associations would be ready to cooperate in the imitative. The delegate from Belgium, Mrs. Lèbe Dessard, informed the 7 assembly that a member of the Belgian delegation, Mr. Van Isegem, was willing to co-operate as well. A long discussion took subsequently place, during which delegates from Austria, Italy, the Netherlands and Portugal took the floor. The assembly decided that this clearing service would be hosted in within the IAJ website. A special WG was set up, composed of delegates from Belgium (Mr. Van Isegem), the Netherlands (Mrs. Kuitert), Germany (Mr. Jünemann, coordinator), Portugal (Mr. Ventura). The WG will work essentially through email exchanges. The Secretariat General will provide the name of a person who will keep contacts with the administrators of the IAJ website.

3. Situation in the member states:

3.1. Moldova:

President Tratnik pointed out that Mr. Giacomo Oberto, Deputy Secretary General of the IAJ, during his visit in Moldova in March 2006 (as an CoE expert on the new legislation on the National Institute of Justice) met in Chisinau with colleagues from Moldova (Mr. Timofti and Mr. Poaelungi), who confirmed him: – that the association still exists and is effectively operational, – that Mr. Timofti (now judge at the Supreme Court) is still the President of the association, – that the addressees and contact details we have are still correct, – that they regularly receive our mails, – that they are in a very difficult position for economical reasons (the association does not have the money to pay IAJ yearly fees nor to participate in our meetings) and that they would be glad to go on as members of the IAJ, but after the assistance and financing of the Dutch has ceased they do not have the material means to pay the fee and to travel abroad. Mrs. Tratnik remarked that Moldova is not paying the IAJ fee since 2002.

Vice President Mr. Vrieze took the floor to underline that he had contacted Mr. Vincke, who previously had been for a certain period of time in Moldova on behalf of a Dutch initiative. He had confirmed that any assistance from the Dutch part had ceased and that currently a German project of assistance had been set up. He added that the Netherlands had never financed the Moldovan Association. The assembly took note of this information.

3.2. Georgia:

President Tratnik pointed out that, under point 12.2. of her written report, she had informed the member associations on the request the EAJ received from Mr. Sophio Japaridze, legal assistant of the NGO “Article 42 of the constitution” from Georgia, which is representing the interests of Judge Mariamidze, dismissed from the position as a result of the reprimand imposed on him as an administrative measure. Emphasizing their concern about the law on “Disciplinary Responsibility and Disciplinary Litigation for the Common Courts’ judges of Georgia” which is in their view undermining the principle of rule of law, the organization asked the EAJ to react within the scope of its competence. According to the decision of the EAJ on the procedure of such applications, the message was send to the Georgian Association of Judges, asking them for an information or explication. Until now the association did not answer.

On 17 May Mrs. Tratnik received information from the German Association of Judges on the meeting of the GAJ held with group of Georgian Supreme Court Judges on 15th May 2006. In his report Mr. Jünemann recapitulated the history of the Georgian Association and of the Georgian judiciary during these last years. Currently the leading party is trying to install judges that follow the party line. Under the pretext of an anti-corruption campaign many judges have been dismissed, in a few cases for good reasons though. Due to critics from abroad they then changed the method and offered all judges elected by the former government and parliament a voluntary resignation with the option to get full salary payment even after their resignation. So almost two thirds of the roundabout 350 members of the judiciary chose this option, against the reluctant rest, disciplinary measures were taken. Although the appeal 8 against this ruling has not been decided yet our colleagues did not seem to be too confident that the decision still could be changed. Nonetheless they asked for support by showing public interest from abroad to protect those Georgian Judges who still try to provide fair trials and do not simply follow the prosecutors’ demands.

Mr. Jünemann took the floor to explain his written report and the assembly took note of it.

