COURT STATISTICS – A TOOL FOR MANAGEMENT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING
Autor/i: Marina Matić Boškovič, PhD,
Stranice: 81-96
UDK: 311.3:347.9
005.6:347.9
DOI: doi.org/10.47152/rkkp.58.3.6
Apstrakt: Court statistics developed over the time from bureaucratic data collection to monitoring and evaluation of court performances and judicial reforms. In the Europe, the Council of Europe CEPEJ contributed to the promotion of court statistics as a tool for management over judiciary and evaluation of judicial performances. Modern use of statistical reporting requires setting of performance indicators, which tracking will enable monitoring of court performance and inform decision making on further actions. Some of performance indicators are recommended by the CEPEJ and are widely accepted, like clearance rate and disposition time. However, court statistics could include information beyond court cases, like financial data per court and human resource data, which could inform interventions in the area of human resource management and financial resource management, i.e. equalization of workload among courts and judges, as well as calculation of cost per case. The use of information and communication technologies (ICT) in the courts and court statistics contributed significantly to improvement of administration of justice, through development of automatized case management systems, automatic export of relevant reports on court performance based on predefined indicators. However, few preconditions are required for successful deployment of the ICT in judiciary. Countries were putting efforts to strengthen court statistics and some good practices were developed over time. Slovenia dashboard for improvement of disposition time and Serbian court maps for tracking backlog reduction are good examples that could be used replicated in countries with similar challenges and goals.
Ključne reči: court statistics / case management / ICT / decision making / administration of justice.
Reference:
– Buscaglia, E., Dakolias, M. (1999) Comparative International Study of Court Performance Indicators: A Descriptive and Analytical Account. Washington DC: Legal and Judicial Reform Unit, Legal Department, The World Bank, available at: http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/373641468769467659/pdf/multi-page.pdf
– Cerrillo, A.M., Fabra, P.A. (eds.) (2009) E-Justice: Using information communication technologies in the court system. New York: Information Science Reference.
– Cordella, A., Contini, F. (2020) Digital Technologies for Better Justice – A Toolkit for Action. Inter-American Development Bank, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.18235/0002297
– Dakolias, M. (1999) Court performance around the World. World Bank Technical Paper, (430), available at: http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/639261468758377643/pdf/multi-page.pdf
– Dransfield, S.B., Fisher N.I., Vogel, N.J. (1999) Using Statistics and Statistical Thinking to Improve Organisational Performance. International Statistical Review, 67(2), pp. 99-150.
– Hammergren, L.A. (2014) Justice Reform and Development: Rethinking Donor Assistance to Developing and Transitional Countries. New York: Routledge.
– Herrero, A., Lopez, G. (2010) Access to Information and Transparency in the Judiciary. Governance Working Paper Series. World Bank Institute.
– Hodzic, A. (2017) Courts Performance Management, Support to Justice Sector Reforms in Ukraine, EU, available at: https://www.pravojustice.eu/storage/app/uploads/public/5ae/f8e/8d5/5aef8e8d595b6456536760.pdf
– Keilitz, I. (2010) Smart Courts: Performance Dashboards and Business Intelligence. Future Trends in State Courts 2010, pp. 73-78, available at: https://cdm16501.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/ctadmin/id/1613
– Keilitz, I., Glanfield, L., Hall, D., Richardson, L. (2018) Global Measures of Court Performance. Melbourne: International Consortium for Court Excellence.
– Kusek, J.Z., Rist, R.C. (2004) Ten steps to a Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation System: A Handbook for Development Practitioners. Washington
DC: World Bank.
– Matić Bošković, M. (2017) Management of Court Performance as part of Judicial Accountability. Strani pravni život, 61(2), pp. 77-92.
– Simović, M., Šikman, M. (2018) Efficiency of Criminal Proceedings – Between Expectations and Reality. Journal of Criminology and Criminal Law, 56(3), pp. 23-43.
– Velicogna, M. (2007) Justice Systems and ICT – What can be learned from Europe?. Utrecht Law Review, 3(1), pp. 129-147, doi: https://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.41
Other Sources:
– CEPEJ (2007) Monitoring and Evaluation of Court System: A Comparative Study.
– CEPEJ (2008) CEPEJ Guidelines on Judicial Statistics, available at: https://rm.coe.int/1680747678, accessed on 26.10.2020.
– CEPEJ (2016) Towards European Timeframes for Judicial Proceedings Implementation Guide, available at: https://rm.coe.int/16807481f2, accessed on 26.10.2020.
– UNODC (2011) Resource Guide on Strengthening Judicial Integrity and Capacity. Vienna: UNODC.
Online sources:
– https://rm.coe.int/judicial-data-warehouse-and-performance-dashboards-supreme-court-of-sl/168078b0cb, accessed on 30.10.2020.