Reflections on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice Sector This document is designed to serve as a reflective piece and builds on the work and conclusions reached as part of on the recently completed Functional Review of the Romanian Justice Sector (JFR). The JFR was completed under the Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS) Agreement on Functional Review of the Romanian Justice Sector (P172734), signed between the Ministry of Justice and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development on June 18, 2021. This document was not prepared in connection with the RAS Agreement. © 2024 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000; Internet: www.worldbank.org SOME RIGHTS RESERVED This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Nothing herein shall constitute or be considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Attribution—Please cite the work as follows: “World Bank. 2024. Reflections on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice Sector. © World Bank.” Reflections on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice Sector June 2024 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations/IV Executive Summary/V Introduction/1 Romania’s justice sector: cross-cutting observations/5 Optimizing Performance: Strategic Resource Management for Judicial Efficiency/9 Enhancing Access to Justice: Bridging the Gap to Legal Equity for All/15 Data-Driven Justice: Harnessing the Power of Data to Meet Citizen Needs and Improve Judicial Performance/20 Modernizing Justice: Advancing Justice through Digital transformation/26 Closing Reflections/31 III REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Acronyms and abbreviations ALEGRA Peru's Asistencia Legal Gratuita CCR Constitutional Court of Romania CEPEJ European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice CVM Cooperation and Verification Mechanism DNA National Anticorruption Directorate ECHR European Court of Human Rights ECRIS Electronic Case Registry and Information System EU European Union GDP Gross Domestic Product GoR Government of Romania HCCJ High Court of Cassation and Justice HR Human Resources HRM Human Resources Management ICT Information and Communication Technology JFR Functional Review of the Romanian Justice Sector MOJ Ministry of Justice NGO Non-Governmental Organization NRRP National Recovery and Resilience Plan PHCCJ Prosecution Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice PM Public Ministry (Prosecution Services) PO Prosecution Office RAS Reimbursable Advisory Services RMS Resource Management System SCM Superior Council of Magistracy SDJ Strategy for the Development of the Judiciary SIIJ Special Section for Investigating Offenses within the Judiciary WB World Bank IV REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary About the JFR The Functional Review of the Romanian Justice Sector (JFR), undertaken through a World Bank Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS) agreement, signified a major initiative by the Government of Romania to evaluate and strengthen justice sector performance and management. Conducted over a period of two years, the JFR was designed to assess the sector’s overall functioning, identifying strengths and areas for improvement, and offer recommendations for improved service delivery. The review’s comprehensive approach – which covered a diverse range of management and performance topics – provides a broader perspective, shedding light on how the various elements of the justice sector collectively contribute to its effectiveness and challenges. The core findings are captured in a baseline Diagnostic Report and the more comprehensive Functional Review Report. About this document This document provides observations and insights on Romania’s justice sector, building on the work and conclusions reached as part of the JFR. Its purpose is not to present every finding or recommendation from the JFR, but to distill cross-cutting conclusions and lessons that are relevant both to Romania’s ongoing justice reform and to the wider international context, as justice systems globally encounter evolving challenges and demands. At a higher level, the aim is to foster dialogue on how justice sectors can adjust to new societal needs, highlighting justice as a fundamental, universally accessible public good that underpins a just and stable society. Cross-cutting observations on Romania’s justice sector Romania has made significant strides in advancing the rule of law and justice reforms, as evidenced by the recent lifting of the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM) by the European Commission. Recent developments in Romania’s justice sector, including important legislative changes, have adjusted institutional mandates and how resources are managed. As Romania enters the next phase of justice reform, adopting a unified strategic approach and establishing a common vision for the future are essential. This vision should be centered on the people with tailored services to address real-life challenges. However, to achieve such a vision, justice institutions must navigate several systemic challenges, such as limited coordination among justice sector entities, fragmented service delivery, and nonstrategic and inefficient resource management, all of which threaten the efficiency and responsiveness of the judiciary. A strategic, collaborative effort is key to tackling these cross-cutting challenges and modernizing Romania’s justice system. This includes streamlining procedures, aligning resources, and maximizing data for improved decision making and coordination across the sector. Such a strategic approach is fundamental for increasing efficiency of and access to justice services and realizing a vision of a high-performing justice system that responds to the evolving needs of the public. Optimizing performance Strategic resource management is key to an efficient, responsive justice sector that serves the public effectively. The Romanian justice sector is grappling with staff shortages, which threaten judicial performance outcomes. Low occupancy rates in prosecution offices and, increasingly, in courts, are contributing to growing workloads and case backlogs. In courts, the uneven distribution of caseloads among judges remains a significant inefficiency. To address these challenges, adopting a strategic approach to resource management is critical, involving informed policy decisions and long- term planning for strategic outcomes. Ensuring that courts and prosecution offices are adequately staffed to deliver justice services effectively is a part of this approach. Regular assessments of caseloads and the reallocation of human resources are necessary to enhance efficiency. Moreover, collecting and analyzing reliable case processing data is vital to identify bottlenecks and empower decision-makers to implement targeted solutions for performance improvement. V REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Enhancing Access to Justice Access to justice is a crucial aspect of an equitable and fair society. Improving access to justice is a strategic priority for the Romanian justice sector, but barriers remain. The country’s fragmented approach to legal aid and low eligibility thresholds for assistance, coupled with the lack of central oversight, hamper the program’s effectiveness and the sector’s capacity to determine whether assistance reaches those who genuinely need it. Public awareness of rights is limited by inconsistent communication and the absence of clear, practical information. Inadequate infrastructure for some courts presents a barrier to accessing justice and exercising rights. Key areas for improvement include expanding legal aid, creating a central oversight department at the MOJ, and fostering rights awareness through better communication. Continuing to invest in modern, inclusive courthouses to will further remove barriers to access to justice. Data-Driven Justice Data is crucial for an effective justice system, facilitating informed decisions, resource optimization, and improved service delivery. The Romanian justice sector faces significant data challenges. The absence of standardized data management practices across institutions limits coordination and data sharing, leading to data inconsistencies and hindering cross-comparisons, ultimately impacting the sector’s capacity to understand whether it properly addresses citizen needs. Establishing a robust data governance framework, with standardized practices for data collection and management, is vital to overcome existing challenges. Such a framework would safeguard the integrity of data and advance the shift toward a data-driven approach to justice. Modernizing Justice While digital transformation is recognized as a top priority for Romania’s justice sector, the sector lacks a common strategy for its transition to digital justice services. The current ICT landscape is complex, characterized by a mix of justice-wide systems, specialized applications, and numerous bespoke local solutions. Systems are often poorly integrated, resulting in a disjointed architecture that hinders data exchange and system interoperability. This fragmentation impacts the sector’s overall effectiveness, causing inadequate coordination, misaligned initiatives, and insufficient data sharing among institutions. To accelerate and streamline digital transformation, the Romanian justice sector must align political, administrative, and technical efforts with a bold vision and governance, adapting the legal framework to prioritize end-user needs. A coherent digital strategy, supported by strong management and stakeholder engagement, along with a clear implementation roadmap, is essential to harness ICT investments for the public good. This comprehensive approach promises to enhance efficiency and accessibility, marking a transformative shift in how justice is delivered. Looking forward Romania’s justice sector reform journey, marked by progress and occasional setbacks, underscores the importance of steadfast commitment to the rule of law and the pursuit of a justice system that is just, efficient, and accessible. A unified vision for the future – one that is responsive, equitable, and adaptable to new demands, and that prioritizes the needs of the people – is essential for guiding progress. Leadership, sustainability, and flexibility are also fundamental to successful reform. Romania’s experiences offer lessons that extend well beyond its own borders, providing the global community with valuable insights. As the world continues to evolve, collective wisdom and collaborative efforts will be key in shaping justice systems that are resilient and responsive to the communities they serve. VI Introduction This document is designed to serve as a remains fit-for-purpose considering emerging reflective piece and builds on the work and societal needs. Engaging in such dialogues is crucial conclusions reached as part of the recently in affirming justice as a global public good – one completed Functional Review of the Romanian that is universally accessible and essential for the Justice Sector (JFR) conducted under the functioning of society. This collective commitment Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS) to a justice system that upholds the rule of Agreement signed between the World Bank law, protects rights, and facilitates the peaceful and Ministry of Justice. It aims to provide resolution of conflicts is the foundation of a fair, observations on the functioning of the justice stable, and prosperous society. sector in Romania, highlight key conclusions, share lessons learned, and identify potential avenues for About the Functional Review advancing justice services; it is not designed to present every detail or finding from the review. It The JFR, conducted under a World Bank RAS seeks to underscore the importance of a justice Agreement, represents a significant endeavor system that is adaptable, efficient, and attuned by Romanian authorities to assess and enhance to the changing needs of its citizens, while also the performance and management of the acknowledging the strides already made in justice sector. The Government of Romania Romania’s ongoing justice reforms. (GoR) requested World Bank support for a comprehensive analysis to identify institutional Romania’s experience is part of a larger, global strengths, pinpoint areas for improvement, and narrative, as justice systems across the world propose recommendations to address performance confront new challenges and demands. Justice challenges in the justice sector. The analysis was institutions are responding to a variety of pressures, designed to inform the development of its next including societal shifts, evolving international Strategy for the Development of the Judiciary legal standards and technological advancements, (SDJ). The engagement was part of a long-standing all of which require innovative approaches and collaboration between the GoR and the World Bank solutions. As they navigate these challenges, they to improve the delivery of justice services, as a are finding new ways to uphold the rule of law, foundational element to a fair and equitable society. protect human and economic rights, and ensure fair, efficient and modern administration of justice. At its core, the JFR aimed to assess the This process of transformation is complex and functioning of the justice sector as a whole. continuous, reflecting the dynamic nature of law It necessitated a comprehensive review that and governance in the face of a rapidly changing went beyond a targeted analysis of one function, world. To this end, this document aims to shed institution, or topic to encompass all areas of light on the evolving challenges encountered by the the justice sector. The importance of this holistic Romanian justice sector and start conversations approach lies in its ability to reveal how different on enhancing the sector’s capacity to deliver justice components of the justice system interact and effectively and equitably and to ensure the sector contribute to its overall effectiveness.  1 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - INTRODUCTION The JFR was structured into two key phases. Report presents the findings and recommendations The first phase, the baseline diagnostic (June in two main pillars with nine thematic chapters. 2021 to April 2022), involved a broad review of judicial performance. It included assessing quality, The table below offers a concise summary of efficiency, independence, and integrity, alongside the contents of the Functional Review Report, a high-level review of the management of human, presenting the main subjects addressed within financial, and ICT resources, and communication each chapter therein. This table functions as practices. This phase culminated in the Baseline a navigational tool, guiding readers through the Diagnostic Report, which outlined initial findings and content and highlighting the key areas of focus. proposed areas for deeper analysis. The second While it aims to capture the essence of the phase (May 2022 to May 2023) delved into a more chapters, it is important to note that it does not targeted examination of specific areas identified encompass every topic discussed in the Functional in the first phase. This included extensive research, Review. Likewise, this reflection document does not consultations, and direct engagement with address all the nuances and discussions included in justice practitioners, providing a detailed analysis the Functional Review Report. Therefore, readers are and strategic recommendations for enhancing encouraged to dive into Functional Review chapters management and performance across various themselves for a detailed understanding of all the facets of the justice sector. The Functional Review topics covered.  