BULGARIA: JUDICIAL ASSESSMENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The present Government has taken significant
steps to start the reform of its public administration, including
the judicial branch. In the area of legal and judicial reform,
important changes have been or will soon be implemented.
As illustrated in the Judicial Assessment, much
still remains to be done. The judicial branch has no centralized
management staff for budgetary and administrative planning, no
effective disciplinary organization, no facilities or other
arrangements for training new personnel or for continuing education
of existing personnel, no centralized or uniform case management
criteria or system, very poor enforcement of judgements, poor
physical court facilities in the busiest courts, and very poor
administrative and clerical assistance for judicial
professionals.
There is clear commitment on the part of the
Government to fight corruption and, as part of this effort, to
tackle some related issues in the functioning of the judicial
system. Many of the reforms already undertaken, or in the pipeline,
are extremely necessary and timely. In contrast to the Government’s
planned reform of its public administration, the measures taken to
date in the area of judicial reform do not appear to form part of
an overarching, integrated judicial reform strategy but rather,
represent a sequence of reactive measures designed in large part to
combat corruption and overcome perceived inefficiencies in the
system.
In order to bring about systemic change in the
judicial system as a whole, a strategic vision for the judicial
branch needs to be developed and a holistic reform program designed
and implemented. Assuming any such national program to be sound,
its adoption would most certainly act as a catalyst in attracting
foreign financing for judicial reform activities.
The most critical reforms and measures suggested
in the body of the Judicial Assessment are summarized below. All
the suggestions made by the Bank in the Judicial Assessment are
intended to assist the Government in forming a clear picture of the
breadth of the reforms necessary in designing a program to bring
about systemic change in the judicial system. On the basis of the
recommendations made, the Government should continue its efforts to
develop the direction and design of its own reform program and take
the first, and most fundamental step toward this goal, the
preparation of a phased reform program for the judicial system.
An institutional body should be charged with
this task, a body or working group representing a cross section of
interests in the judicial system including from the following:
judicial branch professionals, the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC),
the Ministry of Justice (MOJ), legal NGOs, legal academics,
Ministry of Interior, Bulgarian Bar Association, Ministry of
Education. This working group would then also form a counterpart
group to coordinate the activities of various donors and
international financial institutions in the area of legal and
judicial reform.
A Proposed Reform Agenda
Strengthening the SJC
An important weakness identified in the Judicial
Assessment lies in the lack of institutional support for the SJC in
fulfilling its constitutional mandate to oversee the judicial
branch. As recommended in the Judicial Assessment, strengthening
the SJC represents an essential prerequisite for any reform program
in order to allow it properly to perform its constitutional role.
Support is necessary to build its budgetary, supervisory and
planning capacity, its methodology in personnel matters and its
capacity to assess the physical needs of the courts. To implement
the Government’s anti-corruption strategy, an internal affairs
function within SJC should be developed to handle internal
corruption investigations on an on-going basis for all parts of the
judiciary.
Fundamental Public Administration
Issues
Other broader issues, critical to a judicial
reform strategy, should be looked at by GOB. These include: the
extent of the immunities given to the judiciary; determination of a
satisfactory pay scale for judges; and achieving greater
coordination between the functions and resources of the SJC and the
MOJ and devising means so that these two bodies could work together
to assist each in performing their respective roles.
Tackling the Inefficiencies in the Court
System
Both the Judicial Assessment and the USAID
report make a number of recommendations for the improvement of
caseload management in the courts. The GOB is
urged to build upon existing efforts to create the Uniform
Information System, initially for the criminal caseload, and later
for the civil caseload. A computerized case-tracking, file
management, and docketing system should be developed for the courts
to enable them to capture complete information on length of cases
and manner of disposition at each stage of a case.
Before seeking donor assistance, an internal
review of each part of the judicial branch should be undertaken to
determine the computer assets owned in the courts and to evaluate
the software systems available. This review should be combined with
an analysis of any physical space available and modifications
required to the court buildings in order to provide for increased
computerization. The clerical needs of the courts also need to be
examined in the light of the USAID report and the advent of
increased computerization.
Functions of, and Alternatives to, the Court
System
Other components of an overall judicial
strengthening program should also include measures such as the
development of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms and the
establishment of "small claims" courts or procedures. It will also
be necessary to take a long, hard look at the functions performed
by the courts, such as registration of land and enterprises, and to
determine if the courts are the proper place for these
functions.
Improving the Quality of Legal Education and
Legislative Drafting
Within the context of the Government’s reform
program in the area of higher education, the education and training
needs of Bulgarian lawyers and judges need to be reassessed.
Experts, preferably from a civil law system within the EU, may be
able to provide assistance in this area. A similar assessment
should also be carried out, in consultation with the EU, of the
process and quality of legislative drafting.
Focus on Enforcement
Greater emphasis should be placed on developing
measures to improve the enforcement of judgments. Any other
measures to strengthen the judiciary would come to nothing if the
present weaknesses in enforcement remained an ongoing bottleneck in
the administration of justice.
Access to Justice
In view of the EU’s accession requirements,
further analysis could usefully be undertaken of any real or
perceived obstacles to easy access to justice for all citizens.
Anti-Corruption Strategy
A functioning and independent judiciary is
central to any anti-corruption strategy. The courts cannot be
effective in controlling corruption unless corruption is eradicated
from within the ranks of the judiciary. The proposals made in this
report for strengthening the SJC, establishing ethical norms,
formalized disciplinary channels and an oversight function for the
judiciary would constitute the first steps in attempting to rid the
judiciary of internal corruption and equip it to be an effective
tool in the Government’s overall anti-corruption strategy. The
Government is also urged to look at the issues raised in this
report on the extent of the criminal immunity granted to members of
the judiciary.
|