Outcome 1.3.1
“The HJC capacities (including processes, capabilities and management) and resources (financial, equipment and infrastructure) are adequate for it to carry out its activities. HJC appoints, promotes and transfers the required number of judges and/or legal advisors according to required and approved rules and standards”.
This result is specifically related to HJC, as one of the institutions included in Objective 1.3.
With the fulfillment of Objective 1.3, the expected outcome for HJC 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 relation to this premise, the authority provided to this institution vis-à-vis the judiciary will be exercised according to the relevant standards of the domain.
Currently the HJC, in these first few years of operation, is increasing its capacity and performance. HJC has set up constituent structures, has recruited staff and has an infrastructure that has enabled it to establish the necessary legal basis to exercise its activity. It has adopted a series of decisions on appointment, transfer criteria and has set standards on performance measurement and career system[1]. Throughout the duration of CJS II, capacity building and impartial discharge of responsibilities, based on the principles of meritocracy and transparency, will enable the achievement of the objective to strengthen this body and act in accordance with domain standards. As a result, Outcome 1.3.1 is logical and in coherence with Objective 1.3 as well as with the current situation.
The outcome is in line with the provisions of CJS I, but also in line with the expected outcomes of the measures listed in the CJS 1 2019-2021 Action Plan (specifically measures 1 and 3 of sub-objective 1/a, as well as measure 1 of sub-objective 1/b)
This outcome is as a matter of fact also expected upon fulfillment of certain measures in goals 2 (2.1 1) and 3 of the 2019-2020 HJC Strategic Plan for the Judicial System in the Republic of Albania.
Outcome 1.3.1 is logical and deemed as necessary and expected in terms of the goals of Policy 1 and Objective 1.3. However, the elements set out in this outcome that guide the understanding of capacity, i.e., the part “including processes, capabilities and management” remains unclear. This difficulty is also emphasized by the lack of completeness of the measures that have been foreseen in order to achieve this outcome. To achieve this, CJS II only contains the measure “Completion of procedures for the appointment, promotion, transfer of magistrate graduates from the SoM”. In addition to incorrect wording, as will be analyzed below, the measure appears to have a partial effect on achieving this outcome. For this reason, it is recommended that measures be added to CJS II to make the outcome realistic, or to link this outcome with the eventual measures that HJC plans to include in its Strategic Plan for the following years, which is in the development stage.
In CJS II, there are currently no indicators to measure this outcome. Referring to the CJS I 2019-2021 Action Plan, to measure its progress, the following is provided as an indicator: “% of judges and prosecutors who believe that judges have been appointed/promoted, transferred, for reasons other than skill and experience in the last two years (separate values for judges and prosecutors)”. The inclusion of the indicator “% of judges who believe that judges have been appointed/promoted based on meritocracy and career system”, related to the judiciary, would provide quantitatively and qualitatively the perception of the achievement of the outcome for the implementation of standards in the exercise of its activity and would make it more realistic. To measure the appropriate financial resources an indicator could be “% of the state budget dedicated to HJC in relation to the draft budgets proposed by the institution itself”. For the capacity measurement part, a measurement indicator would be “% of HJC advisors/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 to be envisaged for capacity building and infrastructure.
Conclusion: The outcome is required and meets Specific Objective 1.3. It should clarify the elements that imply capacities in order to identify measures and indicators for their measurement. Also, the drafters should consult the HJC on the measures that will be determined and that should be taken in order to fully achieve this outcome. We also suggest that these indicators be included to monitor this outcome: “% of judges who believe that judges are appointed/promoted based on a meritocracy and career system”, “% of the state budget dedicated to HJC in relation to the budget projected and proposed by the institution itself”, as well as % of HJC advisors/administration who have been trained on their functional duties”.
[1]For more information, please read approved bylaws in http://klgj.al/akte-normative-nenligjore/