Policy Goal 2
“Strengthen transparency, efficiency of the judiciary and access to justice in line with constitutional, legal requirements and European standards”.
Policy Goal 2 relates to the effect that justice reform has had on the judiciary. Since a new mechanism is provided in Policy Goal 1, different from the previous one, analyzed as problematic as it did not provide impartiality, efficiency, transparency, accountability, etc., the new mechanism, through new institutions and new laws, must have positive effects on the judicial system.
These desired effects are clearly expressed in Policy Goal 2 and relate to the performance of the judiciary as a whole. The judiciary will need to build a more transparent relationship with the public and its users, be accessible to the parties, act quickly and efficiently. Also, Policy Goal 2 states that in meeting these standards, work should take into account Albanian law and European standards.
CJS I contained an almost identical strategic objective, Strategic Objective 3: “Improving the operation of the judicial system by strengthening its efficiency, transparency and approach in line with European standards”. This provision seems to fit perfectly with the approach of the 2015-2020 National Strategy for Development and Integration (NSDI), according to which the judiciary should be transparent and should gain the trust of the public. However, CJS I, under this strategic objective, also provided measures related to public access[1].
Whereas the new Strategy contains a specific objective which was drafted separately, Specific Objective 2.3, which is related only to increasing the professionalism of the judiciary. So, it seems that the new Strategy contains a new requirement for the judiciary related to the increase of its professional capacity, which should have been stated within Policy Goal 2. This is a very important requirement and with long-term consequences, therefore it is indispensable that it be in written form and be further broken down into concrete objectives and measures.
The importance of this policy is also noted due to it defining five specific objectives[2], four of which will be analyzed below due to their importance to the functioning of the justice system. This study did not analyze the objective related to the Constitutional Court, due to its special character outside of the three-level judicial system and special rules related to trials at the CC.
Given the way it is formulated, it seems that the focus of this policy goal is ‘the judiciary’ and not the ‘justice system’, although there is a connection with the prosecution and its organization, as in the case of the adoption of the judicial map, which directly impacts the functioning of the prosecution office.
Conclusion: Policy Goal 2 has a special weight in the Strategy and a great importance for this study, due to the concrete outcomes that its fulfillment requires. For this reason, it is suggested to complement it with a requirement for professionalism of the judiciary.
[1]CJS I, in strategic objective 3, provided several measures: ‘3.01. Improve legislation in order to improve the efficiency of court proceedings in particular through: -improvement of the notification system; -provision of means to prevent adjournment of trials; launching accelerated trials; – filtration criteria; – requiring reasoning at the same time as the court decision/announcement of the decision; 3.02. Establish a reasonable and proportionate system of court fees to ensure the financing of justice services, as well as guarantee access to court; 3.03. Establishment of a fair and functional system of free legal aid for individuals and groups in need; 3.04. Improving the relationship between the court and the media and ensuring public access to information in cases of public interest.
[2]Policy 2, Specific Objective 2.1 “Specific Objective 2.1. Review the legal framework regarding the judiciary as needed to further improve professional competency, accessibility, transparency and efficiency”; Specific Objective 2.2 “Institutional strengthening and capacity building of the Constitutional Court (CC), provision of adequate resources and its professional functioning, transparently and effectively”; Specific Objective 2.3 “Increasing the efficiency and professional ability of the training system which ensures advancement towards European practices and quality in the field of justice, providing an adequate number of magistrates and legal advisors trained on the justice system in Albania”; Specific Objective 2.4 “Improving the judicial system in order to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of all levels of the judicial system, including the High Court, and ensuring the provision of transparent justice, without delays and accessible to citizens” and Specific Objective 2.5 “Effective access to justice provided through legal aid, alternative dispute resolution and appropriate court fees”.