POTENTIAL CONTRIBUTION OF TWO RECENT EU SOFT LAW DOCUMENTS TO IMPROVED JUDICIAL GOVERNANCE STANDARDS

Ana S. Knežević Bojović

doi:10.56461/SPZ_25204KJ

Authors

Ana S. Knežević Bojović Senior Research Associate, Institute of Comparative Law, Belgrade, Serbia. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3746-5747

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56461/SPZ_25204KJ

Keywords:

judicial independence, judicial governance, soft law, judicial independence standards, Europe.

Abstract

Judicial governance is a vital component of judicial independence, and yet its manifestations vary considerably across European countries. Judicial self-governance standards are articulated in a range of soft law instruments, and have prompted extensive academic debates. Starting from the premise that soft law is a relevant source of judicial independence and judicial governance standards, the author posits that two soft law instruments developed by the OSCE and the European Law Institute over the past two years enhance both the understanding and implementation of judicial independence standards by bringing added value. The hypothesis regarding the added value of the two instruments is examined through an analysis of the judicial governance and judicial self-governance concepts. Employing primarily comparative and dogmatic methods, the author demonstrates how these two instruments formulate judicial governance standards by systematising existing soft law norms and incorporating new academic developments.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akutsu, L. & de Aquino Guimarães, T. 2015. Governança Judicial: Proposta De Modelo Teórico-Metodológico. Revista de Administração Pública, 49(4), pp. 937-958. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7612116774

Bačić Selanec, N., Petrić, D. 2024. Putokaz izmjene nacionalnog zakonodavstva i pravosudne prakse ujednačavanja sudskih odluka – tumačenje presude Hann-Invest. Informator, 6852, pp. 11-16.

Bingham, T. 2011. The rule of law. Harlow: Penguin Books.

Bobek, M. 2008. The Fortress of Judicial Independence and the Mental Transitions of the Central European Judiciaries. European Public Law, 14(1), pp. 99-123. https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2008007

Bobek, M. & Kosař, D. 2014. Global Solutions, Local Damages: A Critical Study in Judicial Councils in Central and Eastern Europe. German Law Journal, 15(7), pp. 1257-1292.

Bovend'Eert, P. P. T. 2016. Judicial independence and separation of powers: case study in modern court management. European Public Law, 22(2), pp. 333-354.

Bunjevac, T. 2020. The Rise of Judicial Self-Governance in the New Millennium. Melbourne University Law Review, 44(3), pp. 812-862.

Castillo-Ortiz, P. 2019. The politics of implementation of the judicial council model in Europe. European Political Science Review, 11(4), pp. 503-520.

Castillo-Ortiz, P. 2023. Judicial Governance and Democracy in Europe. Cham: Springer.

Dallara, C. & Piana, D. 2015. Networking the Rule of Law: How Change Agents Reshape Judicial Governance in the EU. London-New York Routledge.

Deligiannis, A. P. & Anagnostopoulos, D. 2017. Towards Open Justice: ICT Acceptance in the Greek Justice System the Case of the Integrated Court Management System for Penal and Civil Procedures (OSDDY/PP). Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government (CeDEM), Krems, Austria, pp. 82-91. doi: 10.1109/CeDEM.2017.26

Garoupa, N. & Ginsburg, T. 2009. Guarding the Guardians: Judicial Councils and Judicial Independence. American Journal of Comparative Law, 57(1), pp. 103-134.

Jelić, I., Kapetanakis, D. 2021. European judicial supervision of the rule of law: The protection of the independence of national judges by the CJEU and the ECtHR. Hague journal on the rule of law, 13(1), pp. 45-77.

Knežević Bojović, A, Ćorić, V. 2023. Challenges of rule of law conditionality in EU accession. Bratislava Law Review, 7(1), pp. 41-62. https://doi.org/10.46282/blr.2023.7.1.327

Knežević Bojović, A. & Ćorić, V. 2024. Judicial Self-governance in Serbia: Challenges to and Results of a Quantitative Approach. Pravni zapisi, 25(2), pp. 352-393. https://doi.org/10.5937/pravzap15-54236

Kochenov, D. V. & Bárd, P. 2022. Kirchberg salami lost in Bosphorus: The multiplication of judicial independence standards and the future of the rule of law in Europe, Journal of common market studies, 60(S1), pp. 150–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13418

Kosař, D. 2016. Perils of Judicial Self-Government in Transitional Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kosař, D. 2018. Beyond Judicial Councils: Forms, Rationales and Impact of Judicial Self-Governance in Europe. German Law Journal, 19(7), pp. 1567-1612. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200023178

Kosař, D. & Vincze, A. 2022. European Standards of Judicial Governance: From Soft Law Standards to Hard Law. Journal für Rechtspolitik, 30(4), pp 491-501.

Kosař, D. & Šipulová, K. 2023. Politics of judicial governance. In: Tushnet, M. & Kochenov, D. (eds.) Research Handbook on the Politics of Constitutional Law, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 262-285. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839101649.00024

Lurie, G., Reichmann, A. & Sagy, Y. 2019. Agencification and the Administration of Courts in Israel. Regulation and Governance, 14, pp. 718-740.

