This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Back to contents

Law and Politics

Reference:

Vasilev D. Productivity and efficiency in the evaluation of judicial activity // Law and Politics. 2022. № 3. P. 49-79. DOI: 10.7256/2454-0706.2022.3.34635 URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=34635

Productivity and efficiency in the evaluation of judicial activity

Vasilev Dmitrii

Senior Lecturer, Department of Theory and History of State and Law, Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management "NINH", judge in honorable retirement

630099, Russia, Novosibirskaya oblast', g. Novosibirsk, ul. Kamenskaya, 52/1, kab. 5-613

vasdm69@gmail.com

Other publications by this author

DOI:

10.7256/2454-0706.2022.3.34635

Received:

15-12-2020

Published:

03-04-2022

Abstract: The article raises the question of whether it is correct to use the term "efficiency" when evaluating judicial activity using quantitative indicators of judicial statistics. These indicators are focused on the departmental needs of a closed-in judicial system. The article shows that in relation to the assessment of the activity of courts according to judicial statistics, it is correct to use the term "productivity". The thesis of the article is that when evaluating the work of courts and judges, to distinguish productivity from efficiency. It is noted that the productivity of ships and their efficiency are not directly dependent. Particular attention is paid to determining what constitutes the effectiveness of judicial activity. The author comes to the conclusion that the effectiveness of judicial work can be investigated by studying the assessments of courts and judges by their "clients" - litigants, other persons involved in the case, society as a whole. Courts act effectively if their "reputation capital" increases in the eyes of society. The currently used indicators of judicial statistics should be replaced by an assessment of the effectiveness of justice based on a sociological study of the reputation of the judiciary. The judiciary should have its own structures to monitor changes in public opinion regarding the reputation of the courts. When considering a possible methodology for assessing the reputation of courts and judges, it is noted that it is not expressed in quantitative data. Shifting the emphasis in the evaluation of judicial activity to the study of efficiency will provide feedback to the judicial system with its "clients", will form additional motivation for judges to take care of their own reputation in the eyes of public opinion.

Keywords:

reputation of the court, the quality of the judge's work, efficiency of courts, judicial statistics, evaluation of judicial activity, corporate culture of courts, ship performance, stability of judicial acts, number of court cases, procedural deadlines
This article is automatically translated. You can find original text of the article here.

The conclusions of the article are not at all aimed at rejecting the assessment of the productivity of vessels by "quantity" and "timing". On the contrary, the need for a comprehensive assessment measuring both efficiency and productivity is emphasized. Justice cannot be effective without achieving minimum performance standards. These standards should be recommended by the bodies of the judicial community. It is necessary to involve third parties in their development and verification of their achievement, possibly within the framework of public monitoring bodies formed at the courts.

It is important to understand that the results of evaluating the effectiveness and productivity of judicial work will be meaningless if there is no backlash from the judicial community, the leadership of courts and individual judges.

This publication outlines only the general outlines of an integrated approach to the evaluation of judicial activity. The development of specific methods for evaluating the work of courts and judges, analyzing its results and ways to respond to them may be one of the areas of further research on the topic under consideration.