TABLE 1. Functional Review Report chapters and main topics  Chapter  Coverage and main focus  Management Pillar  • The significance of strategic management in the Romanian public administration and justice sector. • Roles of the MOJ and other institutions in the strategic management process. • Analysis of strategic management capacity in the justice sector, considering the   development and implementation of the current and previous SDJs. • Challenges and opportunities to enhance strategic management and Strategic anagement  coordination. • The evolution of communication practices within the justice sector. • Analysis of priority areas for improving internal and external communication, highlighting progress achieved and challenges. • Recommendations to enhance current communication practices to grow impact on public awareness of citizen rights, justice services, access to justice,   collaboration, and coordination. • Opportunities to build capacity and transition towards more strategic Communications Management  communications. • The role of HRM in judicial institutions and service delivery, including modernization of HRM practices in European and international models. • Analysis of selected HRM policies and practices, such as those pertaining to recruitment, promotion, performance evaluation, training, and retirement, and their impact on the functioning judiciary. • Recommendations to address HRM challenges, such as the increase in Human Resource Management  retirement, vacancies, and loss of experienced professionals. 2 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - INTRODUCTION Chapter  Coverage and main focus  • Insights from the Baseline Diagnostic Report on financial management, related aspects of the Romanian justice sector. • Critical financial issues affecting the justice sector’s functionality system and the delivery of high-quality services to the public. • Recommendations for financial management reforms, including ways to   overcome the operational challenges. Financial Management  • The role of technology as a critical tool in advancing productivity, efficiency, and accessibility of justice. • Digital transformation of the Romanian justice sector, including challenges and opportunities in the ICT architecture supporting the justice sector. • Analysis of the governance mechanisms and management of resources related   to ICT systems and programs in the justice sector. Information and • Presentation of proposed target states and suggested initiatives that facilitate Communication Technology digital transformation. Management  Performance Pillar  • An analysis of court performance, based on review of judicial statistics. • Overview of data challenges impacting the functional review of the Romanian justice sector and the sector’s capacity to understand judicial performance.   • Recommendations for improving court efficiency, drawing on international experience. Efficiency  • An analysis of performance of the prosecution services, based on review of official statistics. • Assessment of the impact of HR policies on performance.   • Recommendations for strengthening performance of the prosecution services in Romania. Prosecution Services  • The role of enforcement in the justice process, offering international examples. • Review of the legislative framework for Romania’s enforcement system and   governance arrangements for the bailiff profession. • Analysis of challenges posed by lack of enforcement data. Enforcement of Judgments • Overall challenges with the current system, user satisfaction, and and Other Enforceable Titles  recommendations for improvement. • The importance of legal aid in ensuring equitable justice services. • High-level review of developments and challenges in Romania’s legal aid provision and comparison with international standards. • Analysis of Romania’s legal aid system, including legal framework, institutional arrangements, and legal aid provision and reporting practices.   Legal Aid  • Challenges and recommendations for improving the legal aid program. 3 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - INTRODUCTION The value of the JFR lies in its approach, which collective ownership of the reforms. The RAS not only delivered diagnostic insights but also also included change management training and facilitated the collaborative development of knowledge-exchange study visits to Ireland and strategic recommendations for reform. The Sweden, which were key in building capacity for engagement has been instrumental in preparing enduring justice sector reforms. This multifaceted the MOJ and other justice institutions, such as support has positioned the Romanian justice the Superior Council of Magistracy (SCM), Public sector on a clear trajectory toward realizing its Ministry (PM), High Court of Cassation and Justice reform objectives, thereby reinforcing the country’s (HCCJ), and lower courts to advance Romania’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and justice reform agenda. Utilizing the World Bank’s enhancing justice service delivery.  convening power, the RAS successfully brought together key justice stakeholders to deliberate on Building on the analysis and findings of the JFR, sector challenges and opportunities, with the goal this document initially describes cross cutting of forging a joint perspective. Partnership and observations and reflections on Romania’s collaboration were crucial in informing the reform justice sector. The subsequent chapters explore recommendations. Through extensive stakeholder key themes identified during the functional interviews,1 multi-institutional workshops, and review, offering insights on the findings of the meticulous feedback on JFR reports, a broad JFR and looking toward the future trajectory of spectrum of viewpoints was integrated into the Romania’s justice sector. They explore the interplay final conclusions. Preserving this collaborative between different aspects of the system, assess environment is vital for developing a unified vision the implications of these findings, and propose for reform and strengthening the capacity for forward-looking approaches to enhance the sector’s lasting change. The RAS’s support extended to responsiveness and effectiveness. the development of recommendation reports for the forthcoming SDJ and its action plan, as well as proposals for a change management plan, all of which are crucial for fostering readiness and 1 Over150 formal consultations with Romanian stakeholders and numerous follow-up interviews were conducted. Interviewees included rep- resentatives from the MOJ, SCM, HCCJ and other courts Prosecution services (including specialized prosecution offices), National School for Clerks, National Institute of the Magistracy, National Union of Bar Associations, Bucharest Bar Association, National Union of Bailiffs, Bailiff Association of Bucharest, Romanian Mediation Council and other government agencies and civil society organizations. 4 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - CROSS-CUTTING OBSERVATIONS Romania’s justice sector: cross-cutting observations Romania’s progress in justice reform and the during the 2017-2019 period when the government’s rule of law has been marked by both significant changes to the justice system were seen as achievements and notable challenges. The country undermining judicial independence. The controversial has made strides in aligning its legal system with use of emergency ordinances to pass primary EU standards, particularly through the adoption of legislation, including those that sought to decriminalize comprehensive legislative codes that have modernized certain corruption offenses, bypassed the usual its legal framework. High-profile anti-corruption efforts legislative scrutiny and sparked both domestic and led by the National Anticorruption Directorate (DNA) international criticism. The creation and subsequent have resulted in the prosecution and conviction of dismantling of the Special Section for Investigating numerous officials, signaling a strong commitment Offenses within the Judiciary (SIIJ) was a particularly to integrity within public institutions. However, some contentious issue, with the European Court of Justice reforms have faced resistance and setbacks, especially assessing its compatibility with EU law. Safeguarding Justice: The Debate on Judicial Independence Judicial independence is a principle that is central to the integrity of legal systems around the world. Its goal is to “secure for individual judges, courts, and court systems the independence to resolve disputes according to the law and to shield them from improper interference from other branches of government, or private or partisan interests.”a This foundational concept ensures that the judiciary operates free from external pressures and influences, allowing for fair and impartial administration of justice. The interpretation of judicial independence is subject to debate. Some argue that it requires complete autonomy of the judiciary, while others believe it should be balanced with accountability mechanisms to prevent judicial overreach. In certain views, judges perceive independence as a license to apply the law and make decisions as they see fit, which is not inherently a conflict between independence and accountability, but rather a tension with the value of juridical certainty. This tension arises because the principle of juridical certainty requires that laws be applied consistently, predictably, and as intended by the legislators, without personal discretion undermining the consistence of legal outcomes. The balance between independence and accountability is often seen as a measure to maintain public trust in the judicial process, while also safeguarding the rule of law. The debate extends to the methods of appointing judges, their tenure, and the ways in which judicial decisions can be challenged or reviewed. Illustrating this in action, the Constitutional Court of Romania has blocked several judicial reforms related to the careers of magistrates, citing the principle of judicial independence. Despite differing views, the overarching consensus is that judicial independence is indispensable for the protection of rights and the maintenance of a democratic society. a Keilitz, I. Viewing Judicial Independence and Accountability through the “Lens” of Performance Measurement and Management, International Journal for Court Administration, Volume 9, nr. 3, 2018, p. 23-36. 5 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - CROSS-CUTTING OBSERVATIONS Recent developments in Romania’s justice and Verification Mechanism (CVM), recognizing sector have been transformative, with pivotal Romania’s progress in judicial reform and anti- legislative changes in the functioning of the corruption measures. Consequently, Romania will judiciary. The National Recovery and Resilience now report its advancements through the Rule Plan (NRRP) has been a driving force to advance of Law mechanism, aligning with the practices of long-awaited reforms that had progressed other EU member states. slowly in the past years. These reforms have shifted key functions from the executive to the As Romania embarks on the next chapter of judicial branch, fostering an environment ripe its justice reform, a unified strategic approach for leadership growth and greater institutional is paramount. This new era calls for a shift from autonomy. However, this shift also underscores a justice model grounded in traditional services the pressing need for strong coordination and and influenced by external forces to one that institutional strengthening across the sector. is intrinsically driven by a common vision that Notably, the Justice Laws approved in November prioritizes the needs of its citizens and ensures 2022 have brought about significant changes access to services tailored to the real-life challenges in the sector’s management. These include the faced by its people. Through this transition to a phased transfer of the judicial budget from people-centered approach to justice, Romania can the MOJ to the HCCJ, starting with salaries ensure that its justice model serves the population and payroll in January 2023; expanding judicial effectively, with a particular focus on empowering institutions’ authority in appointing senior judges the most vulnerable. As a key step, the GoR has and prosecutors; and changes in the promotion already committed to developing and rolling out a process within the judiciary. The enactment of user-centric service delivery model in select justice the new Justice Laws contributed to the European institutions as part of its Strengthening Foundations Commission’s decision to lift the Cooperation for Improved Justice Service Delivery project.2 People-Centered Justice: Ensuring Fairness in a Changing World People-centered justice places individuals at the heart of legal systems, transforming the rule of law from a principle into a tangible reality for every person seeking fairness and resolution. This approach integrates traditional and innovative methods and tools to meet the real-life challenges of the people it serves. It involves engaging with communities to understand their needs and adjusting services to these needs. As legal challenges evolve, the justice system must adapt by becoming more transparent, accountable, and responsive. Embracing a people-centered approach to justice requires a cultural shift within institutions, focusing on legal empowerment and dismantling barriers to justice like complexity, cost, and discrimination. This transformation ensures an inclusive system that serves everyone, contributing to an equitable society, where justice is not just an ideal, but a lived reality. To achieve this, service delivery must be redesigned to be user-friendly and efficient, employing tools like community-based services, accessible legal information, and technology solutions to make justice more approachable. Some commonly employed tools include mobile justice units for on-the- spot legal services in remote areas, legal aid clinics for free guidance, simplified legal procedures for easier navigation, public education for increased legal awareness, and partnerships with NGOs to connect individuals with justice services. Alternative dispute resolution methods also provide additional paths to justice, particularly benefiting marginalized groups. 2 TheStrengthening Foundations for Improved Justice Service Delivery project, financed by the World Bank, includes key activities to develop a system-wide model for user-centric provision of justice services, focused on reducing barriers to accessing justice for vulnerable groups, and apply the model in selected courts. 