Page 6 - Serbia Judicial Functional Review

v. Time to Disposition in Days (the SATURN Method) ........................................................................... 92
vi. Timeliness as Reported by Court Users and Practitioners ................................................................. 96
C. EFFECTIVE ENFORCEMENT ............................................................................................................................. 97
i. Number of Pending Enforcement Cases ............................................................................................ 97
ii. Number of Pending Utility Bill Enforcement Cases ............................................................................ 99
iii. Private Enforcement ........................................................................................................................ 100
iv. Enforcement of Court Judgments .................................................................................................... 103
D. PROCEDURAL EFFICIENCY AND EFFICACY ........................................................................................................ 104
i. Service of Process............................................................................................................................. 105
ii. Scheduling and Hearings ................................................................................................................. 107
iii. Average Numbers of Hearings ......................................................................................................... 110
iv. Average Number of Cancelled Hearings and Adjournments and their Reasons .............................. 110
v. Efficiency in Prison Transfers ........................................................................................................... 112
vi. Use of Modern Case Management Techniques ............................................................................... 113
vii. Efficiency in the Substantive Conduct of Hearings ........................................................................... 114
viii. Efficiency in Joining Similar Cases ............................................................................................... 116
ix. Efficiency in the Appeal Process and the Extent of ‘Recycling’ of Cases .......................................... 117
E. GENDER IMPACTS OF INEFFICIENCIES IN THE COURT SYSTEM .............................................................................. 117
F. EFFICIENCY IN THE DELIVERY OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES ............................................................................... 119
3. QUALITY OF JUSTICE SERVICES DELIVERED ......................................................................................... 123
CHAPTER SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................ 123
A. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 125
B. QUALITY OF LAWS AND LAW-MAKING ........................................................................................................... 125
i. Perceptions about the Quality of Existing laws ............................................................................... 125
ii. Quality of the Law-Making Process ................................................................................................. 127
iii. The Rollout of New Laws ................................................................................................................. 129
C. QUALITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES WITHIN THE COURTS ............................................................................. 130
D. QUALITY IN CASE PROCESSING ..................................................................................................................... 132
i. Use of Standardized Forms, Templates and Checklists .................................................................... 132
ii. Extent of an Implementation Gap (the ‘Law on the Books’ vs. the Law in Practice) ....................... 132
iii. Consistency in the Implementation of Law and Perceptions of the Quality of Judicial Work .......... 133
iv. Use of Specialized Case Processing for Particular Case Types ......................................................... 135
v. Coordination in Case Processing ...................................................................................................... 136
E. QUALITY OF DECISION-MAKING IN CASES ...................................................................................................... 137
i. Use of Standardized Judgment Writing Tools .................................................................................. 137
ii. Consistency of Decision-Making with the ECHR .............................................................................. 137
iii. Deferred Prosecution as an Alternative Sanction ............................................................................ 142
iv. Plea Bargaining................................................................................................................................ 144
v. Quality in Sentencing ....................................................................................................................... 145
F. EFFECTIVENESS OF THE APPEAL SYSTEM IN ENSURING QUALITY OF DECISION-MAKING ........................................... 147
i. Appeals by Court Type and Case Type ............................................................................................. 148
ii. Appeals by Location ......................................................................................................................... 153
iii. User Perceptions of Appeals ............................................................................................................ 155
iv. Factors Explaining High Appeal Rates and High Variation in Appeals ............................................. 157
v. Efforts to Enhance Uniformity in the Application of the Law .......................................................... 160
G. INTEGRITY IN JUSTICE SERVICE DELIVERY ........................................................................................................ 160
i. Perceptions of Integrity and Reasons for Lack of Integrity .............................................................. 160
ii. Perception of Trust and Confidence ................................................................................................. 161
iii. Extent of Reported Corruption and Use of Informal Means ............................................................ 163
iv. Perceptions of Corruption ................................................................................................................ 166
v. Judicial Independence and Perceptions of Judicial Independence ................................................... 170
vi. Perceptions of Impartiality and Fairness ......................................................................................... 172

4. ACCESS TO JUSTICE SERVICES ............................................................................................................. 177
CHAPTER SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................ 177
A. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 179