On 10 April 2017 the European Commission published the 2017 EU Justice Scoreboard. This is the fifth report, which analyzes the efficiency, quality and independence of judicial systems. Preparation of the report data required participation of 28 EU Member States; the report includes a number of quality indicators, as well as provides a deeper analysis of certain areas.

Report is based on national statistical data of 2010-2015 and information on national reforms undertaken.

The report contains in-depth analysis of each of questions included in the evaluation, with the aim of improving the overall performance of the EU Member States. The authors of the report emphasized that the 2017 report shows a number of positive indicators and achievements compared to the previous years.

 

The efficiency of the judicial system

Data on the duration of proceedings reveal that time limit needed for examination of cases tends to decrease in Latvia.

Cases are fastest examined in Denmark, Estonia and Lithuania. Latvia is ranked as 14th (two positions higher than in the previous period) where about 170 days are needed for examination of a case before the court of first instance. While the longest time for examining a case remains unchanged – in Cyprus; where examination of one case takes 1100 days on average or about 3 years in the court of one instance.

First place in examination of complex cases that involve dispute are taken by Luxembourg and Belgium. Latvia is ranked as 14th with about 220 days required for dealing with one case, but the last place is taken by Cyprus.

Regarding the reduction of the backlog of cases Latvia occupies 7th place.

A similar situation occurs when examining complicated cases which involve dispute – regarding the smallest backlog of cases Latvia is ranked 8th which indicates that courts examine more cases than receive, therefore number of  pending cases has reduced and consequently the backlog of cases.

Also, by analyzing the data regarding the examination of administrative cases, Latvia is ranked in 9th place, ahead of Lithuania and Estonia which only in 2015 had positive indicators regarding the reduction of backlog of administrative cases.  

Estonia occupies the 10th position regarding the amount of pending cases (fall in 5 positions), Latvia - 5th, Lithuania - 4th position. Latvia and Lithuania has two pending cases per 100 inhabitants, while in Estonia the backlog of cases is more than 2 (about 2.8) cases per 100 inhabitants. Most cases pending are in Portugal – more than 12 cases per 100 inhabitants.

Regarding the backlog of complex cases which involve dispute, Latvia takes 11th place with about 1.4 cases per 100 inhabitants, but regarding the backlog of administrative cases Latvia is in 3rd place with about 0.1 cases per 100 inhabitants.

The report analyzes cases where there are proceedings against the Competition Council.

Taking into account this indicator, Latvia is ranked in 15th position with a little more than 600 days needed for examination of one case (report uses 2013-2015 data).

While speaking of cases concerning trademarks, Latvia is ranked as 10th with a little more than 380 days needed for examination of one case.

Cases concerning consumer protection are fastest examined in Estonia and Portugal. Latvia is in the middle of all assessed countries in the light of the fact that these data were not submitted by all Member States, noting, however, that the time needed for proceedings has slightly increased compared to the previous period.

Regarding the number of received civil, commercial and administrative cases per 100 inhabitants Latvia is ranked in 20th place. Denmark, Austria and Slovenia have 37-45 incoming cases within a year per 100 inhabitants, while in Latvia this number from 2010 to 2015 has been below 5. However, by analyzing the received dispute cases, i.e., deducting the number of cases not involving disputes from the previously mentioned number of cases, it reveals that the most pending cases are in Romania and Belgium - almost 7 cases, while in Lithuania these are 3.5 cases, Latvia - 2.1, and in Estonia a bit more than 1 case.

 

Quality of the judicial system

17 EU Member States, including Latvia, have received the highest score regarding the accessibility of information online, providing the public with general information about the judicial system of the country.

An example of a good practice indicated in the report is the possibility to submit applications electronically; the opportunity to follow the proceedings remotely, as well as electronic communication between the court and legal professionals facilitates access to justice and reduces the length and costs of proceedings.

6 EU Member States, including Latvia, have received the highest evaluation of electronic media accessibility.

As well as all Baltic States are among those 9 countries where court rulings are publicly available in electronic form.

In assessing the functionality of rulings’ database, Latvia occupies 5th position together with countries such as Italy, Lithuania, Hungary, and the Netherlands.

Analyzing the way how Member States encourages possibilities of alternative dispute resolution, the report's authors highly appreciated the efforts of Hungary and Germany, while Latvia is ranked as 13th.

For spending budget allocated to courts Latvia is ranked as 18th. Luxembourg spends the most – 180 EUR per capita, followed by the United Kingdom and Germany with approximately 150 euros. Latvia spends a little over 50 EUR per capita, while Cyprus spends the lowest amount – a little over 20 EUR; however having compared these expenses to gross domestic product, Latvia occupies 5th position.

Highest number of judges per 100 000 inhabitants is in Luxembourg - about 46 judges. Latvia takes the middle position of the rating – about 25 judges, while the smallest number of judges is in Ireland - less than 5 judges per 100 000 inhabitants.

The report also analyzed the proportion of male and female judges. In Latvia, depending on the instance, the proportion ranges from 69 to 80%, which indicates that the number of employed women is higher than number of male judges. A highest proportion of female judges in Latvia is in the courts of first instance, but this number tends to reduce at the appeal and cassation instances.

Regarding the continuing training of judges, Latvia takes 10th-12th place. While in terms of judges' activities such as participation in of EU law training programs or exchange programs Latvia is ranked as 8th.

Latvia is included among the 14 countries that most actively use the statistical data for managing the court work. At the same time the report's authors indicated that Latvia should make more use of the surveys intended for court users and lawyers.

 

Independence of the judiciary

The report contains Eurobarometer data on the way society and entrepreneurs perceive independence of the judiciary. In Latvia relatively few people perceive independence of the judiciary as ‘very good’ or ‘very bad’. The independence of the judiciary is evaluated between being ‘rather good’ and ‘rather bad’. However, there has been little progress in terms of a positive assessment, compared with the previous period. The main reason why Latvian people characterizes the independence of the judiciary as being rather good or rather bad is as follows: there is a tendency to believe that there is possibility of interference or pressure on judges through economic interests; attempt of government and politicians to influence the judiciary, as well as the fact that the judges' status is not sufficient for guaranteeing the independence of judges.

The report also included the data of Global Competitiveness Index of World Economic Forum - WEF) based on opinion polls, rather than quantitative and qualitative studies where Latvia in terms of perception of independence of the judiciary among all EU Member States is ranked in the 19th position.

For full report, see here: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/document.cfm?doc_id=43918

 

Alise Adamane

Public relations specialist

Communication and technical support department of the Ministry of Justice