Information for the conduction of Judicial Cases

Standards of Performance and indicators

Dr. Ramón G. Brennarbrenna@derecho.uba.arrbrenna@argenjus.org.ar

Peter Drucker:

If you want to get something, measure it

If you cannot measure it, forget it

Things we lack

We lack a base line with which can compare, not only the deviations from an “ideal” situation or a “good performance”, but also the advances or results of the changes that one decides to introduce, in different situations in front of which, intuitively, we have the sensation that they are unsatisfactory or dysfunctional.

We forget about the processes of judicial

reform

Reliable information systems

Systematic evaluation

Judicial Statistics

They constitute an important part of the information system and are a central tool for the identification of the strengths and weaknesses of the systems, to design reforms and take action, follow the operations, better management and in general, for decision making of all the actors in the justice world, specially including the citizens. (CEJA- Manual)

Questions

How to compare the results of the changes?

How to develop judicial policies?

Who needs the information?

Information for the Judge

For a good administration of the court and its cases, the judge has to have access and availability to certain information about how his court is working. This implicates not only that he possesses this information, but also that he develops a continuing monitoring of the situation of the court.

– There are different levels for monitoring an adequate management of the cases.

The first one is the one of the basic information.

There, as we already seen, it’s necessary to be able to respond to some questions.

How many cases are filed each year? How many are pending? How many are pending in every court? From when are they pending?

Which is the procedural situation of every case? What was the last thing that happened in them and when? Which should be the next procedure? Is it programmed?

How many cases have finalized? How many in each court?

In what ways did the cases finish? How many with a conciliation? How many with a withdrawal of the plaintiff? How many with a reject of the plaintiff?

To get these answers you need at least some data that has to be assessed daily, and the desirable thing would be that the computer system would automatically give us most of the information.

Classification by type of expedient, type of process and tendencies.

Expedients pending in each court. Tasks pending on every expedient. Date of last activity and details of it. Verdicts or any other form of termination of the

process and its comparative time.

The second level aims to an efficient functioning.

In this case information from the historic evolution of the trials and its duration and the establishment of standards of duration for each kind of trial and each subject.

We have to start from the establishment of the standards of duration that are considered acceptable and do the measurement by relevant procedural stages of each trial.

These criteria or standards and the objectives must be defined and

adopted:

For all the Judicial system For parts of the system For particular cases. Shows of cases and standards of specific times.

Time Standards help because:

They promote an expedite justice. They offer motivation for achieving goals of

time. The are a pattern to measure the

effectiveness of the administration, of the programs and the individuals.

They promote the utilization of information systems to monitor the expedients and get data regarding the performance of the courts.

The monitoring and information systems presuppose the utilization of statistics and briefs as tools.

Necessary data in order to answer these questions

Showing of management information in a register. How to use the information.

Exhibition of the data, briefs, charts and graphics and it’s daily availability if it’s possible in the computer system.

Avoid giving the typical information about the judicial system problems.

Analyze the information and having total knowledge of what’s going on in the court in all times.

Well-done briefs should let the judge have complete conscience of what’s happening in the court and in all the cases.

Identify “lost” cases and the reasons of why that happens.

See if programmed and developed activities and the time between them comply with the standards and the objectives.

Monitor the verdicts or the ending of the cases, the old cases and percentage of trials and compare again with the expected standards.

Identify the problems in order to take any kind of action. Are the cases delayed? What motivates that particular problem?

All that we discussed should lead to a better and more efficient management, which is the third level.

The questions here are:

How does the information compares with the judges perception about the system?

What are the tendencies in the short and medium ranges? According to the generated information, what problems can be anticipated? What actions could be adopted in order to avoid future problems?

What are the weaknesses and the strengths of the system? What could be done to improve it?

Which cases are becoming “old” and don’t reach the standards?

Standards and CriteriaJudicial Power

Independent Impartial Competent Accessible Efficient Free of

delays

Effective Quality

oriented Predictable Equity Responsible Transparent

Standards

..Access to the Judicial System ..Quick procedures ..Equity, impartiality and congruence

..Independence ..Public Trust

Access to the judicial system

Public Procedures. Judicial Processes must be open to public

Security, easy access and comfort. Courts facilities must be secure, accessible, and adequate for its objectives.

Effective participation. Every person that has to appear before the courts must have the opportunity of completely exercise his/her rights without unfair limitations.

Courtesy, sensibility and respect. Magistrates and judicial employees must be correct and considerate in their treatment with the general public and preserve the respect that anyone who appears at the courts deserves.

Affordable costs. The access to judicial procedures and the registers measured in economic procedural, and time frames must be reasonable, fair and accessible to the general public.