6 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - CROSS-CUTTING OBSERVATIONS Countries such as the Netherlands and Peru have embraced people-centric approaches, and their experiences offer valuable lessons that can inform and inspire other countries. The Dutch legal aid board exemplifies this with its provision of free legal advice and subsidized representation, including mediation services. Peru’s Asistencia Legal Gratuita (ALEGRA) centers provide free legal orientation, assistance, and mediation of family and other noncriminal disputes. It can also direct defendants in criminal cases to a public defender system also run by the MOJ or to NGOs and private attorneys providing free representation. It is crucial for all stakeholders within the inefficient resource management. The absence of justice sector to unite under the shared vision a standardized governance framework and uniform of a people-centered approach to justice data management across justice institutions reassessing priorities and collaboratively shaping precludes a consistent view of the state of affairs a sector wide strategy and approach aligned at the sector level, creates obstacles for accurate with the collective will. This is a challenging cross-institutional analysis, and hampers effective undertaking, partly due to the diverse mandates strategic decision-making.  of justice institutions and a lack of sector-wide coordination. While the SDJ 2022-2025 sets out The lack of a strategic approach to the use a strategic direction for the entire justice sector, of resources weakens the Romanian justice its development and implementation have been led sector’s capacity to fulfill individual institutional by the MOJ, with limited engagement from other mandates and function as a unified sector key players. Although the MOJ is responsible for to deliver justice services and ensure the rule the sector’s policy and strategic management, of law. Human resource management in the the actual delivery of justice services falls to the Romanian judiciary faces significant challenges. courts, prosecution offices, and other justice actors. The sector lacks a formal and consistent process of This disconnect is apparent in the incomplete long-term workforce planning, which is necessary to implementation of measures of the previous SDJ address the impending retirement of many judicial 2015-2020 and the unmet interim targets of the personnel and to fill numerous vacancies, especially current SDJ. Coordination efforts by entities like the in senior positions. Recent policy changes, such as Strategic Management Council, crucial for driving the freeze on in-situ promotions, are insufficient reforms and equipping justice institutions with the to resolve the staffing crisis comprehensively or necessary capacity and resources, have not been sustainably. effective. Involving all key actors from the design Despite sufficient funding, the Romanian phase is essential to forge a common goal, secure judiciary is underinvested, with a budgetary institutional commitment to strategic reforms structure heavily dominated by wage expenses. and activities, and shape the future of justice in Salaries and related costs, including payments Romania. for outstanding salary rights,3 account for The challenges in developing and implementing approximately 90 percent of expenditures in courts a unified strategic vision for Romania’s justice and prosecution offices. This leaves little room sector are indicative of more extensive issues for capital investment, which is essential for the in strategic management, interinstitutional modernization and efficiency of the justice system. coordination, and resource allocation. The prevailing The issue often is not the lack of funds but the lack of coordination, coupled with fragmented legal absence of a strategic approach to budgeting. mandates, result in disjointed service delivery and Transitioning from historical expenditure-based 3 TheRomanian justice system faces a significant financial challenge with the increasing costs of settling claims for outstanding salary rights, which in 2021 constituted 19.6% of the court system's wage bill and 26.7% of the prosecutorial system's. This trend, fueled by court decisions, to raise the pay of judges and prosecutors to reflect the increase that the court clerks had benefited from as a result of the policy to reduce the pay gap within the justice system, is expected to persist and further strain the system's budget. 7 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - CROSS-CUTTING OBSERVATIONS budgeting to a programmatic and performance- forward-looking plan for justice in Romania. based budgeting4 is highly recommended. This shift To enhance the efficacy of the justice sector will enhance accountability and add a strategic and uphold the principles of the rule of law, it is vision to allocation of financial resources in the imperative to confront these systemic challenges Romanian justice system The current legislative head-on. This requires a concerted effort to framework provides solid ground for moving foster a more integrated, strategic approach to toward a full-scale implementation of performance managing the sector’s operations and resources, budgeting. However, authorities should carefully ensuring that all institutions within the sector devise the roadmap for its implementation, boost are aligned and working collaboratively towards their internal expertise and capacity, promote the common objectives. The modernization of the culture of the importance of performance in the legal framework is crucial for the justice sector’s context of resource allocation among magistrates success, ensuring laws and regulations are attuned and gear the judicial ICT architecture towards to contemporary societal needs and bolstering better interoperability to enable contextualization efficiency, fairness, and accessibility. Simplifying of performance related data. procedures and rules is equally vital, reducing red tape and making the system more approachable At a higher level, the sector’s advancement for citizens. Advancements in management depends on collaborative leadership and practices across financial, human resources, increased institutional capacity to address communications, and technology sectors, including complex challenges. Justice institutions must infrastructure investment, are imperative for unite to reassess priorities and collectively enhancing operational efficiency. Addressing these reformulate its reform agenda, ensuring shared challenges is essential to maintain the rule of law ownership of its vision for the future. Engaging and requires a unified, strategic effort from all with citizens and utilizing data for informed justice institutions to work towards a cohesive decision-making are essential to establish a clear, vision for Romania’s justice system. SY N O P S I S – C R OS S - C U T T I N G O BS E RVAT I O N S WHAT IS HAPPENING WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN • Common vision among justice institutions fosters a • Lack of a shared vision for the future of justice in Romania, strategic, collaborative approach, prioritizing people- hampering the establishment of clear policy directions and centered approaches and ensuring access to justice that service delivery strategies to meet citizen needs. meets real-life challenges. • Fragmented mandates and limited inter-institutional • Enhanced operational effectiveness in the justice sector coordination, resulting in siloed functioning and fragmented through strengthened cross-institutional coordination, service delivery and impeding the development of a streamlined processes, and consolidated approaches to strategic, unified approach to justice administration. justice service administration. • Strategic resource management underpinned by standard • Absence of a unified strategic approach and robust practices and data-driven decision-making, ensuring a governance structures across various institutions comprehensive approach to human resources, financial hinders effective resource management and obscures the oversight, and investment in essential ICT and physical understanding of judicial performance metrics. infrastructure. 4 Performance budgeting is a tool that enables judicial authorities to align their priorities with the budgetary agenda and follow the evolution of the process of achieving objectives linked to those priorities. It facilitates optimal resource allocation while making spending units (i.e., courts and Prosecution offices) more accountable for their actions in the process of planning and executing their policy agenda. The approaches applied in European countries’ justice systems range from program budgeting and zero-based budgeting, which are structured primarily to achieve better allocative efficiency through analysis of outputs, to approaches such as formula funding or purchaser-power model in which allocations are directly tied to pre-set indicators through an algebraic formula – systems which put strong organizational and individual level performance incentives in place. International experience suggests simplicity and gradual customized approach which considers the particulars of budgetary systems and sector-specific circumstances. 8 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - OPTIMIZING PERFORMANCE Optimizing Performance: Strategic Resource Management for Judicial Efficiency The efficiency of courts and prosecution services The aim is to identify actionable areas for reform is fundamental to the rule of law and the swift to enhance the efficiency and overall performance administration of justice, as well as a critical of the justice system. While it is challenging to component of people-centered justice. By attribute the exact causes of underperformance ensuring that these institutions operate effectively, due to the scarcity of data on certain topics,6 the justice system becomes more responsive to the observable patterns, such as the rising number of needs and rights of individuals. Effective justice unfilled positions within judicial institutions, appear institutions not only uphold legal standards but to correlate with a decline in operational efficiency. also foster public trust in the legal system. Efficient Additionally, factors like the broad criteria defining courts can resolve disputes promptly, reducing case what constitutes a case, including applications for backlogs and ensuring timely justice for individuals enforceability, and the absence of mechanisms to and businesses alike. Similarly, efficient prosecution reduce caseloads (e.g., a fast-track procedure for services are crucial for the accurate and speedy small claims, mechanism to reduce the number of processing of cases, which helps deter crime and appeals, etc.) contribute to the burgeoning caseloads maintain social order. Together, these efficiencies and extended disposition times in the judiciary. contribute to a stable and predictable legal Tackling these widespread issues is crucial for environment essential for economic development enhancing sector-wide performance, which in turn and the protection of citizens’ rights. will lead to improved justice services for the people. Examining the efficiency of courts and The Romanian justice sector is facing a critical prosecution offices, together with other relevant challenge with rising vacancies, with one fifth data such as human resources data5 provides of judge positions and more than a quarter of a nuanced understanding of how policies, prosecutor positions unoccupied.7 While the practices, and management of resources number of judges and prosecutors in the staffing influence judicial performance. This, in turn, has scheme aligns with the EU average, the actual significant ramifications for the quality of justice occupancy rates may jeopardize the functioning that citizens receive. This chapter is dedicated of the justice institutions if left unaddressed. The to unpacking the primary conclusions from the staffing issues affect all levels of the court and comprehensive analysis of the efficiency of prosecutorial hierarchy, with the impact of vacancies courts and prosecution offices undertaken in the more evident for prosecution services.8 There functional review, highlighting the most critical has been a noticeable decline in clearance rates9 findings relevant to these judicial bodies. It and a rise in congestion ratios10 following lower examines the interplay between these insights and occupancy rates, suggesting that the efficiency the broader challenges that have surfaced in other of the prosecution process is being compromised. segments of the functional review, such as data This trend could lead to increased backlogs, longer quality and inefficient distribution of resources. waiting times for trials, and ultimately, a reduction 5 HR data include indicators such as occupancy and vacancy rates, retirement trends, and allocation of personnel across various courts. 6 The functional review revealed several challenges related to data (see chapter on data-driven justice). The analysis of the efficiency of Romanian courts and prosecution offices was hampered by these issues. Persistent discrepancies, particularly after an archiving error skewed historical records, forced the World Bank team to rely on less disaggregated data received before the system update. The prosecution services' analysis was limited by the lack of key data (e.g., age of pending stock, number of preliminary and completed investigations, and average dura- tion of investigations). 7 According to figures reported by Romania to the European Commission in 2023 for the Romania Rule of Law Report, about 20 percent of judge positions were vacant, while the corresponding figure for prosecutors exceeded 28 percent. 8 The situation may have changed since 2022, as a significant number of judges retired in the following year. 9 Clearance rates, which reflect the ratio of resolved to incoming cases, indicate whether courts are keeping up with their workload or generating backlogs – a rate below 100 percent suggests increasing backlogs. 10 Congestion ratios indicate unresolved cases relative to new cases within a year. 9 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - OPTIMIZING PERFORMANCE in the public’s trust in the justice system’s ability to Report, by expanding the recruitment of assistant deliver timely and fair outcomes. Addressing these magistrates following a successful pilot project. vacancies promptly is crucial to prevent further strain on the sector and to uphold the standards of Staffing challenges at higher level and specialized judicial efficiency. courts and POs, most notably the HCCJ and PHCCJ, are further exacerbated by strict requirements The underlying causes of low occupancy rates on years of experience and promotion practices. among Romanian magistrates can often be traced These issues lead to quorum shortages at the HCCJ back to specific human resource policy decisions. and a high number of vacancies across all higher level These include those concerning retirement, and specialized courts and POs,12 as experienced promotion, years of experience necessary for judges retire and younger talent is prevented from certain positions, and required years of training advancing due to insufficient years of experience. for new entrants. The possibility for magistrates to Compounding this is the promotion system, which, retire after 25 years of service, while beneficial for until recently, allowed magistrates to advance while individual career planning, has led to a wave of early staying in the same position at the same court or retirements, depleting the workforce prematurely. prosecution office. This made recruitment to higher Additionally, the threat of adoption of legislation level courts and POs more difficult as there were extending the retirement age of magistrates fewer candidates applying for those positions. While led to an unprecedented number of requests for the practice with in-situ promotion was halted at the retirement in 2022 and 2023.11 Admissions through end of 2022 for the period of three years, most of the SCM-organized competitions are inadequate to magistrates eligible for in-situ promotion have already offset the outflow, especially with the upcoming been promoted. Consequently, courts and prosecution extension of training at the National Institute for offices are grappling with the vacuum left by retiring Magistracy from two to three years. The Romanian staff and difficulties with recruitment to higher levels government has already taken action to address and specialized courts and POs, as there are simply no the shortage, as captured in the latest Rule of Law or very few applications to those positions. FIGURE 1. Occupancy rates by prosecution office level, 2016–2021 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% PO Courts of Appeal PO Tribunals PO District Courts PHCCJ 2016 92% 82% 82% 86% 2017 93% 80% 77% 95% 2018 94% 84% 77% 81% 2019 86% 75% 72% 75% 2020 83% 73% 76% 66% 2021 81% 68% 75% 56% Source: World Bank. 2023. Report on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice System. Data sources: Ministry of Justice data and World Bank calculations.. Note: PPHCCJ = Prosecution Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice, PO = prosecution office. 