3.3. Spain:

Mrs. Tratnik informed the assembly that the Spanish Association send on 17th May information on “Proximity Justice”, explaining that the Spanish government had presented a draft bill for the creation of so called “proximity courts.” This problem was discussed at the meeting of the IBA group, where a declaration of the group was adopted (but so far she did not receive it). That meant that there was already an official opinion of the IAJ on this topic. Spanish delegates took then the floor to explain the situation, underlying that all Spanish associations are against this bill. The French delegate Mr. Barella took as well the floor to explain the French system of the “juges de proximité”, whose appointment is deeply influenced by political choices. A long discussion took subsequently place, during which also the delegates from Austria and Romania took the floor. The assembly decided to take note of the resolution adopted by the Ibero American Group and to endorse it.

3.4. France:

The President introduced the discussion on this topic by underlying that the French Association of Judges sent (email communication on 27th April 2006) a note and the draft resolution for the EAJ meeting in Vilnius (both documents were on 2nd May forwarded to the EAJ members). From the note it can be seen that the Parliamentary Commission, set up in January 2006, should give a report on 13th June and what it appears to be envisaged is that: 1. disciplinary accountability could be provided for also as far as the contents of judicial decisions are concerned; 2. a reform of the High Judicial Council could be envisaged, according to which judges should be represented only in a minority way.

The information from the French colleagues came very short before the meeting in Vilnius and was also very brief. For this reason it was impossible to pass it to the EAJ permanent WG on the independence (where France is member also) to prepare an opinion, on the other hand the Parliamentary Commission did not deliver its report yet (it will deliver its report on 13 June 2006).

The French delegates took the floor to explain the current situation in their country, and asking for the approval of the proposed resolution. A long discussion took place, during which delegates from Slovenia, the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Romania and Honorary President Woratsch took the floor. Finally a special WG was set up, charged of drafting two different resolutions on the subjects involved. Such WG was composed of delegates from Austria, France, United Kingdom and Vice President Mr. Vrieze.

3.5. Slovenia:

The President informed the assembly that the Slovenian Association of Judges send on 17th May information on Judicial Salary reform in Slovenia, from which one can see Slovenian judges initiated to begin proceedings for constitutional review before the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia. Mr. Zalar from Slovenia took the floor to explain that the Slovenian Association whished that the assembly took note of this information. The assembly took note of Mr. Zalar’s report.

Closing this point of the agenda President Tratnik remarked that the Polish delegation had not explained why they had decided not to attend the meeting. Mrs. Tratnik will send a letter on this topic to the Polish Association.

Vice President Mr. Vrieze recalled the contents of the report he sent on the meeting of the Network of European Judicial Councils. The assembly approved the proposal of the 9 President to send a letter to the Secretary General of this Network, in order to apply for the status of observer. Contacts will be also done by Vice President Mr. Vrieze who will report on this topic during next EAJ meeting in Hungary.

Vice President Bento Company distributed to each delegation an issue (No. 16) of the review “Justice in the World,” which will be accessible on the net at the following address: http://www.justiceintheworld.org.

4.  Contacts and co-operation with the European institutions

4.1. Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE):

President Tratnik informed the assembly that the 6th meeting of the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE), was held in Strasbourg from 23rd to 25th November 2005. The EAJ was represented by Judge Joseph D. Camilleri from Maltese Association of Judges. The CCJE adopted the text of Opinion No. 7 (2005) on “Justice and society”. In 2006 the CCJE will prepare an opinion on “The role of the judge and the balance between protection of the public interest and human rights in context of terrorism”. The next plenary meeting shall take place in Strasbourg from 8-10th November 2006. In 2007 the 3rd European conference of Judges will be held and probably focus on the role of the high councils for the judiciary.

4.2. European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ):

Mrs. Tratnik explained that the 6th Plenary Meeting of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) was held on 7th to 9th December 2005 in Strasbourg. The meeting was chaired by Mr. Eberhard Desch (Federal Ministry of Justice, Germany). The EAJ obtained the full observer status to this commission and the President of the EAJ participated to the meeting and gave the presentation of the EAJ. At the meeting the Medium-Term Activity Programme was adopted.

Also in 2006 the CoE and EC are organizing, for the second consecutive year, a competition to discover innovative and efficient practices used in the European courts for court organization or for the conduct of civil proceeding. A European prize for innovative practice in civil justice organization and procedure, called “Crystal Scales of Justice” is to be awarded within the framework of the European Day of Civil Justice (25 October). Entries can be submitted before 31 August from courts, Bars or any other bodies of judicial professionals in the member states of the EU or the CoE. The “Crystal Scales of Justice” Award will be presented to the winner at a prize-giving ceremony, which will be held on 26 October at the French Court of Cassation in Paris.