Procedural Celerity Managing Judicial cases. Courts must comply with

the steps contained by the respective procedural codes in cases and keep updated of new cases that they receive in order to begin in an expedite way.

Comply with the time, deadlines and timetables.

Application of laws and procedures. Courts must apply changes introduced to laws and regulations in an effective way.

Equality, impartiality and congruence

Fair Trial. Courts must observe with fidelity and without exception laws and regulations related to procedures.

Resolutions. Courts must adequately care about relevant circumstances of each particular case but in the resolutions adopted, they must maintain as much coherence as they can with the ones taken before in similar conflicts.

Clarity. Courts must clearly decide every legitimate procedural pretension that is exposed and also establish, in a concrete way, how to comply with the taken resolution.

Responsibility for the execution. Courts must take the execution of their decisions as their own responsibility

Security of the registers. Security measures to keep secure the files of all the important decisions of the court must be taken.

Independence and Responsibility:

Respect for the independence. Courts must maintain their Institutional Purpose and show this in the relationship with other branches of the government.

Responsibility: Responsibility in the Public Resources Management. Although attributions of the Judicial Powers in the fixation of their own budget is limited, they should assume the responsibility of receiving the assigned budget and distribute it with efficiency, holding accountable for their management

Public Trust

Accessibility. Courts and Justice provision, must be perceived as accessible by the public.

Celerity, Impartiality and Trust. The Public must have confidence that the Courts are being managed with the celerity that the regulations and the specific circumstances permit and that their decisions will be impartial and fair.

Independence and Judicial Responsibility. The community must perceive courts as independent and free of any excessive influence of other institutions of the government and responsible for their acts.

.

Measure of the variables

Data. Are the values that one variable adopts in a specific moment

Information. Are the relevant data that are useful for decision-making.

Indicators. Sign, Value, Index, information that defines the existence, change or progress of a specific situation.

Board of Commands It’s an instrument that:

Gathers in a synthetic, organized and systematic way, the relevant information about the management of an organization..

It’s composed by indicators, which periodic follow, will allow having a higher awareness of the situation in the organization or sectoring, and the achievement, deviance or non-fulfillment of the expected objectives.

It contrasts between standards and pre-established objectives.

It’s generally under a computer system.

Its basic functions consist in:

Adequate Diagnosis of a situation

Align the Organization according to pre-established goals and objectives

Constitute a device or alarm and evaluation.

Types of Boards of Commands

Operative. Allows the daily follow up. Directive. Allows the monitoring of the

results of the organization and its key areas.

Strategic. Provides internal and external information, necessary to foresee the future and diminish surprises.

Integral. Has everything that the other types have and is utilized for high direction.

Some Types of indicators Of Cause. It’s preventive. Allows

anticipating. Of effect. Evaluates the obtained results. Of efficacy. Measures the achievement of

the objectives. Of efficiency. Evaluates the economy in the

use of resources in order to achieve the expected objective.

Of satisfaction. It measures qualitative opinion that a service or product deserves in the receptor’s or beneficiary’s view.

Measures of the indicators.

They can be measured: Binaurally: For yes or for no: Control by exception

(absenteeism-complaints)

By percentages or levels: Comparing to a pre-established limits (number of absences v. total of worked days)

By performance: Measures actions done in a unit of time (number of resolutions per day)

By temperature: Measures the organizational climate. (Satisfaction surveys, suggestions)

Measurements

Is there a relationship between the number of cases that begin and the number of cases that end?

What Courts of the jurisdiction have an acute dilatory problem?

How much time elapses between each phase of the trial?

What is the percentage of cases ended with conciliation?

Indicators:

Litigious information:

Cases entered every /100.000 habitants Cases entered for every judge. Rate of growth Amount of work for every judge Amount of work on every area Percentage of judicial decision not appealed. Rate of congestion (filed cases + pending

cases / resolved cases) Rate of appeals Distribution of the filed cases by area

Productivity:

Number of cases solved by every judge Division by complexity Sentences Sentences by complexity Rates of sentences Rates of cases ended by conciliation or

other anticipated ending methods. Percentage of sentences appealed. Percentage of solved issues without

sentence.

Duration and Dilation.

Time of waiting. Pending cases by area or main procedures. Rate of pending cases. Rate of resolution. Annual pending cases. Duration (Beginning-End) Distribution of duration in periods of

3,6,9,12,18,24 and more than 24 months. Percentage of cases solved in periods of

3,6,9,12,18,24 and more than 24 months.

Quality.

Rate of Revocations Rate of Annulments Number of complaints from users

Rate of Satisfaction for the information

Rate of Satisfaction for treatment received