World Bank2012-06-142012-06-142008-06https://hdl.handle.net/10986/8076This report examines why, given the increasing resources allocated to the judiciary, there seem to have been only modest improvements in judicial performance. It lifts the veil on the conflicting opinions on the reasons for slow progress on performance and efficiency by analyzing the institutional environment within which the judiciary functions and the key incentives propelling the policy stances and actions of major institutional actors. A supply-demand approach is then used to review the challenges behind improving judicial performance, focusing on resource allocation and management issues on the supply side and on case inflow on the demand side. This perspective enables consideration of both supply and demand issues impacting judicial performance and offers an opportunity to suggest actions and policy responses that could enable policy makers to manage demand more effectively while strengthening access to justice. Overall, therefore, improving judicial performance now requires a shift from increasing the overall level of resources to approaches that do not increase the burden on the central budget. The key challenge now confronting Bulgaria's judiciary is to build on the reforms so far by developing, financing and implementing a judiciary-wide modernization program to sustain the transformation and demonstrate impact through monitor able indicators of performance. The information and analysis in this report much of it familiar to the leadership of Bulgaria's judiciary, executive and legislature could facilitate a consensus between the three branches of power on the resources that the judiciary could realistically expect to receive, and on the results that it can be expected to achieve, given existing resource and capacity constraints. In this dialogue, an exclusive focus on judicial independence could risk diverting attention from concrete measures needed to ensure that the judiciary is adequately resourced and that mechanisms to ensure the efficient use of resources and improved performance are in place. Indeed, judicial independence is a fundamental principle guaranteed by the Constitution and laws of Bulgaria, and unconditionally respected with regard to the judiciary's adjudicative functions. However, sustained focus on the achievement of performance goals could have important potential long-term benefits for the judicial system, not only in terms of increased budgetary resources, but more importantly in terms of increased public trust and confidence.en-USCC BY 3.0 IGOACCESS TO COURTSACCESS TO JUSTICEACCOUNTABILITY FOR PERFORMANCEACCOUNTINGADJUDICATIONADMINISTRATIVE COURTADMINISTRATIVE COURTSALLOCATION OF RESOURCESANNUAL BUDGETAPPROPRIATIONAPPROPRIATIONSARTICLEASSETSAUDIT OFFICEAUTHORIZED BUDGETBAILIFFSBUDGET ALLOCATIONBUDGET ALLOCATIONSBUDGET CIRCULARSBUDGET CONSTRAINTBUDGET ENVELOPEBUDGET EXECUTIONBUDGET FORMULATIONBUDGET FRAMEWORKBUDGET IMPLEMENTATIONBUDGET NEGOTIATIONSBUDGET PREPARATIONBUDGET PROCESSBUDGET PROPOSALBUDGET REQUESTBUDGET REQUESTSBUDGETARY ACCOUNTSBUDGETARY AUTHORITYBUDGETARY DATABUDGETARY FUNDSBUDGETARY MANAGEMENTBUDGETARY RESOURCESBUSINESS REGULATIONSCAPACITY BUILDINGCAPACITY CONSTRAINTSCAPITAL ALLOCATIONSCAPITAL BUDGETCAPITAL EXPENDITURECAPITAL EXPENDITURESCAPITAL INVESTMENTCAPITAL PROJECTSCAPITAL SPENDINGCASE BACKLOGCASH MANAGEMENTCATEGORIES OF EXPENDITURECENTRAL BUDGETCENTRAL CONTROLCIVIL PROCEDURECIVIL SOCIETYCLAIMCOMMERCIAL DEBTSCOMMERCIAL DISPUTECOMPLAINTCOMPLAINTSCONFIDENCECONTRACT ENFORCEMENTCONTRACT MANAGEMENTCONVICTIONSCORRUPTIONCOST PER CASECOURT DECISIONCOURT PERFORMANCECOURT RULINGSCOURT STAFFCOURT SYSTEMCREDIBILITYCRIMECRIMINALCRIMINAL CASESDATA COLLECTIONDEBTDEBT COLLECTIONDEBTSDISCRETIONDISPOSITIONDISTRICT COURTSEFFICIENCY GAINSESTATEETHICSEXPENDITURE CATEGORIESEXPENDITURE DATAFINANCIAL FLOWSFINANCIAL MANAGEMENTFINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMFINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSFINANCIAL RESOURCESFISCAL DISCIPLINEFISCAL PROGRAMFISCAL SUSTAINABILITYGOVERNMENT EXPENDITURESGOVERNMENT SPENDINGHUMAN RIGHTSIMMOVABLE PROPERTYINDEPENDENT JUDICIARYINFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTSINITIATIVEINSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTSINSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENTINSTITUTIONAL REFORMSINTEGRITYINVESTIGATIONINVESTIGATORSJUDGEJUDGESJUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITYJUDICIAL AUTHORITIESJUDICIAL BODIESJUDICIAL BRANCHJUDICIAL BRANCHESJUDICIAL CORRUPTIONJUDICIAL COUNCILJUDICIAL COUNCILSJUDICIAL DECISIONSJUDICIAL DISTRICTJUDICIAL EFFICIENCYJUDICIAL GOVERNANCEJUDICIAL INDEPENDENCEJUDICIAL INFRASTRUCTUREJUDICIAL PERFORMANCEJUDICIAL PERSONNELJUDICIAL POSITIONSJUDICIAL POWERJUDICIAL PROCEEDINGSJUDICIAL PROCESSJUDICIAL PROCESSESJUDICIAL REFORMJUDICIAL REFORMSJUDICIAL RESOURCEJUDICIAL RESOURCESJUDICIAL SECTORJUDICIAL SERVICESJUDICIAL STAFFJUDICIAL STATISTICSJUDICIAL SYSTEMJUDICIARYJURISPRUDENCEJUSTICEJUSTICE SYSTEMLAWSLAWYERSLEADERSHIPLEGAL AIDLEGAL AUTHORITYLEGAL POWERSLEGAL PRACTICELITIGATIONMAGISTRATESMEDIAMEDIATIONMEMBER COUNTRIESMILITARY COURTSMINISTERMINISTERSMOVABLE ASSETSNATIONAL AUDITNATIONAL BUDGETNEGOTIATIONSPENSION LIABILITIESPERFORMANCE EVALUATIONPERFORMANCE FRAMEWORKPERFORMANCE GOALSPERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENTPERFORMANCE INDICATORSPERFORMANCE INFORMATIONPERFORMANCE MANAGEMENTPERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORKPERFORMANCE MONITORINGPERFORMANCE REVIEWPERSONNEL EXPENDITUREPERSONNEL EXPENDITURESPERSONNEL MANAGEMENTPOLICEPOVERTY REDUCTIONPRIVATE SECTORPROCUREMENTPROSECUTIONPROSECUTORPROSECUTORSPUBLIC EMPLOYEESPUBLIC EXPENDITUREPUBLIC EXPENDITURESPUBLIC FINANCEPUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENTPUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMPUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSPUBLIC FUNDINGPUBLIC SECTORPUBLIC SERVICEQUANTITATIVE DATAQUANTITATIVE INDICATORSRECEIVABLERECURRENT COSTSREFORM EFFORTSREPORESOURCE ALLOCATIONRESOURCE ALLOCATION PROCESSRESOURCE ALLOCATIONSRESOURCE MANAGEMENTSALARIESSALARYSECTOR POLICIESSEPARATION OF POWERSSERVICE DEMANDSERVICE PROVISIONSMALL DEBTORSSTATE BUDGETSTATE EXPENDITURETRANSPARENCYTRIALUNCERTAINTYWorld Bank10.1596/8076