11 The initial legislation extending the retirement age of magistrates was later abolished and adopted in a watered-down version, following a decision of the CCR ruling the law unconstitutional. 12 The PHCCJ is particularly affected with more than half of the positions unoccupied. 10 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - OPTIMIZING PERFORMANCE Staffing shortages have increased the The COVID-19 pandemic affected the number workloads of existing judges and prosecutors of incoming cases and the way courts and and exacerbated the differences in caseloads. prosecution offices operated in that year, and In Romania, caseloads per judge and per possibly in the following year, complicating prosecutor vary significantly.13 Judges at the the analysis of recent trends. While courts’ most congested courts handle more than four efficiency appeared to increase in 2021, clearance times the number of cases than judges in the rates started to drop again in 2022. In 2022, least congested courts. The differences are even tribunals and district courts saw clearance rates more pronounced at the POs, where prosecutors in civil and commercial, and administrative cases in the most congested POs manage more than drop below 100 percent. Criminal case clearance six times the number of cases than prosecutors rates also declined or stayed below 100 percent in the least congested. The actual differences across all court levels. At the same time, the in caseloads are even higher when considering congestion ratio rose in civil and commercial the number of vacancies at each court or PO. cases at lower courts but fell slightly at courts of Monitoring these variations can help ensure a appeal. For criminal and administrative and fiscal fair and efficient distribution of work and inform litigation cases, the congestion ratio increased at future decisions related to the strategic use of all court levels, indicating rising backlogs. resources. This can help maintain the quality and timeliness of judicial processes. FIGURE 2. Clearance rates for civil and commercial FIGURE 3. Clearance rates for criminal cases, cases, 2017–2022 2017–2022 110% 110% 100% 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 50% 40% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% 0% Courts of District Courts of District Tribunals Tribunals Appeal Courts Appeal Courts 2017 100% 94% 99% 2017 102% 99% 99% 2018 87% 108% 101% 2018 102% 101% 99% 2019 98% 101% 99% 2019 99% 99% 99% 2020 98% 92% 97% 2020 99% 99% 100% 2021 98% 101% 103% 2021 97% 101% 102% 2022 104% 96% 96% 2022 97% 97% 98% Source: World Bank. 2023. Report on the Functional Source: World Bank. 2023. Report on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice System. Data sources: Review of the Romanian Justice System. Data sources: Ministry of Justice data and World Bank calculations. Ministry of Justice data and World Bank calculations. 13 There can be normal variations in cases per judge in courts at the same level based on several factors, including the jurisdiction, the complex- ity of cases, and the administrative efficiency of the courts and POs. Typically, a certain degree of variation is expected and manageable and it is difficult to say what a perfect caseload should be. However, it would be considered problematic when the difference in caseloads per judge or prosecutor becomes substantial leading to delays in case processing times, affecting the quality of justice, or causes undue stress on judges and prosecutors. 11 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - OPTIMIZING PERFORMANCE FIGURE 4. Clearance rates for administrative and The timeliness of decision making is a standard fiscal litigation cases, 2017–2022 indicator and should be followed not only at 140% the court level but also at the level of individual 120% 100% judges. Only then can potential issues be identified 80% and addressed. At the level of the individual judge, 60% timeliness of decision making should be evaluated in 40% 20% connection with data on their workload. This would help 0% to determine which judges cannot meet the deadlines Courts of Appeal Tribunals District Courts because of too high workloads, and which are simply 2017 85% 105% 99% poor performers. For the latter, a consequence system 2018 124% 122% 106% could provide incentives to perform better. For instance, 2019 104% 104% 97% in some countries, performance metrics inform salary 2020 99% 102% 92% negotiations. Those who underperform may not get a 2021 92% 103% 111% 2022 103% 94% 99% raise. While compliance with the deadlines for drafting Source: World Bank. 2023. Report on the Functional judgments is a criterion for evaluating the professional Review of the Romanian Justice System. activity of judges in Romania, it does not seem Data sources: Ministry of Justice data and World Bank to be connected to any consequences, potentially calculations. perpetuating existing practices. At the same time, a clear trend of declining case Growing backlogs in POs underscore the system’s dispositions and growing backlogs in prosecution struggle to keep pace with its caseload. Clearance offices threatens the timely administration of rates consistently remain below 100 percent at all PO justice.14 Despite a steady decrease in incoming levels, signaling that incoming cases outnumber those cases, case dispositions are falling, indicating that resolved and leading to an accumulation of unresolved the prosecution services cannot keep up with cases. The additional burden of cases transferred their workloads. This raises the risk of cases being from the SIIJ and the expanded jurisdiction to dismissed due to the expiration of the statute of investigate crimes committed by magistrates may limitations, as seen in the 50 percent increase in such further impact clearance rates. Prosecution offices dismissals from 2016 to 2019. Additionally, a four- attached to tribunals and courts of appeal are also year delay in legislative response to a constitutional struggling with backlogs, worsened by a surge in cases ruling - declaring a provision on the interruption taken over from SIIJ without a boost in resources. of statute of limitations unconstitutional - has led The growing number of cases being dismissed on the to further case closures and annulled convictions. grounds of the statute of limitations, highlights the Analyzing the age structure of the pending stock urgency of improving clearance rates to ensure timely could aid and enhance understanding in this area. justice and prevent the dismissal of cases without resolution. The high congestion ratio, particularly at While Romanian court disposition times align the level of POs attached to district courts and the with ECHR standards for reasonable length of PHCCJ reveals a growing stock of pending files, which, proceedings,15 the timely issuance of reasoned if unaddressed, will further threaten the rule of law decisions, crucial for appeal processing, is a and administration of justice. persistent challenge. Appeals depend on the timely delivery of these decisions, and any delay in drafting The limited availability of case processing data, judgments hinders the appeals process. The Romanian such as the number of investigations or the average legislator has made several attempts to improve this, duration, poses a challenge in identifying and resulting in significantly shorter average times to addressing bottlenecks in the prosecutorial system. deliver the reasoned decisions. However, despite these Despite this, it is evident that Romania has the lowest efforts, a Ministry of Justice analysis reveals persistent rate of cases brought to court per capita among EU delays affecting many cases across all court levels,16 countries and one of the highest rates of pending highlighting the need for further examination to identify cases, indicating inefficiencies in case management. and rectify the causes of these holdups. The increasing number of cases dismissed on the 14 The number of annual case dispositions is a good measure of system productivity and can be used for assessing performance. While this measure should be used with caution as it can be influenced by external factors, such as the COVID-19 pandemic or the complexity of cases and available expertise, it is an important indicator which can be used for management purposes. 15 CEPEJ. 2018. Length of court proceedings in the member states of the Council of Europe based on the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. 16 Analiza prealabilă elaborării noului document strategic pentru sistemul judiciar. P.78. 12 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - OPTIMIZING PERFORMANCE FIGURE 5. Number of closed cases due to fulfilling the grounds of the statute of limitations highlights the statute of limitations, 2016–2021 need for improved case prioritization and processing. 100.000 The low ratio of cases referred to court, especially at 90.000 POs attached to district courts, calls into question the 80.000 effectiveness of prosecutorial discretion in filtering 70.000 out meritless cases. The high number of seemingly 60.000 meritless cases being investigated suggests there is 50.000 scope to reduce the caseloads of POs by changing 40.000 existing procedures and practices and introducing 30.000 more specific measures, such as tracking of their work 20.000 through the Case Management Information System 10.000 (CMIS). By revising procedural laws and practices on 0 prosecutorial discretion and the possibility to dismiss 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 meritless cases, the number of cases that need to Total 59789 65230 83250 88579 87861 88129 be investigated could be reduced, thus reducing the Source: World Bank. 2023. Report on the Functional caseload of POs. Finally, ensuring that relevant data is Review of the Romanian Justice System. Data sources: collected and used by decision makers would help in Ministry of Justice and World Bank calculations. . addressing bottlenecks and determining problem areas. As the adage goes, what gets measured gets managed. FIGURE 6. Clearance rates of prosecution offices attached to, 2016-2021 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Courts of Appeal 85% 98% 100% 89% 96% 90% Tribunals 79% 83% 87% 90% 84% 77% District Courts 85% 84% 88% 86% 86% 90% PHCCJ 81% 90% 60% 93% 88% 66% Source: World Bank. 2023. Report on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice System. Data sources: Ministry of Justice data and World Bank calculations.. Note: PHCCJ = Prosecution Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice FIGURE 7. Congestion ratio by type of prosecution office, 2016–2021 3,00 2,50 2,00 1,50 1,00 0,50 0,00 Courts of Appeal Tribunals District Courts PHCCJ 2016 0,63 1,38 2,20 1,39 2017 0,48 1,29 2,41 1,26 2018 0,48 1,26 2,34 2,20 2019 0,56 1,28 2,33 1,66 2020 0,56 1,45 2,62 1,41 2021 0,51 1,61 2,40 1,43 Source: World Bank. 2023. Report on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice System. Data sources: Ministry of Justice data and World Bank calculations.. Note: PHCCJ = Prosecution Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice. 13 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - OPTIMIZING PERFORMANCE To address the efficiency issues, the Romanian prosecutors persist. Regular assessments and justice sector needs to step up its management reallocation of human resources based on caseloads of human resources and overall strategic could improve efficiency, ensuring that resources are management. The most pressing issue is to fill the allocated where they are most needed. vacancies in courts and prosecution offices. This does not necessarily mean adding new positions. Effective decision-making and resource allocation Romania’s overall number of cases and judges needs to rely on accurate and consistent data, and prosecutors is comparable to the EU averages, which is not yet the case. A robust framework indicating that hiring more judges and prosecutors for data governance is necessary to ensure may not be necessary.17 Indeed, in terms of judicial standardization, coordination, and adherence to clear data management protocols. Performance metrics efficiency, higher input does not necessarily equal with key indicators for measuring the efficiency higher output. To the contrary, experience from of courts and POs are vital tools for identifying European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice and addressing operational bottlenecks in a timely (CEPEJ) countries shows that additional inputs in manner. Overall, effective and efficient delivery of terms of budgets, personnel, or salaries may not lead justice services requires strategic management, to the desired effects; many countries with a relatively particularly in the allocation and utilization of high number of judges are also among those with resources. The systemic issues described in this greatest lengths of proceedings, while countries with section highlight several challenges that impede relatively fewer judges are more efficient.18 Before optimal performance of the justice sector. These adding additional resources, systemic problems challenges offer valuable lessons on how to enhance need to be addressed. While efforts have been judicial efficiency and effectiveness. Addressing made in Romania to adjust staffing levels based these areas not only facilitates the resolution of on court activity, the inefficiencies with respect to existing inefficiencies but also lays the groundwork the distribution of caseloads among judges and for a more robust and responsive justice system. SY NO PS IS – O P T I M I Z I NG P E R FO R M A NCE WHAT IS HAPPENING WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN • Staffing shortages in judicial institutions reflecting adverse • Policy decisions better informed by long-term planning to impacts of HR policies ensure desired strategic outcomes • Efficiency of the judiciary threatened by decreased • Sufficiently staffed courts and POs deliver justice services occupancy rates in courts and POs • Indications of increasing workloads, growing backlogs, and • Improvements in key performance metrics following declining case dispositions   increase in and strategic use of staff • Persistent inefficiencies in caseload distribution among • Regular assessments of caseloads and reallocation of judges human resources to improve efficiency • Performance assessment and improvement hindered by • Relevant data is collected to determine problem areas and limited availability of case processing data used by decision makers to address bottlenecks 17 While judges and prosecutors cannot be forcibly moved to another court or PO, one way of redistributing human resources is not to fill vacant positions once a judge retires or leaves the profession. 