The EU Justice Scoreboard is a useful information tool that looks at the data on the independence, quality and efficiency of national justice systems throughout all Member States. This scoreboard mainly focuses on cases of a civil, commercial and administrative nature and has been published annually from 2013 onwards.
This system is an excellent way to gauge Malta’s results in the justice sector, and is also paramount in underlining challenges faced so that these can be addressed.
This year’s scoreboard, which is published by the European Commission, refers to results attained in 2016 from across all EU countries. Malta has recorded the best clearance rate when it comes to civil, commercial and administrative cases from across all countries meaning that in terms of the number of cases decided compared to the number of cases which are opened, our country is the most efficient throughout the whole European Union.
This certainly was not the case back in 2013.
This increase in our courts’ efficiency is also reflected in the fact that Malta registered good clearance rates in the various specific Courts and places among the first best seven countries in this regard. Improvements were recorded in each area, especially when one keeps in mind that the amount of civil, commercial and administrative cases opened during the past 4 years remained at a constant level.
This encouraging rate has left a positive impact on the length procedures registered in Maltese courts and as the Justice Scoreboard clearly outlines through its results, a substantial improvement was registered from 2013 onwards. From the markedly laggard country in the European Union in terms of how long it takes for a case to be decided, we have managed to halve the length of proceedings and have surpassed other countries and climbed up the ranking by three positions. Of course we want more and we are determined to achieve even better results for a better administration of justice.
This is the fourth year that we are seeing positive results, a clear sign that this Government is determined to keep on improving the numbers on lengthy procedures through the introduction of reforms to keep on improving on efficiency.
The Justice Scoreboard shows that Malta has improved its services regarding the progress of cases thanks to newly introduced services. Malta has also been listed among the first 15 countries in relation to managing cases using IT.
Before making further comments I feel duty bound to thank all the stakeholders which were crucial to achieve those results – the Judiciary, all the members of the legal Professions, the Court Administration and anyone who is part of this exciting sector of our society. They deserve all the praise for the results achieved but with a strong underlying message that we have to keep building on these results because the people out there expect a better administration of Justice.
Efficiency
In a nutshell, justice systems are measured according to three variables – efficiency, quality and independence of the judiciary.
In turn, efficiency in the civil courts is measured on the length of proceedings, the clearance rate and the number of pending cases.
The disposition time of all the civil, commercial and administrative cases in 2016 saw a marginal improvement on 2015 which was a good year. Whilst this is a substantial improvement from the disposition time registered in previous years (we managed to halve the length of time it takes for a case to be decided), there is still room for improvement when comparing to other countries. If the Justice Scoreboard were to be a football table, finally we have managed to move out of the relegation table after starting the season with –10 points. As an ambitious country, this is not enough. We want to place in higher positions in the table. To keep the analogy going the fact that in the last stretch we managed to score the most goals in the league and we have the best winning run in the whole league means that if we keep improving with the same rate, we will keep surpassing other teams and placing ourselves higher and higher.
We are optimistic that through hard work and more reforms, we will keep delivering change.
When it comes to the delay in particular courts, Malta has seen an improvement in disposition time throughout and this is good news. Yet as I said, we want more and we will not stop working hard until we achieve better results.
The clearance rate is a strong indicator of efficiency in Maltese court. In fact, as I mentioned earlier, Malta is at the forefront when it comes to this rate by classifying as the first country in this regard, whilst in the 2017 edition it was in the 4th place. This means that our courts are working well to address pending cases. When it comes to civil and commercial cases, Malta has maintained a good clearance rate of 107.3%, at par with 2015 levels – it has ranked 7th in this classification. Malta is in fourth place for the clearance rate of administrative cases, and this positive result gives us the energy to keep addressing this sector.
With key additions in the cohort of the Judiciary, I believe we can even increase and improve the clearance rate.
The European Commission also looks at the number of pending cases as another indicator of efficiency. In the total number of pending cases in the civil, commercial and administrative sector in the first court instance, Malta has advanced to the 7th place, another sign of improvement. Malta is also one of those countries that has lowered the number of pending cases in this sector year after year, and in the civil and commercial sector as well. Our country has also moved two places up from last year’s scoreboard when it comes to pending administrative cases and has placed 6th. At the same time, we have kept the access to Justice intact, we have not raised any fees or tariffs in the last years, and the number of incoming cases has remained stable while investing more in alternative means of resolving disputes such as family mediation and article 166A procedures.
Quality
Malta has seen an improvement in specialised sectors in relation to the quality provided by the justice system. The Justice Scoreboard particularly showed that Malta has increased the possibility to open a case in its courts electronically whilst introducing a strong electronic framework for the Small Claims Tribunal.
Malta has maintained its position in many aspects pertaining to quality, and has improved its performance in a number of sectors, which include the increase of its measures on how to evaluate activity in court and has improved its services in terms of providing available information on the progress of cases. For the first time, the Ministry through the Department of Justice has started administering User Satisfaction Surveys with professionals who make use of their services.
We will increase IT solutions for Court practitioners and the general public while bolster other aspects of the qualitative side if the administration of Justice as explained by the Justice Scoreboard.
Independence
The European Commission addresses the independence of the judiciary as an indicator of the judicial system’s progress in the justice scoreboard as well.
This is, at the end of the day, a sine qua non in the Judicial sphere. The independence and autonomy of the Judiciary is paramount.
2016 was the year when we made Constitutional amendments to create a Committee, made up of independent people, to give advice to the Government on the appointment of Judges and Magistrates. Whilst before 2016 the Government was free to nominate and effectively appoint overnight an advocate to become a Magistrate or Judge, the situation has now changed and the Government has to obtain advice from this important body. We joined France and Ireland in having this particular mechanism which ascertains a level of checks and balances in the appointment to the Judiciary.
Malta has shown that it has a system of structural measures in place to ensure that the independence of the judiciary is kept.
The report also delves into the perception of the independence of the Judiciary. We achieved a result which is better than the average of the European Union but we need to do more. The Judges and Magistrates are completely independent, free from any untoward approaches by the other powers of the state. However, we need to do more to increase the perception of independents and the political class has to ask herself whether things that were thrown at the Judiciary in the last couple of years has affected positively or negatively this sector.
I believe that the Opposition should have shown more restrain in its criticism of the Judiciary.
Our country is showing a strong commitment to keep on working to strengthen the administration of Justice. It is not easy and the challenge is definitely not for the faint hearted. We reiterate the need to keep improving things. The results achieved provide the drive to keep on doing more and more.