The next – 7th plenary meeting of CEPEJ will take place in Rome on 6-7th July 2006 and will deal with the answers to the questionnaire “Evaluating European Judicial Systems 2004” as it was done for 2002 (European Judicial Systems 2002 – when the report had major impact on all European judicial matters on national and supra-national level and nearly all governments were using the report in discussions with the judiciary and in public argumentation). That’s why it is important that our report on the salaries on 2004 is finished before this meeting.

4.3. European Commission

4.3.1. Experts meeting on Conflicts of Jurisdiction and the principle of ne bis in idem in criminal proceedings, Brussels 30th and 31st May 2006:

Mrs. Tratnik pointed out that on 23 December 2005, the Commission adopted a Green Paper on conflicts of Jurisdiction and the Principle of ne bis in idem in criminal proceedings and the associated Commission Staff Working paper. With these documents the commission has launched a public consultation on the subject; the Commission’s public consultation on 10 this topic will continue with the Experts Meeting, which will be held on 30-31 May 2006 in Brussels. The outcome of these discussions, together with the written replies to the Green Paper, would prepare the ground for the Commission’s task of presenting a legislative Proposal on the subject jurisdiction conflicts. The commission intends to present a legislative Proposal on the subject in last quarter of 2006.

With a letter on 27th April 2006 the EAJ was invited to participate at the meeting. After the consultation with the President of the Belgian Association, she informed the EU with the letter on 8th May that Ms. Marianne Lejeune and Mr. Denecker from the Belgian association of judges would participate and represent the EAJ at the meeting. Mrs. Tratnik thanked the Belgian association. Mr. Jünemann informed the assembly that the German Association had prepared a written opinion on this topic, published on its website.

4.3.2. Congress “e-Justice & e-Law – New IT-Solutions for Courts, Administration of Justice and Legal Information Systems”:

Vienna 31st May to 2nd June 2006: Mrs. Tratnik informed the assembly that the EAJ received an invitation to participate at the IT-Congress, organized during the Austrian Presidency, by the Austrian Federal Ministry of Justice, the Austrian Federal Chancellery, the European Commission and the Council of Europe, which will take place in Vienna from 31st to 2nd June 2006. With a letter on 24th February 2006 the President of the EAJ thanked for the invitation and informed the organizer that Mr. Gerhard Reissner from Austria will participate and represent the EAJ at the congress. Mr. Reissner will attend the meeting and prepare a short written report before the next meeting.

5. Budget information

See enclosure No. 5.

Mrs. Tratnik pointed out that on 8th November 2005 when the last report on budget was made the availability of the EAJ was 16,133.15 Euro. From 8th November 2005 till 2 May, the EAJ received the contribution from the IAJ for the year 2006 of 3,000.00 Euro and spent 583.50 Euro (what represent the reimbursement of the travel expenses for the President of the EAJ for the meetings in Brussels and Strasbourg). On 2 May the availability of the EAJ budget was 18,549.65 Euro. The President informed as well the assembly about associations that did not paid their contribution for the IAJ for the year 2006 and recalled the consequences of a prolonged non-payment, set by the IAJ’s Constitution.

6. Future meetings

President Tratnik recalled that EAJ’s next meeting will be held on 28th September 2006 in the afternoon, during the annual IAJ meeting in Siofok (Hungary) from 28 September to 2 October 2006, when the new Presidency committee will be elected and where also the assembly of the EAJ will elect one of the Vice Presidents from Europe for the President of the EAJ of the next term (as it is provided in Article 4, Para. 2 of Statutes f the EAJ). The Hungarian delegate took the floor to explain the current state of preparation of the meeting and the President and the assembly thanked him for the invitation.

Vice President Bento Company took the floor to inform the assembly that the 2007 spring meeting of the EAJ will take place in the town of Valencia, Spain, during the month of March.