18 Uzelac, Alan. 2011. Efficiency of European Justice Systems. The strengths and weaknesses of the CEPEJ evaluations. 14 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - ENHANCING ACCESS TO JUSTICE Enhancing Access to Justice: Bridging the Gap to Legal Equity for All Access to justice is a fundamental pillar of Romanian authorities have committed to a functioning democracy and an essential enhancing access to justice as a key reform aspect of the rule of law. It embodies the priority. This is reflected in the SDJ 2022-2025, principle that all individuals have the right to seek which sets forth a vision for “a modern, efficient, and obtain remedy through justice institutions, quality and accessible justice system for all.” in accordance with human rights standards. The action plan for the SDJ 2022-2025 outlines This principle is crucial for enforcing rights and several important actions to improve access to realizing protections, fostering societal harmony justice, though the realization of these initiatives and equality; it is central to maintaining the remains uncertain. There have also been other integrity of the rule of law. A people-centered recent initiatives that aimed to increase public approach to justice ensures that access is not knowledge of rights and available justice services, just a theoretical entitlement but a practical such as development of communication tools and reality for every member of society, regardless of awareness campaigns.19 Until now, Romania has background or circumstance. prioritized modernizing judicial infrastructure as part of its approach to increasing access to The removal of barriers to access to justice justice. Over the last 20 years, there has been is a societal imperative, essential for creating a concerted effort to improve physical access to an equitable justice system. These barriers, justice services, as evidenced by the updating which can be physical, procedural, or socio- of judicial infrastructure design standards economic, must be overcome to ensure that all and targeted investments in new courthouse citizens, especially those from vulnerable groups construction and the refurbishment of existing and victims of injustice, can benefit from the facilities for selected courts. justice system. Good communication, legal empowerment, and the provision of tools to ensure awareness of rights are key to making the justice system more accessible and equitable. Legal aid, including extra-judicial support, is critical in providing a fair chance at obtaining justice for all, thereby reinforcing the rule of law and the democratic fabric of society. 19 One recent example is the SCM’s “Transparency, accessibility, and legal education by improving public communication at the level of the judicial system” (TAEJ) project. The EU-funded project aimed to strengthen the image of the judicial system, provide greater transparency internally and externally, and improve access to justice. The project produced a number of communication materials using various commu- nication channels such as TV, radio, social media, a dedicated platform, and printed materials. The project was finalized in 2023, and its impact and medium to long-term sustainability remains to be seen. 15 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - ENHANCING ACCESS TO JUSTICE Investing in Court Infrastructure for Enhanced Access to Justice Inadequate court infrastructure poses a significant barrier to accessing justice, often impeding the public’s ability to exercise their legal rights effectively. In Romania, many court buildings, including some in the capital of Bucharest, are overcrowded and in a state of disrepair, not meeting essential standards for fire safety, earthquake resistance, and energy efficiency. Furthermore, design shortcomings are evident, as numerous courts lack accessible facilities or segregated spaces for victims and defendants, which are critical for upholding the dignity and safety of all involved. The absence of modern infrastructure in older courts also hampers the judiciary’s ability to embrace digital advancements, further limiting functional space as courts are inundated with paper. Investment in judicial infrastructure is vital for removing barriers to access to justice and the efficiency of judicial services. Nevertheless, Romanian courts dedicate less than 1 percent of their budget to capital investments, a figure markedly lower than the European average of 8 percent. While notable improvements have been realized through grants, external loans, and collaborations with organizations such as the National Investment Company, a significant commitment is still necessary to guarantee equitable access to justice throughout the country. Source: Reinterpretation of box on court infrastructure in the Functional Review Report. Despite these efforts, ensuring that all individuals Although legal aid is recognized as integral to the are aware of their legal rights and available right of access to justice, attention to the provision justice services remains an enduring challenge of aid has been slow to develop. The current state for universal access to justice in Romania. The of play reveals a legal aid system that struggles current approach to communication on accessing with limited resources and coordination. Notably, Romania records one of the lowest rates of legal justice is fragmented, relying on multiple individual aid beneficiaries per capita (0.003 per inhabitant) in projects rather than a single and unified strategic Europe, starkly in contrast with the European average approach. While some individuals are well-informed of 0.011 and the high of 0.033 per capita among the about their legal entitlements and the procedures countries reporting to CEPEJ. Furthermore, Romania’s for accessing justice services, many encounter investment in legal aid, a mere 0.008% of its GDP, is barriers due to the absence of structured, and easy relatively modest.20 This fact is particularly striking to understand, practical information. The reliance in given the nation’s generally high expenditure on its providing information in courts overlooks those who justice system as a whole. may not visit a court until they are already involved in legal proceedings. Although the development of The slow development of Romania’s legal aid informative websites marks progress, it is limited program, coupled with limited oversight and by the digital divide, affecting those without a fragmented legal framework, has resulted in a system that is difficult to navigate for both digital literacy or access, such as the elderly, rural service providers and beneficiaries. The legal residents, and vulnerable groups. The use of complex framework itself is scattered across various laws, legal language in communication materials further leading to inconsistencies and a lack of clear alienates the average person. The sustainability of mandates. This is evident, for example, in the area many rights-awareness communication initiatives of extra-judicial legal aid, which is referenced in the is compromised due to a lack of continuous funding. law but is rarely used in practice. There is also a lack There is a clear need for a more strategic, inclusive, of information and support for alternative dispute and sustained approach to ensure that all citizens resolution mechanisms, which could provide more are aware of their rights and can access justice accessible and efficient means of resolving legal services effectively. 20 Asnoted in the Functional Review Report, “There are countries that are lower – the minimum is 0.0005, but the average is 0.0320, and the standardized median is 0.0183. It is not that Romania’s expenditures on the rest of the justice administration are low, but that the entire sector consumes 1.06 percent of the GDP compared with the 49-country average of 0.815 percent and median of 0.644 percent”. 16 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - ENHANCING ACCESS TO JUSTICE issues outside of the court system. These systemic The institutional arrangements for legal aid issues disproportionately affect vulnerable groups, provision lack coordination, with no single agency whose limited legal knowledge or resources can overseeing the entire process. The legal aid system make navigating the complex system and accessing in Romania suffers from an absence of centralized entitled legal aid services daunting. oversight and limited availability of practical public information, with various institutions independently The eligibility threshold for legal aid in non-criminal managing different segments of the process. cases is notably low, and recent efforts to raise the income ceiling have been deemed insufficient. Additionally, the system’s limited mechanisms for Likewise, the process for proving eligibility can be quality control and compliance validation, along cumbersome, particularly to marginalized individuals with the inadequate data collection, prevent proper who may encounter problems accessing official evaluation of legal aid program’s accessibility and documents. This has led to a situation where access to effectiveness, highlighting the need for enhanced legal aid is restricted, likely leaving many who require capacity within the justice sector for comprehensive assistance without recourse. However, the true extent oversight, monitoring, and assessment. of unmet needs and deficiencies in service provision is unclear. Comprehensive data on legal aid in Romania While Romania continues to face challenges in – such as beneficiary numbers, services rendered, and ensuring that all citizens have access to justice, approval rates for aid – are not centrally collected and these challenges are not insurmountable. To start, reviewed, making it difficult to assess the effectiveness empowering citizens with a clear understanding of and accessibility of the legal aid program. This was their rights, the services at their disposal, and how made evident during the functional review as data on to utilize these services is also crucial to effectively the number of legal aid beneficiaries varied drastically enhance access to justice in Romania. Refining the across institutions. Table 2 below shows the different dissemination of legal aid information is central to 2020 statistics on legal aid beneficiaries provided this empowerment, ensuring practicality, clarity, during the Functional Review. and accessibility, especially for those with limited TABLE 2. Statistics on number of legal aid legal resources. Addressing the widespread lack beneficiaries for 2020, by data source and case type of awareness presents a significant opportunity to render justice more accessible. A unitary and CRIMINAL CIVIL SOURCE CASES CASES OTHERS sustainable communication strategy must be established across justice institutions, focusing on MOJ – first estimate based on Not Available 204 NA updating and centralizing information on accessing (NA) ECRIS IV entries legal aid, as well as steering people in the right SCM – direction. Extending proactive outreach through submission to 63,492 3,030 NA media like radio, television, and community events CEPEJ to reach a wider audience can also be considered. MOJ – from Programs to reach vulnerable communities should reports solicited 42,413 11,954 1,007 from courts include a facilitator who can tell people about legal aid. The information offered should guide individuals 153,258 (36,574 Bar associations asserting their rights and navigating the justice investigations and 24,707 708 (via MOJ) 116,684 courtsa) system with confidence. The system in place should Source: Source: World Bank. 2023. Report on the Functional also consider the diverse needs of the population Review of the Romanian Justice System. Data sources: and collaborate with civil society organizations for Statistics are provided by each of the entities cited.. effective information distribution. Strengthening the Note: Although the MOJ could provide more recent communication capacity within justice institutions data, 2020 was used as this is the date of the numbers submitted by the SCM to CEPEJ. is essential, requiring adequate resources such a Assuming that most defendants receiving legal aid as skills, finance, and infrastructure. By doing so, during criminal investigations also received it during the Romania can significantly improve access to justice, court phase, the total may be double counted. But even equipping its citizens with the necessary knowledge if only the court data are taken, 116,684 still far exceeds and tools to claim their legal rights. the alleged official CEPEJ numbers. 17 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - ENHANCING ACCESS TO JUSTICE FIGURE 8. Barriers to accessing justice services Limited resources and coordination Fragmented coordination and communication Awareness of rights and justice services Judicial infrastructure Lack of targeted outreach Technical language User digital literacy divide Some outdated information Narrow communication campaigns Inconsistent dissemination of information Fragmented legal framework Spread and limited practical information Source: Author’s elaboration based on JFR findings. Romania should continue to invest in upgrading provision of legal aid in Romania could strengthen judicial infrastructure, ensuring courthouses are access to justice by broadening eligibility conditions, accessible, secure, and tailored to the needs of improving oversight, and ensuring the availability of court users and staff. Inclusive design is crucial, primary and secondary aid, as well as assistance for offering equal access for all genders and enabling mediation. Prejudicial and extrajudicial legal aid can individuals with disabilities to navigate easily, significantly improve access to justice by providing transforming courthouses from potential barriers into assistance before a case goes to court and helping gateways of fairness and equality. While all inadequate individuals resolve legal issues outside the court infrastructure should be improved, investments in system. The Government has already committed to infrastructure should be prioritized, and to do this, review and expand the legal framework on Romania’s the justice sector must first understand which courts legal aid program as part of its Strengthening require modernization, rehabilitation, or replacement Foundations for Improved Justice Service Delivery with a newer building. A proposed methodology for project, financed by the World Bank.’ such an assessment was developed and shared with Romanian authorities as part of the RAS. The GOR Central to this vision is the establishment of a already has several ongoing projects to modernize dedicated department within the MOJ to oversee courts, with more in the pipeline including the highly- the provision of legal aid. This department would anticipated justice district in Bucharest. The gallery be responsible for evaluating the quality and cost- effectiveness of legal aid programs, enhancing at the top of the next page, showcases photographs the collection and analysis of data regarding the of newly renovated and constructed courthouses in services rendered, and collaborating closely with Romania, providing a visual testament to the country’s the judiciary and other key actors. It would also commitment to creating modern, accessible, and user- be tasked with coordinating the assessment of centric judicial facilities. the actual needs for legal assistance within the population and adjusting eligibility conditions Significantly enhancing Romania’s legal aid to better align with these needs. Additionally, system, making it comprehensive, efficient, and the department would ensure that the quality, easily accessible to all in need, expands access efficacy and efficiency of the legal aid program to justice for everyone regardless of their are supported by information captured in justice socioeconomic means, background, or capabilities. information systems and enriched by insights from Updating and expanding the legal framework for the user surveys and focus groups. 