Peer to Peer Meetings of Professional Associations of Judges and Prosecutors with their Membership

Current05.03.2010.

Introducing JAS and PAS members with achievements and activities that Associations were undertaking, target and evaluate problems that members are facing in their branches, determine branch activities as well as improve internal communication, point out major obstacles in their work and encourage members to support and participate in future activities on regular bases.

Both JAS and PAS Management will be at the disposal of their colleagues providing answers and update on all the recent and actual developments and possibilities of intriguing the relevant stakeholders, media and professional public in securing and excepting best possible solutions.

Branch members will point out on the local problems and necessity of JAS and/or PAS reaction in providing solutions for these problems. Also, branch members will present proposals for future activities of both associations.

Meetings would include branch members and their presidents as well as President, Deputy President and Managing Board representatives of JAS and PAS. At first place, meetings should be held in those districts that were not covered during the first period of the project implementation in 2009, at which time JAS was performing these activities alone. Also, it is advised that meetings should be held in those branches whose presidents and/or Managing Board representatives have passed the reelection process held in December 2009. Furthermore, meetings should gather approximately 30 participants, members of JAS and PAS branches. The OSCE representatives are welcome to attend and participate in these meetings due to the fact that their presence would provide additional encouragement to branch members in their future activities. It would be of particular importance to underline that there are mutual benefits for both elected and non elected members to attend these meetings.

Essentially, Peer-to-Peer meetings would address several major issues such as:

• New court network - organization of court work and court units, organization of work of public prosecution office and their units;
• High Court Council and State Prosecutorial Council – introduction and analysis of Opinion No. 10 of the Consultative Council of European Judges on the preferred model of Councils for Judiciary; future composition and members profile;
• Disciplinary responsibility of judges and prosecutors and its purpose - balancing the principle of permanent tenure of judges/deputy prosecutors function but also providing a guarantee of judiciary independence;
• Evaluation of judges and prosecutors performance and its purpose as a tool for managing the judicial system - estimation of the required number of judges/prosecutors with the aim to provide for equal distribution of workload of judges/prosecutors and courts/prosecution offices;
• Assessing and drafting amendments to the procedural laws, defining problems and providing recommendations for improvements.
• Follow up of the activities of the relevant state bodies in order to make appropriate impact timely and in appropriate ways;
• Future role of professional associations of judges and prosecutors in shaping the judicial training through Judicial Academy`.