The delegate from Finland confirmed that his Association will organise the spring meeting in the year 2008.

The President and the assembly thanked the delegates from Spain and Finland for their invitations.

7.  Miscellaneous

7.1. Request from AMBA (Association of members of the Board of Appeal – European Patent office):

Mrs. Tratnik informed the assembly that, during the PC meeting in Rome (May 2005) the Italian colleague Mr. Vincenzo Di Cerbo explained the contents of a letter that the Association of members of the Board of Appeal had sent to the IAJ’s General Secretariat, lodging an application for membership and expressing their interest for the activities of the IAJ. The European Patent Office is actually acting as a judge of appeal towards decisions taken in the first instance by an administrative body of Patent office. Members of the Board of Appeal can be either technicians or judges, coming from the judiciaries of the European countries which are members of this institution. As the IAJ can accept as members only national associations of judges, the PC took no final decision on the application of AMBA and decided to charge the Secretariat to request a more elaborated proposal for further cooperation with the EAJ.

By a letter addressed to the IAJ Secretary General (on 4th November 2005) the AMBA expressed their wish that one or two members of its board might attend the next the EAJ meeting in Vilnius as observers. After the e-mail consultation with the Vice Presidents Gert Vrieze and Jose Maria Bento Company and considering that until now the observers only were invited after a respective decision was made on this, Mrs. Tratnik informed the Secretary General (e-mail communication on 24 March 2006) that a delegate from AMBA could not be invited to the EAJ meeting in Vilnius, as the question on possible co-operation with AMBA should be previously discussed and decided by the assembly of the EAJ and the PC.

During the discussion the Italian delegate Mr. Zuccarelli underlined that this association had not explained the reasons for their interest in our works. Mrs. Tratnik added that not all members of this association are judges and that judges belonging to the Patent Office are already members of respective national associations.

The assembly approved the decision taken by the President.

7.2. Seminar on the topic of defendant’s rights in criminal proceedings in Europe

The German Association of Judges will organize a judicial seminar on the topic of defendant’s rights in criminal proceedings in Europe on 1-2 December 2006 in Berlin. Mr. Jünemann took the floor to explain that this initiative is linked to the German Presidency of the EU, which will start as of January 1st, 2007.

 

SESSION OF 20th MAY 2006

The session was opened at 9.30 a.m. by President Tratnik, with the attendance of the same IAJ officials and delegates who attend ended the meeting of 19th May.

Upon proposal of the President the assembly unanimously approved a Resolution on High Judicial Councils and a Resolution on the tendency by members of the executive and of the legislature (a) to demand that individual judges give further public accounts for their decisions in particular cases beyond those already given in accordance with their judicial duty and (b) to demand disciplinary action against individual judges in respect of their decisions in particular cases. Both resolutions were prepared by the ad hoc WG (see enclosures No. 2 and No. 3).

President Tratnik submitted to the assembly a draft letter to be sent to the Supreme Court of Turkey and the assembly unanimously approved it (see enclosure No. 4).

President Tratnik closed the meeting at 10.30 a.m. She thanked once again the Lithuanian Association of Judges and its President and all colleagues, for the perfect organisation of the meeting, for their hospitality and very good working conditions during the 12 meeting.

Special thanks were also conveyed to the Secretariat General, especially to Ms. Barbara Scolart and Giacomo Oberto, Deputy Secretary General.

The President of the EAJ                   The Deputy Secretary General of the IAJ

Maja Tratnik                                                   Giacomo Oberto

Enclosures:

  1. Resolution concerning the practice in some jurisdictions of subjecting the remuneration of Judges to a discretionary element in the form of a performance bonus.
  2. Resolution concerning High Judicial Councils.
  3. Resolution concerning the tendency by members of the executive and of the legislature (a) to demand that individual judges give further public accounts for their decisions in particular cases beyond those already given in accordance with their judicial duty and (b) to demand disciplinary action against individual judges in respect of their decisions in particular cases.
  4. Letter to the President of the Supreme Court of Turkey.
  5. Budget 2005-2006 and Expenses from 8 November 2005 to 2nd May 2006.