Matić Bošković, M. 2020. Role of Court of Justice of the European Union in establishment of EU standards on independence of judiciary. EU and Comparative Law Issues and Challenges Series (ECLIC), 4, pp. 329-351. https://doi.org/10.25234/eclic/11907

Møller, J. & Skaaning, S.-E. 2014. Systematizing Thin and Thick Rule of Law Definitions. In: Møller, J. & Skaaning, S.-E. (eds.), The Rule of Law, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 13-27.

O'Hagan, E. 2004. Too soft to handle? A reflection on soft law in Europe and accession states.

Journal of European Integration, 26(4), pp. 379-403. https://doi.org/10.1080/0703633042000306535

Pérez, A. T. 2018. Judicial Self-Government and Judicial Independence: The Political Capture of the General Council of the Judiciary in Spain. German Law Journal, 19(7), pp. 1769-1800.

Piana, D. 2010. Judicial Accountabilities in New Europe from Rule of Law to Quality of Justice, London, New York: Routledge.

Piana, D. 2016. Reforming the judiciary through standards: agency empowerment and centre (re)building in Italy, 2001-2015. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 83(4), pp. 757-772. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852315592022

Preshova, D., Damjanovski, I. & Nechev, Z. 2017. The Effectiveness of the ‘European Model’ of Judicial Independence in the Western Balkans: Judicial Councils as a Solution or a New Cause of Concern for Judicial Reforms. CLEER Paper series, 1, https://www.asser.nl/media/3475/cleer17-1_web.pdf, 2. 10. 2024.

Reiling, D. & Contini, F. 2022. E-justice platforms: challenges for judicial governance. International Journal for Court Administration, 13(1), pp. 1-19. https://doi.org/I 0.3 6745/ijca.445

Senden, L. 2004. Soft law in European Community law. Portland: Hart.

Shetreet, S. 2012. International Standards in the Making, The Mt. Scopus International Standards of Judicial Independence: The Innovative Concepts and the Formulation of a Consensus in a Legal Culture of Diversity. In: Shetreet, S. & Forsyth, C. (eds.), The Culture of Judicial Independence, Leiden: Brill | Nijhof, pp. 473–498.

Shetreet, S. 2024. The significance of developing international and European standards of judicial independence: The ELI Mt scopus project. In: Shetreet, S. & Chodosh, H. (eds.), Judicial Independence: Cornerstone of Democracy. Lieden, Brill. pp. 251-253. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004535091_018

Simović, D. Z. 2023. Constitutionalization of the judicial council in North Macedonia and Serbia: Can we learn from each other?. Strani pravni život, 67(4), pp. 623-642.

Spác, S., Šipulová, K. & Urbániková, M. 2018. Capturing the Judiciary from Inside: The story of Judicial Self-Governance in Slovakia. German Law Journal, 19 (7), pp. 1741-1768.

Ștefan, O. 2024. Preserving the Rule of Law through Transnational Soft Law: The Cooperation and Verification Mechanism. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 16, pp. 671-692. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-024-00222-7

Šipulová, K., Spáč, S, Kosař, D, Papoušková, T. & Derka, V. 2023. Judicial Self-Governance Index: Towards better understanding of the role of judges in governing the judiciary. Regulation & Governance, 17(1), pp. 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12453

Tamanaha, B. Z. 2004. On the Rule of Law - History, Politics, Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tamanaha, B. Z. 2012. The History and Elements of the Rule of Law. Singapore Journal of Legal Studies, pp. 232-247.

Turenne, S. 2024. European Standards of Judicial Independence – Lessons from the Court of Justice of the European Union. In: Shetreet, S. & Chodosh, H. (eds), Judicial Independence: Cornerstone of Democracy, Leiden, Brill, pp. 254-273. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004535091_019

Voermans, W. 2003. Councils for the judiciary in Europe: trends and models. In: Segado, F. F. (ed.), The Spanish Constitution in the European Constitutional Context (ed.), Madrid, Dykinson, pp. 2133-2144.

Legal Sources

CCJE Opinion No. 3. CCJE Opinion no. 3 of the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) to the attention of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the principles and rules governing judges’ professional conduct, in particular ethics, incompatible behaviour and impartiality.

CCJE Opinion No. 4. CCJE Opinion no. 4 of the Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) to the attention of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on appropriate initial and in-service training for judges at national and European levels.

CCJE Opinion No. 14. 2011. CCJE Opinion No. (2011)14 of the CCJE “Justice and information technologies (IT).”

CCJE Opinion No. 17. CCJE Opinion No. 17 (2014) on the evaluation of judges’ work, the quality of justice and respect for judicial independence.

CCJE Opinion No. 22. 2019. CCJE Opinion No. 22 The role of judicial assistants.

CCJE Opinion No. 26. 2023. CCJE Opinion No. 26 (2023) Moving forward: the use of assistive technology in the judiciary.

