Publication: Improving the Performance of Justice Institutions
Loading...
Published
2011
ISSN
Date
2017-06-28
Author(s)
Editor(s)
Abstract
This paper presents a selection of experiences from Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries in managing justice institutions which are the most relevant for performance improvement of their counterparts in Latin America. The scope of the paper is mostly limited to the courts, but comprises all types of courts: specialized courts as well as courts of general jurisdiction, civil as well as criminal and administrative courts, first instance as well as appellate and supreme courts. Issues of legal reform, judicial training, alternative dispute resolution or access for the poor are not considered in this paper. The first chapter provides an overview of the justice sector reform experience in Latin America over the last two decades, and how these reforms coincide with or follow OECD country trends. The second chapter outlines the context of the debates regarding the performance and quality of justice services in OECD countries prior to the 1990s. The third chapter discusses the transition from traditional justice reform approaches in OECD countries to the New Public Management (NPM) approaches that began in the 1990s. The fourth chapter presents five major cases of reforms in public expenditure, human resources, and organizational restructuring in the justice sectors of five different countries. The fifth chapter describes recent trends in OECD countries regarding quality controls in court service delivery which share approaches with the private sector. The paper concludes with some suggestions about areas where Latin American judiciaries may benefit from experiences of OECD countries.
Link to Data Set
Citation
“Decker, Klaus; Mohlen, Christian; Varela, David F.. 2011. Improving the Performance of Justice Institutions. © World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/27451 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Digital Object Identifier
Associated URLs
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Uses and Users of Justice in Africa : The Case of Ethiopia's Federal Courts(World Bank, 2010-07-01)This report presents the findings of one of a series of studies sponsored by the World Bank on the 'uses and users' of courts in the regions where it participates in justice reform projects. These studies typically use aggregate statistics and random samples of cases files to analyze court performance. The results of these studies are useful to countries and to the Bank in separating real from imagined problems, identifying their causes, planning reform programs, and tracking their results over time. Although in Africa court use is typically restricted to a small portion of the population, most donor funding goes to the formal court system and most countries are interested in expanding access to the latter. Hence, the studies can help evaluate those investments and point them in directions where they are likely to do the most good in advancing objectives like increased and more equitable access, delay reduction, and satisfactory resolution of common disputes. Ethiopia is one of the poorest countries in Africa and thus in the world. As in the rest of Africa, traditional dispute resolution mechanisms and a series of 'hybrid institutions' serve a majority of the population. However, its judicial system is unusual in several aspects. First, since 1994, the government has been actively engaged in expanding access to the formal system and improving the professionalism of its judges. Second, at both the federal and sub-national levels, governments have been actively extending the reach of the court system, both by adding courts and judges and by using a variety of additional mechanisms. Third, and most important for this study, for the past ten years, the federal judiciary has been promoting the development of a computerized case tracking system to monitor performance.Publication Vested Interests in Legal and Judicial Reform(Washington, DC, 2008-05)This report analyzes the main reasons or interests that have prevented some recent judicial and legal reforms in Honduras and Bolivia from becoming effective. It focuses on the reasons why criminal justice reforms were unable to put an end to the misuse of pre-trial detention. The report also includes a study of some of the reasons that have prevented criminal procedure code reforms from reducing the perception of impunity prevailing in both countries. With respect to the reforms of judicial selection mechanisms, it focuses on the interests that have prevented the public perception of judicial independence from improving in spite of the implementation of those reforms. The report includes an annex to Section 1, consultations with civil society in Honduras. Section 2 discusses civil and commercial justice in Paraguay. Section 3 discusses vested interests in legal and judicial reform projects in Guyana.Publication Comparative Study on Expert Witnesses in Court Proceedings(World Bank, 2010-06-30)The Turkish Ministry of Justice has identified the existing system of expert witnesses as an obstacle to the efficiency and effectiveness of the judicial services. The 2009 judicial reform strategy and the judicial reform action plan call for a comparative study analyzing the experience in other countries to provide input into the policy debate in Turkey. This study provides descriptions and analyses of approaches to the use of expert opinions in civil, criminal, and administrative court proceedings in France, Germany, Italy, and the United States. It focuses on five key areas: access to the function of expert, execution of an expert opinion, the opinion and its use in evidence, remuneration, and liability.Publication Serbia(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2015-02-09)This report aims at identifying the particular needs and constraints faced by the poorest women and men when accessing the judicial system. Similarly to the Judicial Functional Review,6 the scope of this report focuses primarily on the courts because they are the main vehicle for justice service delivery and the primary institutions of justice in Serbia. The scope includes all types of services and covers litigious and non-litigious aspects of civil, commercial, administrative, and criminal justice. The focus is on the actual implementation and day-to-day functioning of the sector institutions that deliver justice to people, rather than the law on the books . The scope includes other institutions in the sector to the extent that they enable or impede service delivery by the courts, including: the Ministry of Justice (MOJ), the High Judicial Council (HJC), the State Prosecutorial Council (SPC), the courts, the Public Prosecutor Offices (PPOs), the Judicial Academy, the Ombudsperson s Office, the police, prisons, and justice sector professional organizations (such as the Bar, notaries, bailiffs, and mediators). The focus of this report is on access to justice services, including relevant financial, informational, and geographic barriers to such access.Publication Africa Regional Justice Note : A Review and Lessons Learned(World Bank, 2010-09-14)The note is designed to assist Bank task teams, working together with their country counterparts, who may have varying levels of experience with promoting the Rule of Law (ROL); some would be familiar with the African context but not ROL, and for others, vice-versa. This note may also represent a first introduction to ROL reform; for those who have worked on such projects in the past, it should supplement existing knowledge about this emerging field. Specifically, this note aims to equip Bank staff to promote, design, conduct, and oversee projects and analytical work related to ROL reform by: providing an introduction to the ROL movement and the purpose of ROL work in the broader context of development; placing the Bank's work on the rule of law in Africa in a historical context, both in terms of Africa's recent history and the Bank's evolving priorities; presenting 'lessons learned' from past and ongoing rule of law reform efforts and providing specific guidance for embarking on new or supervising existing projects, particularly in conflict-affected and fragile situations; and highlighting rule of law projects that are noteworthy because of a particular focus or approach.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Breaking the Conflict Trap : Civil War and Development Policy(Washington, DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2003)Most wars are now civil wars. Even though international wars attract enormous global attention, they have become infrequent and brief. Civil wars usually attract less attention, but they have become increasingly common and typically go on for years. This report argues that civil war is now an important issue for development. War retards development, but conversely, development retards war. This double causation gives rise to virtuous and vicious circles. Where development succeeds, countries become progressively safer from violent conflict, making subsequent development easier. Where development fails, countries are at high risk of becoming caught in a conflict trap in which war wrecks the economy and increases the risk of further war. The global incidence of civil war is high because the international community has done little to avert it. Inertia is rooted in two beliefs: that we can safely 'let them fight it out among themselves' and that 'nothing can be done' because civil war is driven by ancestral ethnic and religious hatreds. The purpose of this report is to challenge these beliefs.Publication Governance Matters VIII : Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2008(2009-06-01)This paper reports on the 2009 update of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) research project, covering 212 countries and territories and measuring six dimensions of governance between 1996 and 2008: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption. These aggregate indicators are based on hundreds of specific and disaggregated individual variables measuring various dimensions of governance, taken from 35 data sources provided by 33 different organizations. The data reflect the views on governance of public sector, private sector and NGO experts, as well as thousands of citizen and firm survey respondents worldwide. The authors also explicitly report the margins of error accompanying each country estimate. These reflect the inherent difficulties in measuring governance using any kind of data. They find that even after taking margins of error into account, the WGI permit meaningful cross-country comparisons as well as monitoring progress over time. The aggregate indicators, together with the disaggregated underlying indicators, are available at www.govindicators.org.Publication Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators for 1996-2004(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005-06)The authors present the latest update of their aggregate governance indicators, together with new analysis of several issues related to the use of these measures. The governance indicators measure the following six dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability; (2) political instability and violence; (3) government effectiveness; (4) regulatory quality; (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. They cover 209 countries and territories for 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 37 separate data sources constructed by 31 organizations. The authors present estimates of the six dimensions of governance for each period, as well as margins of error capturing the range of likely values for each country. These margins of error are not unique to perceptions-based measures of governance, but are an important feature of all efforts to measure governance, including objective indicators. In fact, the authors give examples of how individual objective measures provide an incomplete picture of even the quite particular dimensions of governance that they are intended to measure. The authors also analyze in detail changes over time in their estimates of governance; provide a framework for assessing the statistical significance of changes in governance; and suggest a simple rule of thumb for identifying statistically significant changes in country governance over time. The ability to identify significant changes in governance over time is much higher for aggregate indicators than for any individual indicator. While the authors find that the quality of governance in a number of countries has changed significantly (in both directions), they also provide evidence suggesting that there are no trends, for better or worse, in global averages of governance. Finally, they interpret the strong observed correlation between income and governance, and argue against recent efforts to apply a discount to governance performance in low-income countries.Publication Design Thinking for Social Innovation(2010-07)Designers have traditionally focused on enchancing the look and functionality of products.Publication Government Matters III : Governance Indicators for 1996-2002(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-08)The authors present estimates of six dimensions of governance covering 199 countries and territories for four time periods: 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. These indicators are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 25 separate data sources constructed by 18 different organizations. The authors assign these individual measures of governance to categories capturing key dimensions of governance and use an unobserved components model to construct six aggregate governance indicators in each of the four periods. They present the point estimates of the dimensions of governance as well as the margins of errors for each country for the four periods. The governance indicators reported here are an update and expansion of previous research work on indicators initiated in 1998 (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobat 1999a,b and 2002). The authors also address various methodological issues, including the interpretation and use of the data given the estimated margins of errors.