 

The European Association of Judges at the meeting in Vilnius on 20th May 2006 unanimously adopted the following

RESOLUTION

The European Association of Judges notes with concern the practice in some jurisdictions of subjecting the remuneration of Judges to a discretionary element in the form of a performance bonus.

It is the view of the Association that this practice is objectionable on various grounds. In addition it conflicts with European standards and presents a real threat to the independence of judges.

In the first place, the criteria by which the eligibility of a particular judge for a performance bonus is assessed are not objective and transparent.

In the second place, the practice creates a temptation to give greater weight to quantity rather than to quality. Criteria of productivity, based on cost and speed, cannot be applied to the specific jurisdictional function of judges. The quality of judicial decisions depends on the ability of judges to do justice in individual cases and not on the number of judgements they are able to deliver in a given time. Subjecting the remuneration of judges to criteria of socalled “efficiency” (such as cost and time) creates the danger of a deterioration in the quality of justice: quality will be sacrificed on the altar of quantity.

In view of these considerations the European Association of Judges strongly opposes the principle that a part of the remuneration paid to judges should consist of a performance bonus.

 

The European Association of Judges at the meeting in Vilnius on 20th May 2006 unanimously adopted the following

RESOLUTION

1.) It is now widely recognised that the principles of separation of powers of the state and the independence of the judiciary are indispensable to safeguard the rights of citizens.

2.) It is also widely recognised that these principles can be enforced by the creation of an independent High Judicial Council or an analogous body1 in which a majority of its members are elected by their peers.

3.) In France these principles have been adopted by prescribing the election of members of the Conseil Supérieur de la Magistrature (C.S.M.) by all judges and prosecutors.

4.) The EAJ notes that in France it is suggested that the composition of the C.S.M. be modified to make possible an appreciable increase in the number of members appointed by the political authorities thus upsetting the current balance of power.

5.) The EAJ expresses its grave concern with such developments, because a High Judicial Council or analogous body must have a strong degree of independence or autonomy from political or other authorities, or else there is always a danger that it may undermine judicial independence3 and public trust in the judiciary.

Vilnius, May 20th

 

The European Association of Judges at the meeting in Vilnius on 20th May 2006 unanimously adopted the following

RESOLUTION

The EAJ notes, with dismay, that in some European states there has been a tendency by members of the executive and of the legislature (a) to demand that individual judges give further public accounts for their decisions in particular cases beyond those already given in accordance with their judicial duty and (b) to demand disciplinary action against individual judges in respect of their decisions in particular cases.

The EAJ urges all concerned to note that:

  1. a) Any attempt by the executive or legislature to enquire into the decisions of an individual judge or the reasons for decisions concerning a particular case constitutes an unwarranted interference with the judicial process and a direct threat to the independence of the judiciary;
  2. b) Any attempt by the executive or legislature to take disciplinary action against a judge in relation to a decision in a particular case or the reasons for it is an unwarranted interference with the judicial process; a direct threat to the independence of the judiciary and contrary to the principle of judicial control of disciplinary matters concerning judges.

Vilnius, May 20th

 

The European Association of Judges at the meeting in Vilnius on 20th May 2006 charged the President to convey the following message to the President of the Supreme Court of Turkey

The European Association of Judges wishes to express its deepest sympathies to fellow judges in Turkey following the appalling attack on and murder of one of the judges.

The EAJ is confident that this despicable attack will not deter judges in Turkey from maintaining judicial independence and the Rule of Law.

The EAJ President Maya Tratnik Vilnius,

20th May 2006

 

 

BUDGET 2005-2006 and EXPENSES FROM 8 NOVEMBER 2005 TO 2 MAY 2006

(in EURO)

total A) Reserves + 16,133.15

  1. B) Contribution from the IAJ for the year 2005-06 + 3,000.00
  2. C) Total availability for the year 2005-06 [A+B] + 19,133.15
  3. D) Reimbursement of Ms Tratnik’s travel expenses for EAJ (Bruxelles and Strasbourg) – 583.50
  4. E) Total expenses [D] – 583.50 F) Availability on 2 May 2006 [C-E] + 18,549.65