CCJE Opinion No. 24, 2021. CCJE Opinion No. 24 (2021): Evolution of the Councils for the Judiciary and their role in independent and impartial judicial systems.

Croatian Court Rules of Procedure, Official Gazette of the Republic of Croatia, Nos. 37/14, 49/14, 8/15, 35/15, 123/15, 45/16, 29/17, 33/17, 34/17, 57/17, 101/18, 119/18, 81/19, 128/19, 39/20, 47/20, 138/20, 147/20, 70/21, 99/21, 145/21, 23/22, 12/23, 122/23, and 55/24.

Croatian Law on Courts. Official Gazette of the Republic of Croatia, Nos. 28/13, 33/15, 82/15, 82/16, 67/18, 126/19, 130/20, 21/22, 60/22, 16/23, 155/23, 36/24.

ELI Standards. 2024. ELI-Mount Scopus European Standards of Judicial Independence. Available at: https://www.europeanlawinstitute.eu/projects-publications/publications/eli-mount-scopus-european-standards-of-judicial-independence/, 9 May 2025.

ENCJ, Judicial Ethics Report, 2009-2010

EU. 2016. Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, OJ C 202, p. 389-405.

EU. 2020. Conditionality Regulation 2020. Regulation 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget, OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, pp. 1-10.

EU, TEU. 2016. Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union, OJ C 202, pp. 13-43,

OSCE. 2010. Kyiv Recommendations, 2010. OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, Max Planck Minerva Research Group, Kyiv Recommendations on judicial independence in Eastern Europe, South Caucasus and Central Asia.

OSCE. 2023. Warsaw Recommendations, 2023. OSCE Recommendations on Judicial Independence and Accountability.

Slovenian Law on Courts, Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No. 94/07 – official consolidated text, 45/08, 96/09, 86/10 – ZJNepS, 33/11, 75/12 – ZSPDSLS-A, 63/13, 17/15, 23/17 – ZSSve, 22/18 – ZSICT, 16/19 – ZNP-1, 104/20, 203/20 – ZIUPOPDVE, 18/23 – ZDU-1O and 42/24 – sec. U.S.

Caselaw

Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses v. Tribunal de Contas, 2016. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 27 February 2018 Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses v. Tribunal de Contas (Case C-64/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:117).

Grzęda v. Poland, 2022. Case of Grzęda v. Poland, application No. 43572/18, judgment (GC) of 15 March 2022

Hann-Invest 2024. Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 11 of 11 July 2024, Joined Cases C-554/21, C-622/21 and C-727/21, Hann-Invest d.o.o. and Others, ECLI:EU:C:2024:594.

Internet Sources

CCJE Opinion No. 24, 2021. CCJE Opinion No. 24 (2021): Evolution of the Councils for the Judiciary and their role in independent and impartial judicial systems.

ECtHR Press Unit. 2023. Press Unit European Court of Human Rights, Factsheet – Independence of the justice system. Available at: https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/FS_Independence_justice_ENG, 28 January 2025.

ELI. 2024. Available at: https://www.europeanlawinstitute.eu/projects-publications/publications/eli-mount-scopus-european-standards-of-judicial-independence/, 3. 5. 2025.

ENCJ report 2022-2023. Indicators Independence, Accountability and Quality of the Judiciary, Available at: /https://pgwrk-websitemedia.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/production/pwk-web-encj2017-p/GA%20Ljubljana/ENCJ%20Report%20Indicators%20IAQ%202022-2023%2025%20May%202023%20with%20links.pdf, 30. 4. 2025.

Pech, L. 2020. The Rule of Law in the EU: The Evolution of the Treaty Framework and Rule of Law Toolbox. Reconnect. Available at: https://reconnect-europe.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/RECONNECT-WP7-2.pdf, 5. 5. 2025.

Schmidt, A. 2024. When the threat comes from home: the Grand Chamber’s review of the Croatian judicial uniformity mechanism under Article 19 (1) TEU in Hann-Invest. Available at: https://www.aisdue.eu/en/alessandro-schmidt-when-the-threat-comes-from-home-the-grand-chambers-review-of-the-croatian-judicial-uniformity-mechanism-under-article-19-1-teu-in-hann-invest/, 15. 3. 2025.

Kosar, D. & Leloup, M. 2022. Op-Ed: Saying Less is Sometimes More (even in Rule-of-Law Cases): Grze˛da v Poland. Available at: https://eulawlive.com/grzeda-v-polandby-david-kosar-and-mathieu-leloup, 23 4. 2025.

Manko, R. 2023. European Parliament Briefing ECJ case law on judicial independence: A chronological overview. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ BRIE/2023/753955/EPRS_BRI(2023)753955_EN.pdf, 2. 4. 2025.

Venice Commission. 2010. European Commission for Democracy through Law, Report on the independence of the judicial system Part I: the independence of judges. Available at: https://rm.coe.int/1680700a63, 25. 4. 2025.