18 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - ENHANCING ACCESS TO JUSTICE FIGURE 9. Examples of recent investments in justice infrastructure Bolintin Vale First Instance Court  Prahova Palace of Justice (Rehabilitation and arrangement) (New building) Before Exterior After Interior As Romania progresses on the path toward is a measured advance toward the goal of improved greater access to justice, a strategic approach access to justice. Progress should not be limited to to reform and investment that puts people at the adopting initiatives such as broadening legal aid center of justice service delivery is fundamental. and refining data collection or modernizing courts; While the path forward may be marked by challenges it also necessitates a cultural shift within justice such as budgetary constraints, procedural delays, institutions to truly embrace a people-centered and shifting political landscapes, each step taken approach that fosters inclusivity and accessibility. SYNOPSIS – EN HANCI NG ACCESS TO J USTICE WHAT IS HAPPENING WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN • Access to justice hindered by the fragmented legal framework • Expanded legal aid framework designed to ensure equal for legal aid and low eligibility thresholds for assistance access to justice • Lack of centralized oversight and data collection for legal • Central legal aid body coordinating data collection and aid program oversight • Awareness of rights and access to justice impeded • People are empowered to access justice services with a by fragmented communication and a lack of easy-to- clear understanding of their rights, available services, and understand and practical information how to navigate them • Inadequate court infrastructure as a barrier to accessing • Courthouses as accessible, secure, inclusive gateways for justice and exercising rights justice 19 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - DATA-DRIVEN JUSTICE Data-Driven Justice: Harnessing the Power of Data to Meet Citizen Needs and Improve Judicial Performance Data is vital for a modern, efficient, and fair methods, such as integrated ICT systems, justice system. It helps measure the impact of comprehensive surveys, feedback mechanisms, policy interventions, provide operational insights and specialized tools, are pivotal for gaining a and deliver justice services to society. It enables nuanced understanding of citizen needs and informed decision-making, thorough performance evaluating judicial performance. These methods evaluation, effective resource optimization, and meticulously track case flow management, greater transparency and accountability. Ultimately, gauge user satisfaction, measure timeliness and the use of data leads to improved service provision case disposition, assess access to justice, and and better outcomes for the public. scrutinize performance evaluation metrics, thereby underscoring the critical role of data in shaping an In a people-centric justice system, data is effective and responsive justice system. Effective important for understanding and addressing data utilization can highlight service gaps, areas the needs of citizens. It informs which services of excellence, and opportunities for improvement. are delivered and how, ensuring that the justice By leveraging data, justice institutions can also system is responsive and adaptive to the evolving identify underserved groups and take action to demands of society. Enhanced data collection ensure that everyone has access to justice. FIGURE 10. Uses of data in the Justice Sector Informed Decision Performance Resource Transparency and Improved Service Making Evaluation Optimization Accountability Provision Utilize statistical Measure the efficiency Allocate resources Share data on justice Streamline processes data and analytics and effectiveness of based on data-driven operations and and reduce bottlenecks. to support evidence- justice services. assessments of needs. outcomes with the Identify and address based choices. Assess the quality Optimize spending to public. service gaps. Analyze trends to of services and maximize impact on Hold justice Inform policy guide policy and identify improvement justice delivery. institutions development to operational decisions. opportunities. Ensure staff and accountable for their achieve better justice Enhance strategic Benchmark infrastructure are performance. outcomes. planning with robust performance against utilized to their fullest Foster trust in the data insights. established standards potential. justice system through and goals. open data initiatives. Source: Author’s elaboration considering JFR conclusions. 20 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - DATA-DRIVEN JUSTICE Effective data management is crucial in the shape the justice systems processes and outcomes justice sector given the distinct mandates and and can also provide decision makers a broader functions of the different justice institutions. perspective and understanding of challenges and Aligning data management strategies across the opportunities. An illustrative example is provided sector is essential for justice institutions to fulfill in the figure below. Each of the graphs provides a their missions and uphold the rule of law through specific set of data; however, looking at the graphs informed, data-driven decisions. The increasing together, it could be inferred that the decreased amount of data collected and the centrality of using occupancy rates for prosecutors seen over time data in the workings of the system necessitates resulted in lower clearances and subsequently an active management of data to promote a just, increase in cases that had to be closed due to the equitable and efficient administration of justice. expiration of the statute of limitation.21 Data quality and access to data will increasingly FIGURE 11. Prosecutor’s Office at a Glance: Illustrative Example of how data can inform decision making 1. Total occupancy rates, prosecutors (2016-2022) 2. Total caseloads per prosecutor at prosecution offices attached to courts of appeal, 2021 100% 160% 90% 80% 110% 70% 60% 60% 50% 10% 40% Pitesti Cluj Iasi Constanta Galati Bacau Oradea Ploiesti Bucharest Suceava Alba Iulia Brasov Timisoara Craiova Targu-Mures 30% -40% 20% 10% 0% Actual workload 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Workload if all positions in the staffing scheme were filled 3. Clearance rates of prosecution offices, 2016-2021 4. No. of closed cases due to expiration of statute of limitations, 2016-2021 100% 100,000 90% 80% 90,000 70% 80,000 60% 50% 70,000 40% 30% 60,000 20% 50,000 10% 0% 40,000 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 30,000 POs Courts of 20,000 85% 98% 100% 89% 96% 90% Appeal 10,000 POs Tribunals 79% 83% 877% 90% 84% 77% 0 POs District 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 85% 84% 88% 86% 86% 90% Courts Total 59789 65230 83250 88579 87861 88129 PHCCJ 81% 90% 60% 93% 88% 66% Sources: Author’s elaboration with figures from: World Bank. 2023. Report on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice System. Data sources: 1. World Bank calculations, Ministry of Justice data (2016–2021), and WB data (2022).; 2. World Bank calculations and Ministry of Justice data; 3. Ministry of Justice data and World Bank calculations (Note: PHCCJ = Prosecution Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice); 4. Ministry of Justice and World Bank calculations. 21 Thestatute of limitations sets a time limit after which legal proceedings, such as an investigation or bringing a charge to court, cannot typically be initiated. 21 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - DATA-DRIVEN JUSTICE The Romanian justice sector is grappling with and how things will be categorized and counted has considerable data management challenges. made information sharing more challenging. Data Practices for collecting, maintaining, and using data held at one institution cannot be easily provided to vary across justice institutions, with little to no individuals in other institutions who need it. coordination or standardization. This fragmented approach to data handling inhibits cross-comparison The JFR exposed data discrepancies, which and can result in inconsistencies across and within are undermining the credibility and reliability of institutions, calling into question the reliability of data. the data. The lack of data governance (i.e., standard practices for data collection and management) and Each justice institution has developed its own siloed information systems have resulted in data information systems, and these have not been challenges. These challenges not only limited the designed to share data with other organizations. scope and depth of the functional review but also This limited approach results in data silos making revealed a larger concern regarding the sector’s data exchange complex (see figure below). capacity to make informed decisions and allocate Compounded with the autonomous nature of the resources effectively. Table 3 on the next page justice institutions, the lack of consistent policies and provides an overview of the key data challenges practices on what can be shared (and with whom) encountered during the JFR. FIGURE 12. Complex network of information systems INFORMATION FLOWS 3 4 5 6 6 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 Thematic Issues 1 2 3 4 5 6 Case file/data management is No direct link between Siloed information Multiple Data gaps: Limited primarily paper based; data is the systems at the systems making versions of e.g., legal aid, capacity entered in ECRIS and other IT Ministry of Interior and information truth enforcement for systems, supporting documents Prosecutor’s Office/ exchange difficult integration in paper format DNA/DIICOT Source: World Bank. 2023. Report on the Functional Review of the Romanian Justice System. 22 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - DATA-DRIVEN JUSTICE TABLE 3. Overview of the key data challenges encountered during the Functional Review The absence of critical data, such as details on legal aid beneficiaries or enforcement, Absence of Data further compounds these challenges, hindering assessments of the rule of law’s effectiveness and the justice system’s accessibility and fairness. Across Different Sources. Discrepancies in staff counts and categorizations were noted Inconsistent across various institutions (MOJ, SCM, PHCCJ), with unconventional counting methods. Data Legal aid beneficiary figures also varied between sources, with incomplete data and statistical exercises contributing to inconsistencies. There was a lack of uniformity in reporting categories for auxiliary staff in the justice Inconsistent sector, with different institutions providing varying levels of detail. This inconsistency Categorization extended to the categorization of magistrates, where the terms ‘seconded’ and of Data ‘assimilated’ were used inconsistently. The age structure of disposed and pending cases lacked granularity, particularly for cases Insufficient Level older than one year. Detailed data on prosecution activities, such as the number and of Detail duration of investigations, was not collected, limiting analysis of case processing. Also, certain types of criminal cases lacked sufficient detail for analysis. The use of terms and definitions varied across institutions, leading to confusion and Inconsistent difficulty in aligning data. This was particularly evident in the inconsistent use of terms Definitions for magistrates, which affected the clarity and comparability of the data. Data was provided for varying dates within the year without clear specification, making Inconsistent it difficult to compare data sets and assess trends accurately. The lack of standardized Time Frames time frames for data collection compounded the discrepancies and challenged the analysis of year-end situations. Source: Author’s elaboration based on JFR conclusions. Among the challenges presented in Table 3, the clearance rates were much lower in the CEPEJ report inconsistency of data stood out as a flagrant (48 percent) than in the MOJ’s data (102 percent), concern, both across the sector as well as within indicating significant data management and individual institutions. Significant variances reporting issues. In addition, there were considerable variations in legal aid data across different in historical data, especially concerning court institutions and CEPEJ reports. performance from 2016 to 2020, were found in datasets provided by the MOJ in 2021 and 2022. The Functional Review team worked closely with A system update caused a change to historical the MOJ and other stakeholders to understand data by archiving all cases that had been closed, the causes of identified inconsistencies. However, leading to these inconsistencies. Following the some data discrepancies remained unexplained, MOJ’s confirmation of the issue being addressed with institutions acknowledging that provided data were estimations rather than formally collected. and the provision of updated data, further analysis This underscores the need for urgent action to indicated some inconsistencies when compared address data challenges to ensure data reliability. with the figures prior to the update, hinting at the possibility of lingering issues or new errors within The Romanian authorities’ decision to conduct a the information systems that may need attention. functional review demonstrates their recognition of Thus, while the analysis of court efficiency under the data’s critical role in decision-making and marks a Functional Review indicates that Romania performs significant shift towards strategic planning based well, data challenges raised concerns regarding the on data analysis. Establishing robust data governance accuracy of the findings. within the Romanian justice sector is the first step towards making this shift. Data governance would entail Likewise, inconsistencies when comparing creating standardized practices for data collection and MOJ’s data to that reported to the CEPEJ call management, ensuring data quality, and promoting data reporting practices into question. Notably, coordination among different justice institutions. 