Outcome 1.3.2
“The HPC capacities (including processes, capabilities and management) and resources (financial, equipment and infrastructure) are sufficient to carry out its activities, and the HPC appoints, promotes and transfers the required number of prosecutors and/or legal advisors according to the required and approved rules and standards.”
This outcome contains the same provisions as Outcome 1.3.1, and focuses on HPC. It presumes that with the fulfillment of Objective 1.3, for the HPC part, the expected outcome will be oriented in two directions. First, we will be dealing with a consolidated institution, which has the necessary capacities and resources to fulfill its duties and responsibilities. Secondly, in function of this premise, the authority given to this institution in relation to the prosecution office will be exercised according to the relevant standards of this field.
HPC is a functional institution since 2018, in the process of consolidating its capacities and performance. This institution is near the complete finalization of the legal basis for the appointment, transfers, promotions, measurement of the performance of prosecutors, disciplinary proceedings in the prosecution system[1]. Also, transparency in decision-making is considered as one of the most important achievements of this institution. Due to the work done so far, during the implementation of CJS II, it is expected an increase in the capacity and implementation of responsibilities in relation to the prosecution office with impartiality and based on the principles of meritocracy. This will enable the achievement of the objective of strengthening this body and operating in accordance with the standards of the field. Due to the above, Outcome 1.3.2 is in line with Objective 1.3, expected and in coherence with reality.
This outcome is a continuation of the outcomes targeted by CJS I and the CJS I Action Plan for the years 2019–2021 of CJS 1 (specifically the outcomes of measure 1 of sub-objective 1/a, as well as measure 1 of sub-objective 1/b.)
Also, the outcome is a logical consequence to the intended outcome of Program 1 “Prosecutors’ career management based on their individual professional performance” provided by the HPC Strategic Plan for 2021-2024.
In terms of wording, the same suggestion applies as for the outcome above. The elements defined as constituent components of the institution’s capacity need to be clarified.
Regarding this Outcome, CJS II does not contain concrete measures that affect capacity building or related to HPC resources. Even in this case, as for the HJC, the only measure provided refers to that in 1.3.1 “Completion of procedures for the appointment, promotion, transfer of magistrates graduated from the SoM”. HPC, although it has foreseen in its Strategic Plan as an expected outcome “Prosecutors’ career management based on their individual professional performance”, does not contain concrete measures that are directly related to capacity building or resources. Therefore, coordination with the HPC is needed on the measures that will need to be taken to successfully implement all components of this outcome.
The same suggestion applies as above on the Outcome 1.3.2 measurement indicators. Currently CJS II has no defined indicators for measuring this outcome. Even in this case the following can serve as an indicator: “% of prosecutors who believe that they have been appointed/promoted based on meritocracy and career system”, which, regarding the part of the prosecution, would provide quantitatively and qualitatively the perception on the achievement of the outcome for the part of the implementation of the standards in the exercise of its activity and would make it more realistic. To measure adequate financial resources an indicator could be “% of the state budget dedicated to HPC in relation to the draft budget proposed by the institution itself”. An indicator to measure the increase of capacities (skills) could be “% of advisors/HPC administration who have been trained on their functional duties”. Meanwhile other indicators, which will show the degree of fulfillment of this outcome will depend on the measures that need to be taken to increase capacity and infrastructure.
Conclusion: The outcome is expected and meets objective 1.3. It should clarify the elements that imply capacities, in order to have a clearer understanding of it, as well as to identify measures and indicators for their measurement, which would make this outcome realistic. The drafters should also consult with HPC about measures that will serve to achieve these outcomes. We also suggest that the following be included as indicators to monitor this outcome: “% of prosecutors who believe that prosecutors have been appointed/promoted based on meritocracy and career system”, “% of the state budget dedicated to HPC in relation to the draft budget foreseen and proposed by the institution itself”, as well as the “% of HPC advisors/administration who have been trained on their functional duties”.
[1]Read HPC 2020 Annual Raport, pp. 9-10