Wednesday, 31 January 2024

Open Justice and User-Centered Court Services in Georgia – Challenges and Recommendations

Open justice applies the principles of open government – transparency, civic participation, and public accountability – to the justice system.[1]

Modern technologies have the capacity to bring about notable improvements in terms of transparency, efficiency, and access to justice. Additionally, these technologies can play a role in advancing the creation of user-centered services within the realm of justice systems.

Judicial transformation should bring justice closer to people and improve efficiency of services.[2] Accessibility of comprehensive information about the judiciary is one of the determining factors of public trust. Besides, access to public information can promote informed public debate and increase the quality of participatory processes.[3]

The effective utilization of technologies in the judicial system has the potential to carry out a large amount of work, which can reduce the administrative burden of court personnel. However, the study revealed that, in the Georgian context, technologies could not improve the situation in terms of transparency and accessibility of public information. Despite the use of electronic systems in the judiciary, the Tbilisi City Court still cannot provide public information of high public interest, citing the substantial time and resources required for processing.

Access to court decisions remains a significant challenge. None of the decisions delivered after April 30, 2020, are published on the portal ecd.court.ge. Furthermore, the amendment made in June 2023 to the Organic Law of Georgia on Common Courts is problematic, as it stipulates that decisions delivered at an open session will be considered public information only after the final decision enters into force.

The study also demonstrated that Tbilisi City Court does not adequately fulfill the obligations specified in the decision N1/225 of the High Council of Justice: as of September 2023, a significant part of the information that should be published proactively is not available on the website of the Court.

The interviews conducted as part of this study revealed that after the pandemic, court hearings in Tbilisi City Court are held in a physical environment. The majority of attorneys express a preference for remote court sessions post-pandemic unless witness interrogations or other circumstances necessitate the physical presence of parties in court. According to the respondents, the favorable aspect of a remote session include saving time, reducing costs, and preserving human resources. Besides, it reduces the need to postpone hearings when a party cannot attend due to valid reasons.

User satisfaction is a key dimension of the quality of justice. In 2018, the High Council of Justice adopted the Rule for Conducting Satisfaction Surveys of Court Users and the Questionnaire for Assessing Satisfaction of Court Users. Unfortunately, this Rule is silent on taking relevant measures in response to the problems identified through the survey. Moreover, access to information regarding the trends identified in particular courts is not ensured.  Besides, conducting satisfaction surveys electronically and automating data processing would simplify the process and reduce the administrative workload on the employees of the administrative office.

Ultimately, the judicial system should effectively use technologies as the means of improving transparency and citizen-centered court services and should promote the implementation of open justice principles.

The study is available here.

 

This study has been developed with the support of the Open Government Partnership through the EU for Integrity Programme for the Eastern Partnership, funded by the European Union. The contents of this study are the sole responsibility of 'Law and Public Policy Center' and do not necessarily reflect the views of OGP or the EU.



[1] Open Government Partnership Global Report, Open Justice, Justice Policy Series, Part 2, p. 9, <https://www.opengovpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Open-Justice_Justice-II_20201214.pdf> [30.09.2023].

[2] CEPEJ Guidelines on electronic court filing (e-filing) and digitalisation of courts, § 2.

[3] OECD Guidelines for Citizen Participation Processes, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2022, p. 32.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Project "Assessment of the Transparency and Accountability of the Security Sector"

Donor Organization: Innovations and Reforms Center, European Union Budget: 14,000 EUR Duration: 3 June 2024 - 3 February 2025 Project aim:...