23 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - DATA-DRIVEN JUSTICE To move towards a data-centric justice system, establishing data standards, data definitions Romania should strive for a comprehensive and rules to ensure that data are reliable, data governance framework. This framework complete, and comparable across the sector. should include an overall data governance strategy to ensure regulatory compliance to data • Data Security. The increasing level of protection requirements and foster collaboration digitalization necessitates that measures are and accountability in data management. Key in place to ensure the confidentiality/privacy, components to data governance include: integrity and availability of data. This requires maintaining a fine balance between protection • Data lifecycle management. This entails knowing (i.e., safeguarding data) and productivity what data to collect and how to manage the (making data available when needed). data (i.e., capture, classify, store, use, archive, dispose) through its life cycle, securely and in Implementing a comprehensive data governance conformance with regulatory requirements. framework in the Romanian justice sector will • Data stewardship and collaboration. Clear yield significant improvements. Aligning data definition of ownership and responsibilities management practices across the justice sector ensures accountability in data management. institutions increases efficiencies and improves Defining the roles, responsibilities, policies and communications. Standardized data collection procedures will foster coordination among methods will facilitate a unified understanding of stakeholders to manage data quality and the sector’s performance, allowing for accurate streamline data sharing and integration. comparisons and benchmarking. Enhanced coordination among stakeholders will foster a • Data Quality. The main principles of data quality culture of data sharing and collaboration, leading are accuracy and consistency. This requires to more holistic and integrated approaches to Data Governance: Definition and Implementation Data governance refers to the overall management of the availability, usability, integrity, and security of the data employed in an organization. In justice systems, data governance is “the framework by which courts reach and communicate organizational decisions around data, ensure that business activities and data management are synchronized, and develop long and short-term strategies around the collection, use, storage, and disposal of data. It encompasses the people, court processes, and procedures that ensure that data are fit for managing cases, planning, and budgeting. Governance is about creating a culture around data creation and use, including how data rules are created and enforced and how disputes are resolved. Without strong data governance, courts risk wasting time and energy searching for missing information, collecting unnecessary information, correcting bad information, entering data redundantly, and making decisions repetitively and sometimes inconsistently.” a In the United Kingdom, a senior data governance panel was formed in January 2023. The Panel’s role is “to advise and give guidance on the access to and use of court and tribunals data, focusing on 4 main principles: open justice, independence of the judiciary, rule of law, and maintaining public confidence in the justice system. The panel is made up of five (5) senior officials of the His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service and Ministry of Justice, including a co-Chair, five (5) senior judges, including a co- Chair and at least five (5) independent experts. The panel aims to attract experts in open data, social research and emerging technologies such as machine learning. It also welcomes those familiar with ‘LawTech’ sector and those with experience of exploring the effect of justice on socially or economically disadvantaged groups.” b a National Center for State Courts. Data Governance Policy Guide. December 2019 b Gov.UK. Data governance panel formed to improve use of court and tribunals data. March2023. https://www.gov.uk/ government/news/data-governance-panel-formed-to-improve-use-of-court-and-tribunals-datay. 24 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - DATA-DRIVEN JUSTICE justice delivery. Rigorous data quality assurance policy and operational changes, leading to a more processes will build trust in the data, which is dynamic and responsive justice system. Finally, the essential for its use in high-stakes decision- strategic application of data insights will enable making. Identifying the most relevant data types the justice sector to allocate resources more for decision-making will ensure that the most effectively, develop policies that address the root critical aspects of justice delivery are monitored causes of inefficiencies, and enhance the overall and improved upon. Thorough data analysis will quality of service provision, resulting in greater uncover patterns and trends that can inform justice outcomes for all. SY N O P S I S – DATA - D R I V E N J US T I CE WHAT IS HAPPENING WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN • Data providing insights on citizen needs, judicial • Data collected primarily to fulfil reporting obligations performance, and service delivery • Data is managed as an asset and key element of justice • Judicial processes not prioritizing data collection by design services • Varying practices for collecting, maintaining, and using data • Robust data governance framework with standardized across justice institutions approaches in place • Data inconsistencies across justice institutions • Consistent and reliable data across the sector • Data exchange across justice actors and ICT systems • Data seamlessly shared across institutions through complicated by lack of standardization interconnected systems and well-established protocols • Decision making impacted by fragmented approach to data • Policy decisions informed by holistic, evidence-driven management and lack of certain data, hindering cross- understanding of challenges and opportunities comparisons 25 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - MODERNIZING JUSTICE Modernizing Justice: Advancing Justice through Digital transformation In the age of rapid technological advances, digital Digital transformation plays a vital role in transformation has become an essential tool for streamlining operations and enhancing service modernizing justice service delivery, ensuring delivery. Successful digital transformation in the that it is not only efficient but also user-centric. justice sector suggests that starting ‘born digital’ is This transformation transcends the mere adoption more effective than retrofitting existing processes. of new technologies; it signifies a fundamental shift Thus, to ensure that the transition to digital in approaches and working modalities, aligning platforms enhances rather than hinders the delivery with the public’s evolving needs and expectations. of justice, it is essential first to thoroughly assess As society changes, the justice system must also business processes to identify inefficiencies and evolve, leveraging data and technology to create innovative business models, operating processes, avoid automating flawed or obsolete procedures. An and services for better outcomes. Supplementing opportunistic and targeted approach, especially one paper-based systems and embracing digital records, that addresses high-volume and low-risk areas, can e-filing, and other digital services can not only serve as an ideal starting point. Drawing inspiration improve judicial efficiency and access to justice, from private sector practices,23 such as those adopted but also help ensure the sector keeps pace with the in online dispute resolution platforms like the British digital literacy of the society it serves.22 Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal24 (see Figure 13), FIGURE 13. British Colombia Dispute Resolution Focus on vulnerable groups Leverage private sector practices and technologies Monitor performance with user satisfaction surveys and data analytics Source: Author’s elaboration with individual images and information taken from: Civil Resolution Tribunal Website and HIIL Justice Dashboard Website. 22 In transitioning to digital justice systems, it is crucial to acknowledge the digital divide that persists in many countries, particularly affecting marginalized groups who may have limited access and education regarding online platforms and other ICT tools. Therefore, a gradual approach is advisable, beginning with the refinement of processes in both offline and online environments. As digital services become more prevalent, par- allel upskilling of justice workers and the general population is essential, with targeted initiatives like digital literacy programs and community access points staffed with trained facilitators to assist those less familiar with technology. Such initiatives will help guarantee equitable access to justice for all and that no one is left behind in the move to digital services. 23 eBay and PayPal are the front runners in online dispute resolution. eBay is estimated to handle over 60 million disputes a year. Source: Dal Pubel, Luca. E-Bay Dispute Resolution and Revolution: An Investigation on a successful ODR Model. 24 The British Columbia (Canada) Civil Resolution Tribunal is an online dispute resolution platform offering users the chance to negotiate with the disputing party on their own, to seek mediation and lastly, if nothing works, then adjudication. 26 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - MODERNIZING JUSTICE can offer valuable insights. Moreover, adopting off- The Romanian justice sector has progressed in the-shelf software solutions can expedite system its digitalization efforts, alongside many of its development, testing, and adoption, compared to the European counterparts. Romania’s score on the time and resources required for custom-built solutions. CEPEJ ICT Index26 in 2020 is relatively high at 7.1, placing it in the second group of countries with the A shift to a user-centric approach, one that focuses highest ranking (see figure below). A broad range of first and foremost on the needs of those seeking capabilities are available online although these are not justice services, will help drive the process. This consistently available for all courts or procedures.27 approach is complemented by a data-driven strategy, where end-user satisfaction surveys play a crucial role Digital transformation is recognized as a in informing service design, iterative improvements, and top priority for Romania’s justice sector – ongoing evaluation25. Lastly, the importance of change as emphasized in the National Recovery and management and stakeholder engagement cannot be Resilience Plan (NRRP),28 which designates funds overstated; these must be organized and funded as for the digitalization of the judiciary, and also in essential activities to facilitate the adoption of digital Romania’s SDJ 2022-2025. Since the adoption of transformation initiatives within the justice sector. digital technologies in the late 1990’s, the automation of several justice services and processes has helped FIGURE 14. CEPEJ ICT Index 2020 Source: European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) 25 Offers users the chance to negotiate with the disputing party on their own, to seek mediation and lastly, if nothing works, then adjudication. 26 The CEPEJ ICT index measures the diffusion of ICT tools, rather than their actual use. It provides an indication of the deployment and not of the results achieved through the use of ICT. Estonia and Latvia scored the highest, each at 9.8. See European Judicial Systems. 2022. CEPEJ Evaluation Report – 2022 Evaluation Cycle (2020 data). Part 1: Tables, graphs, and analyses. 27 For example, the possibility of using electronic communications during the trial in civil and criminal cases exists. However, the capabilities and underlying technologies vary among courts given the lack of standards. 28 Under the NRRP, €162 million is committed for the period 2022 to 2026 targeted for digitalization of the judicial system, i.e., Compo- nent 7: Digital Transformation. Over 80% of the funds are targeted to increase remote work capabilities and create a sustainable, resilient and secure ICT infrastructure. 27 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - MODERNIZING JUSTICE Romanian justice institutions increase productivity, These challenges, together with the continued reduce the duration of procedures, and increase absence of a sector wide digital strategy have led transparency to the public. The introduction of the to specific, tangible consequences that undermine ECRIS case management system and several stand- the efficiency and effectiveness of the system. The alone systems have automated some procedural rules repercussions include: and relevant processes for court proceedings, making • Limited adaptability to crises. The COVID-19 information and documents more accessible online to pandemic revealed significant gaps in the various parties simultaneously, and enabling analysis of Romanian justice institutions’ ability to case information as it progresses through the system. maintain operations remotely, with some courts Internet-based portals have improved access to justice lacking consistent access to technologies like by providing information on how the sector functions VPNs and video conferencing, and essential (e.g., providing information on procedures and fees) staff hampered by a limited supply of laptops and have promoted transparency with the publication and network bandwidth issues. The uneven of judicial decisions on jurisprudence portals. distribution of resources and collaboration These advances have been achieved within a tools across courts underscored the urgency complex landscape of ICT systems supported of enhancing remote work infrastructure to by a multitude of IT departments and teams. ensure business continuity in times of crisis. Justice-wide information systems,29 mission specific • Data inconsistencies. Fragmented data systems systems30 and multiple, duplicative custom-built result in scattered information across multiple local software solutions31 are loosely connected, if systems (see chapter on Data-driven justice) at all, lacking a unified architecture to facilitate and data discrepancies. Inconsistent data efficient data exchange and system interoperability. definitions for the same concept have resulted in The highly-anticipated introduction of ECRIS varying interpretations and misunderstanding. V is expected to centralize core functionalities The absence of standardized methods for supporting the Courts and POs, expand capabilities calculating or counting indicators further supporting reporting and analytics, and enable exacerbates the issue, making it difficult to online interaction with citizens, lawyers, bailiffs and compare data across different institutions. other justice partners. Common ICT services, such Such inconsistencies not only compromise the as infrastructure hosting and end user support, are integrity of data, hampering the institutions’ distributed across the justice sector institutions, ability to fully understand and effectively leading to a decentralized approach that can address service needs, but also diminish public introduce inefficiencies and a lack of uniform trust and confidence in the justice sector. standards. The ICT departments involved operate • Reliance on Paper-Based Processes. Most judicial in a federated manner, collaborating as needed services still rely on traditional paper-based on an ad-hoc basis. Despite some progress, these processes, which are inherently slower than departments face challenges in maintaining day-to- digital processes and can lead to delays. day operations while striving to digitally transform Moreover, the physical handling and storage the justice sector under less-than-ideal conditions. of documents and dependence on physical Despite digital transformation being a high priority, archives present risks to record integrity and strategic decision-making is often dispersed availability, particularly in the event of disasters among various institutions, with ICT initiatives such as fires or floods. predominantly driven by IT departments and • Suboptimal cross institution coordination. The minimal guidance from justice sector leadership. absence of a centralized ICT governance This ICT-centric governance lacks the necessary structure, decentralized decision-making, and authority to implement the significant changes limited collaboration among ICT departments needed to transform justice services effectively. in different institutions further impedes 29 Justice-wide systems include case management solutions: ECRIS IV – Courts, ECRIS III – Prosecutor’s Office, statistics: STATIS, portals, and resource management: RMS. e.g., case file transfers, electronic access in ECRIS IV, and expanded data collection in ECRIS IV. 30 Mission specific systems include penitentiary management, trade registry, seizure of assets, and forensics. 