References

1. Colbran S. A comparative analysis of judicial performance evaluation programmes // Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education. Taylor & Francis. 2006. № 4. 35-67 p.
2. European Commission. Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion. Quality of Public Administration. A Toolbox for Practitioners. Theme 6: Strengthening the quality of judicial systems // Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. 2015. 339-397 p.
3. Thomas of Cwmgiedd R.J. The Position of the Judiciaries of the United Kingdom in the Constitutional changes. Address to the Scottish sheriffs’ association Peebles. 8 march 2008. [электронный ресурс] // URL: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/ljt_address_to_scottish_sheriffs.pdf. (Date of the application: 20.01.2022).
4. Buksha K.S. Business reputation management. Russian and foreign PR-practice // M.: Williams Publishing House. 2007.-133 p.
5. Vasilev D.S. Indicators of judicial statistics as criteria for evaluating judicial activity // Law and Politics. 2021. No. 3.-P.79-100.
6. Vasilev D.S. Judicial statistics and corporate culture of Russian courts // Law and Politics. 2020. No. 12.-P.34-49.
7. Vasilev D.S. Are our indicators good? On the issue of evaluating the effectiveness of the work of courts and judges // Law and Economics: National Experience and Development Strategies: Sat. Art. based on the results of I Novosib. int. legal forum. Part 2. Novosibirsk. Ed. NSUEU "NINH". 2019.-P.183-203.
8. Vasilev D.S., Salamatova M.S. Judicial Corps of the Novosibirsk Region: Social and Demographic Characteristics, Working Conditions and Professional Development // Law and Economics: National Experience and Development Strategies: Sat. Art. according to the results of III Novosib. int. legal forum. Part 2. Novosibirsk. Ed. NSUEU "NINH". 2021.-P.166-183.
9. Vikut M.A. Providing courts with the rights of persons participating in a civil case, as one of the conditions for the effectiveness of justice // Problems of accessibility and effectiveness of justice in arbitration and civil proceedings. Materials Vseross. scientific-practical. conf, Moscow, January 31-February 1, 2001. M.: Lidzhist, 2001.-P. 132–136.
10. Gagiev A.K. Criteria for the effectiveness of courts in civil and arbitration proceedings: dissertation // M. Mosk. humanitarian. un-t. 2013.-221 p.
11. Dworkin R. Seriously about rights // M.: ROSSPEN. 2004.-392 p.
12. Denisova G. S., Shurygina E. G.Public confidence in the court as an indicator of the effectiveness of the judiciary // Issues of judicial reform: law, economics, management. No. 1. 2009. Rostov-on-Don. pp.48-58.
13. Drucker P.F. Tasks of management in the XXI century // M.: Publishing house "Williams", 2004.-272 p.
14. Drucker P.F. Maciariello D.A. Management // M.: ID Williams LLC. 2010.-704 p.
15. Drucker P.F. Effective leader // M: Mann, Ivanov and Ferber LLC. 2006.-240 p.
16. European Court of Human Rights. Ruling in the case of Obukhova v. Russian Federation // No. 34736/03. ECHR 2009.
17. European Court of Human Rights. Judgment in the case “NGO “Center for Legal Resources” in the interests of Valentin Cappeanu v. Romania” // No. 47848/08. ECHR 2014.
18. European Court of Human Rights. Judgment in the case of Radobuljac v. Croatia // No. 51000/11. ECHR 2016.
19. Ibáñez P.A. To the question of the positive ethics of a judge. Ethics of a judge: a guide for judges // M: Russian Academy of Justice. 2002.-S.166-186.
20. Cardozo B.N. The nature of judicial activity // M.: Statute. 2017.-110 p.
21. Kizirbozunts T.M. Questions of the effectiveness of the judiciary, the place and role of the judge in civil society and a democratic state // New legal journal. 2014. No. 4. P.81-84
22. Covey S. Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. Powerful tools for personal development // M.: Alpina. 2013.-384 p.
23. Mescon M., Albert M., Khedouri F. Fundamentals of management // M.: Delo. 1992.-701 p.
24. Mishina E. A. From the American experience of ensuring the personal independence of judges// Law.Journal of Higher School of Economics. 2010. No. 4. P.119-133.
25. Moskvich L.N. World practices for assessing the effectiveness of the functioning of the court // Questions of jurisprudence. M.: Intern. research in-t. 2013. No. 3.-S. 288–304.
26. Moskvich L.N. Judicial System Efficiency Standards // Russian Judge.-M.: Lawyer. 2013. No. 4.-S. 6–8.
27. Ricoeur P. Fair // M.: Gnosis. Logos. 2005.-299 p.
28. Rumelt R. Good strategy, bad strategy // M.: "Mann, Ivanov and Farber". 2014.-445 p.
29. Soto de E. Another way. Invisible revolution in the third world // M.: Catallaxy. 1995.-320 p.
30. Hayek von F. Constitution of freedom // M.: New publishing house. 2018.-525 p.
31. Hart G.L. Positivism and the delimitation of law and morality // Jurisprudence.-S.-Pb.: Publishing house of S.-Petersburg. university 2005. No. 5.-S. 102–136.
32. Tsikhotsky A.V. Theoretical problems of the effectiveness of justice in civil cases // Novosibirsk. The science. Sib. company. 1997.-391 p.

Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

A REVIEW of an article on the topic "Productivity and efficiency in the evaluation of judicial activity". The subject of the study. The article proposed for review is devoted to topical issues of studying productivity and efficiency "... in the evaluation of judicial activity". The author has chosen a special subject of research: the proposed issues are investigated from the point of view of management, while the author notes that "To the same extent as in relation to other organizations and their employees, the assessment of the work of judges and courts reflects their control." The author studies mainly managerial imperatives, legislation, international acts, rulings of the European Court of Human Rights and other normative legal acts of the Russian Federation: "The existing system of evaluating judicial work does not sufficiently motivate the formation of judges' values of personal independence and civic courage, as well as the development of their organizational, communicative, discursive and argumentative competencies. It contributes to the personnel isolation of the judicial department" and the practice that has developed in assessing the effectiveness, efficiency and productivity of the work of courts and judges relevant to the purpose of the study. A large volume of scientific literature (both Russian and foreign) on the stated problems is also studied and summarized. At the same time, the author notes that "The shortcomings of the existing system of evaluating judicial work are recognized by the judges themselves. In 2021, the Department of Theory and History of State and Law of the NGUEU "NINH" conducted a study "The Judicial corps of the Novosibirsk region 2021 ...". Research methodology. The purpose of the study is determined by the title and content of the work "This publication, which is a logical continuation of the previous ones, is aimed at developing recommendations for a comprehensive assessment of judicial activity, taking into account the provisions of management theory." It can be designated as the consideration and resolution of certain problematic aspects related to the above-mentioned issues and the use of certain experience (which is present in the article, both by the author himself and by Russian and foreign judges). Based on the set goals and objectives, the author has chosen a certain methodological basis for the study. In particular, the author uses a set of general scientific, special legal methods of cognition. In particular, the methods of analysis and synthesis made it possible to summarize and separate the conclusions of various approaches to the proposed topic, as well as draw certain conclusions from the materials of the opponents. The most important role was played by special legal methods. In particular, the author uses a formal legal method that allowed for the analysis and interpretation of the norms of the current legislation of the Russian Federation, court decisions (ECHR). In particular, the following conclusions are drawn: "The limited volume of the article does not allow for a complete review of publications on the topic of the effectiveness of justice. As examples, we will consider dissertation research ... [32], ... [10], publications ... [9], ... [21], ... [25],[26], ... [12]. To illustrate the approach in assessing judicial activity in other States, a brief analysis of the works ... [3] and ... [1], as well as the report of the Directorate General ... of the European Commission [2] is given. It should be noted that the practical interest in this topic is primarily felt by acting judges..." and others. But the "limited volume of the article" of the author is more than 80 thousand characters (although the recommended volume of the article is 12-50 thousand characters). At the same time, in the context of the purpose of the study, the formal legal method was applied in conjunction with the comparative legal method, especially since the author cited many scientific works by foreign scientists. It is important to note here that the author considers the problems with providing references to Russian and foreign studies. Thus, the methodology chosen by the author is fully adequate to the purpose of the article, allows you to study all aspects of the stated topic. The relevance of the stated issues is beyond doubt. This topic is one of the most important both in the world and in Russia, the work proposed by the author can be considered relevant, namely, he notes that "The main purpose of this article is to resolve the issue of forming a new approach to evaluating judicial activity based on the general provisions of management theory", "In this regard, it seems It is necessary to form an interdisciplinary approach, which can be designated by the term "Judicial management"." At the same time, the author is aware of: "This publication outlines only the general outlines of an integrated approach to evaluating judicial activity. The development of specific methods for evaluating the work of courts and judges, analyzing its results and ways to respond to them may be one of the areas of further research on the topic under consideration." The author also provides recommendations and suggestions: "The existing assessment of the work of courts and judges describes their productivity, but not their effectiveness", "Justice cannot be effective without achieving minimum standards of productivity. These standards should be recommended by the bodies of the judicial community. It is necessary to involve third parties in their development and verification of their achievement, possibly within the framework of public monitoring bodies formed at the courts." Thus, scientific research in the proposed field is worth continuing and is only welcome. Scientific novelty. The scientific novelty of the proposed article is beyond doubt. It is expressed in the specific scientific conclusions of the author. Among them, for example, is this: "To determine the effectiveness, that is, the degree and direction of the judicial system's impact on society, it is necessary to describe its mission, that is, the "map" relative to the "axes" of which the judicial system should move." As can be seen, these and other "theoretical" conclusions are new and can be used in further scientific research. Thus, the materials of the article as presented will be of some interest to the scientific community in terms of contribution to the development of science. Style, structure, content. The subject of the article corresponds to the specialization of the journal "Law and Politics", as it is devoted to topical issues of studying productivity and efficiency "... in the evaluation of judicial activity". The article clearly identifies previous studies, notes that this question has already been raised before and provides the results of research by opponents. The content of the article fully corresponds to the title, since the author considered the stated problems and achieved the goal of his research. The quality of the presentation of the study and its results should be recognized as developed. The subject, objectives, methodology, and research results directly follow from the text of the article. The design of the work generally meets the requirements for this kind of work (except for the volume). No significant violations of these requirements were found. Bibliography. The quality of the Russian and foreign literature used should be highly appreciated. The author actively uses the literature presented by foreign authors, and there are also domestic studies. Thus, the works of the above foreign authors correspond to the research topic, have a sign of sufficiency, and contribute to the disclosure of certain aspects of the topic. Appeal to opponents. The author conducted a serious analysis of the current state of the problem under study. The author describes different points of view on the problem, argued for a more correct position in his opinion, and offers solutions to individual problems. Conclusions, the interest of the readership. The conclusions are logical, specific, and they are obtained using a generally accepted methodology. The article in this form may be of interest to the readership in terms of the systematic positions of the author in relation to the issues stated in the article. Based on the above, summing up all the positive and negative sides of the article, I recommend "publishing".

Journals

Books

Productivity and efficiency in the evaluation of judicial activity