Measure 2.1.13

Measure 2.1.13

“Development, discussion and approval of secondary legislation package on judicial civil servants”.

This measure provides for the development and approval of all bylaws by the HJC, in cooperation with the courts, which will regulate issues related to civil servants. It is important to note that the law makes a division of powers, in the case of civil servants, between the HJC and the Court Council.

The HJC is responsible for the organization and functioning of all services related to judicial administration (Article 36 of Law 98/2016). The HJC also adopts standard rules related to court services and the requirements that judicial civil servants must meet (Article 41 of Law 98/2016). KLG adopts by decision detailed rules for the preliminary evaluation, establishment, composition and authority of the Admissions Commission, as well as for the evaluation procedure for judicial civil servants (Article 54 of Law 98/2016), parallel transfers and promotion (Article 57 and 58 of Law 98/2016) and on the procedure for termination of employment in the judicial civil service (Article 82 of Law 98/2016). The HJC is also responsible for approving detailed rules on how to calculate the number of candidates for chancellor’s position admitted to the initial training program offered by the School of Magistrates, and the vetting of candidates admitted to the entrance exam (Article 53 of Law 98/2016).

Meanwhile, it is the Court Council that makes direct decisions on the status of judicial civil servants, approves the structure and staff of the court administration (according to the model approved by the HJC), cooperates with the School of Magistrates and HJC on issues related to initial and continuous training of judicial civil servants, etc. Also, the Court Council should organize regular meetings with court users in order to increase the efficiency and quality of justice (Article 38 of Law 98/2016) and is responsible for the progress of the work of the judicial civil servant employed to a public relations role at the Court.

This is a very important measure, with a direct and visible impact on the performance of the court. For this reason, its fulfillment as soon as possible is extremely important for the judiciary and the public’s trust in justice. According to the CJS II Action Plan, this measure must be implemented by the end of 2022. By analogy with measure 2.1.11, the difficulties related to the chances of implementing this measure within this deadline are the same and can make its fulfillment impossible. It is worth noting that, so far, the HJC has developed an instruction, namely Instruction no. 85, of March 11, 2021 “On the process of filling vacancies in the judicial civil service through the procedure of parallel transfers, promotions and admissions through open competition”.

Conclusion: This measure is in line with the Outcome and the Specific Objective and is of great importance in their successful fulfillment. However, although this is an urgent measure and it would be extremely positive to carry it out in due time, again if we take into account the previous experience of the HJC in issuing acts and the large and substantial gap caused by the lack of a new judicial map, it is uncertain whether this measure is realistic and whether it will be effective if implemented so soon.

Conclusion on both measures: In both analyzed measures, the agency that carries the main weight in their fulfillment is the HJC and the courts are seen as participants. It is important that further into the study we analyze and monitor what will be the steps that the HJC will follow to establish cooperation and discussion with the courts. This is due to the fact that the justice reform changes were aimed at strengthening the courts from within (a provision reflecting this idea, for example, is the creation of a Judicial Council) and it is very interesting to see how the HJC and the courts will cooperate in order to better serve the citizens.