31 Local software solutions are custom build to address functional gaps that are not available in justice wide systems. These include software to facilitate case file transfers, establish electronic access in ECRIS IV, and expand data collection in ECRIS IV. 28 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - MODERNIZING JUSTICE coordination efforts. Oftentimes, information to protect sensitive data and maintain the held at one institution cannot be easily integrity of the justice system. It is imperative provided to individuals in other institutions that policies and procedures are established who need it given the lack of consistent to mitigate cybersecurity threats and ensure policies and standard data sharing practices. the secure operation of ICT systems across all Formal exchanges through letters with multiple justice institutions. signatures are commonplace for sharing even non-sensitive information. Emerging technologies, growing amounts of data, shifting public expectations, and growing • Inefficient spending and misaligned efforts. international experience in digital transformation Financial resources are spent on similar or present opportunities to build on achievements overlapping technologies across institutions. and tackle evolving challenges. The quest for digital This misalignment means that instead of transformation involves progressing towards digitally a cohesive, cost-effective approach to ICT enabled, enhanced and supported systems where spending, there is a possibility of redundant court and judicial services are available on-line to allocation of funds, with different departments all citizens, magistrates, clerks, justice system staff potentially purchasing or developing similar and partners (see Figure 15). Achieving this requires tools independently of each other. Though adjusting how justice is administered and executed, already a concern, this became all the more redesigning business process with the justice end- evident during the COVID-19 pandemic when user experience as the center of focus (i.e., people- bespoke ICT solutions were developed at the centered justice) and adopting digital technologies. individual court or Tribunal level, with little It also involves developing new approaches to handle to no coordination or oversight until after and analyze large amounts of data for improved systems were in place. decision making. It builds upon continuing efforts • Varying practices to reduce cybersecurity to improve transparency and accountability, reduce risks. The reliance on digital technologies bureaucracy, promote social inclusion, and facilitate necessitates robust cybersecurity measures citizen interactions with the justice sector. FIGURE 15. Imagining Digital Transformation Citizen: Self-represented litigant Law Enforcement: easy access relevant online guided system to access services, be information can be information about their reminded of deadlines and be informed of shared easily among law rights as well as information events relating to my case; readily available enforcement partners about court proceedings  and supported by reliable connectivity, remote appearance is possible  Lawyer: Court Clerk: Judge: submit all court documents online submissions of forms and court access to information in one digitally from  my office – saving proceedings means fewer errors and faster place with a click of a button time and money, see updated processing, less time spent on tedious data to understand a case or make court schedule online, self-service entry and manual processing of paper, decision, access to entire case file access to court recordings  in a more focus on the more rewarding aspects in one click, information is safe safe and secure manner of the job  and secure   Source: Author’s elaboration based on JFR conclusions. 29 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - MODERNIZING JUSTICE The functional review of the justice sector prioritizes activities that yields the maximum recommends strategic shifts to align political, benefit to the justice system. By aligning the digital administrative and technical efforts to drive strategy with the broader goals of the justice progress and fulfill the promises of digital sector, the leadership can ensure that the benefits transformation. Digital transformation requires of digitalization are fully realized, serving the public a bold vision, purposefully designed governance, good and reinforcing the rule of law. and an adapted legal framework. It necessitates a deliberate approach to change, including With essential components already in place and modifications to regulations, functions, and/or a commitment to further digital transformation processes. This transformation demands an open within the Romanian justice sector, the future looks promising for enhancing efficiency and accessibility. mind-set, culture change, and more importantly, Careful planning, engagement with stakeholders, a strong focus on the “end-user”, i.e., citizens who and a detailed sector-wide digital strategy are key expect greater ease of use and access to services. to leveraging the advantages of digitalization. This Calibrating the ICT governance structure and transition is not just about technology; fundamentally, institutional setup with strong management it is about rethinking the way justice is administered to ensure it is both transparent and responsive. As the commitment is critical and should be addressed sector moves forward, it will be important to monitor upfront. This approach would facilitate the and evaluate the impact of these changes, to ensure development of a coherent digital justice strategy that they are delivering the intended benefits and to for the entire sector, ensuring management make adjustments as necessary. With a clear vision commitment and stakeholder buy-in across justice and sustained effort, the Romanian justice sector institutions. Given the substantial amount of is poised to undergo significant transformation that funding available for ICT investments, the strategy could serve as a model for others to follow. should include an implementation roadmap that SYNOPSIS – MODERNIZING JUSTICE WHAT IS HAPPENING WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN • Modern management practices drive digital • Operational Management of ICT transformation • Information is shared, accessible and consistent across the • Data inconsistencies proliferate across the sector justice sector • Multiple, duplicate, complex landscape of ICT systems • Shared technologies, platforms and information systems with limited interoperability support common business processes across the justice sector • ICT Infrastructure is secure, resilient and shared across justice sector institutions • Duplicate IT infrastructure with limited business continuity • ICT Resources are pooled and efficiently used across the Sector • Innovative Technologies, solutions and approaches are • Suboptimal use of ICT Resources harnessed to improve the performance of the justice sector 30 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - CLOSING REFLECTIONS Closing Reflections Over the past decades, Romania has made revealing challenges and opportunities that significant strides in strengthening rule of law transcend national boundaries. These insights, and justice, particularly in the wake of its EU derived from a comprehensive analysis of systems, accession, which necessitated a series of reforms processes, and outcomes, highlight the complexity to align with EU standards. These reforms have of justice reform and the universal nature of included efforts to increase judicial independence, the challenges faced. Taking a reflective look on combat corruption, and improve access to and these findings and key lessons learned provides efficiency of justice services. valuable perspectives on the multifaceted issues confronting justice systems globally and increases Romania’s progress, however, has not been without understanding of their interdependencies. its setbacks and has often reflected the broader, non-linear trajectory of justice reform observed One of the key reflections from the JFR is the globally. The country has seen periods of intense need for a shared justice sector vision that reform followed by times when progress seemed is centered around the people it serves – an to stall or face resistance. This can be attributed observation that rings true for justice systems to various factors, such as changes in political around the world. Such a vision is crucial for leadership, shifts in policy priorities, and the influence developing a justice system that is responsive, of vested interests that may resist changes to the equitable, and effective, placing the individual at status quo. Despite such challenges, Romania has the heart of justice processes and ensuring the demonstrated a commitment to continue to pursue system’s primary goal of delivering fair outcomes a more effective and accessible justice system. and upholding the rule of law. Achieving this vision For example, initiatives like the establishment of for justice requires a comprehensive, data-driven the DNA have played a crucial role in this process, highlighting Romania’s dedication to addressing strategy that encompasses the entire justice high-level corruption. The integration of technology sector, including its legal structures, institutional into court proceedings has been a forward-looking capabilities, and the ways in which services are step and also helped identify processes that provided to the public. To do this, justice institutions would require redesign to ensure accessibility and must embrace strategic collaboration, sustainability, efficiency of justice. The lifting of the CVM serves and adaptability as fundamental tenets for reform. as an acknowledgement of the progress Romania has made and encourages ongoing reform efforts. Coordination is key to effectiveness. High- performing justice sectors operate as a single system, While Romania’s ongoing justice reform marked by fluid information exchange, strategic journey is complex and often challenging, resource allocation, and personnel with clear, aligned the fundamental principles of justice—rule roles and responsibilities. Early coalition building of law, equality before the law, fairness, and serves as the foundation for any reform initiative. By access to justice—remain the guiding force uniting diverse stakeholders under a shared vision, behind these endeavors. Romania’s experience it is possible to overcome institutional barriers and thus provides valuable insights into the dynamic foster a reform environment that is both legitimate nature of justice systems and the continuous and effective. This approach is essential for any effort required to maintain their integrity in the government or international institution seeking to face of an ever-changing world. implement meaningful and lasting changes within the justice sector. Achieving this level of coherence Reflecting on Romania’s journey, the JFR offers necessitates deliberate planning and execution, an in-depth analysis with many findings and allowing the justice sector to meet the complex conclusions particular to Romania while also needs of society with agility and foresight. 31 REFLECTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONAL REVIEW OF THE ROMANIAN JUSTICE SECTOR - CLOSING REFLECTIONS Leadership is the linchpin of substantial and The COVID-19 pandemic has been a stark reminder sustainable reform. Without committed leaders of the need for contingency planning and the to lead the implementation of a strategy, even the willingness to embrace innovative solutions to most well-conceived plans will falter. Strong and maintain progress. continuous leadership is vital for driving momentum and ensuring the longevity of reforms, transforming As previously noted, the reflections on the JFR vision into reality. Leaders bear the unique duty offered in this document aim to provide insights of navigating present complexities and laying the for navigating the complexities of justice reform groundwork for a justice system that is resilient and achieving sustainable, positive change – not and adaptable to future challenges. Arguably, only in Romania but in a broader context. Sharing sustainability of reforms is achieved through the these lessons can lead to further conversations on identification and support of reform champions. justice reform and approaches to tackle common These individuals and groups act as catalysts challenges. This is increasingly important in a for change, spearheading new initiatives that are world marked by constant evolution, with global not transient, but are embedded within the legal crises, shifting geopolitical dynamics, and rapid and cultural fabric of society, capable of enduring technological progress reshaping societal norms. It is hoped that such collaboration can light the way for political and economic shifts. future endeavors, contributing to the advancement The ability to engrain flexibility into the of modern, people-centered justice, and culminating implementation of reforms is crucial, serving as in the realization of a fair and equitable society, a testament to the foresight and adaptability grounded in the concept of justice as a global public required in the face of unforeseen challenges. good and upheld by the rule of law. 32