How Albania Judiciary measure performance of judges SUPPORT TO JUDICIAL REFORM IN THE WESTERN BALKANS 16-18 November, 2016 Budva, Montenegro

Introduction High Council of Justice. The first criteria for the judges performance: The number of cases resolved by the judges within a year. For the civil judges the number is 220 cases resolved within a year For the penal cases is 100 cases resolved within a year. For the judges of the district of the serious crime is 10 cases within a year. The number of cases resolved by a judge of the appeal court is 200 case within a year

The second criteria for the judges performance, the deadline to resolve the cases : For civil cases with opposing party is 6 months For family cases is 4 months For civil request is 3 months For criminal offense is 2 months For not difficult penal cases is 6 months And for the serious crimes is 1 year.

The third criteria for the judges performance, the quality of the decision: For the judge that is evaluated “very good”, the limit of the cases dropped of by the Appeal Court must be no more that 10% of the cases. For the judge that is evaluated “good”, the limit of the cases dropped of by the Appeal Court must be no more that 20% of the cases. For the judge that is evaluated “acceptable”, the limit of the cases dropped of by the Appeal Court must be no more that 30% of the cases. For the judge that is evaluated “incapable”, the limit of the cases dropped of by the Appeal Court must be more that 10% of the cases.

The problems in practice according to these criteria HCJ doesn’t determined how many cases can a judge has to resolve in the same time There is no an official model for the way how to formulate a decision.

Evaluation Process According to Article 2 (3) of Decision 261/2, the evaluation process has three stages: The evaluation of the president of the court where the evaluated judge performs his or her duties (Article 19) followed by a voluntary self-evaluation of the judge (Article 20). A report of the evaluation and a draft evaluation by the Inspectorate of the HCJ The final evaluation decision by the HCJ (Article 32).

Criteria According to the Law, three sets of evaluation criteria must be distinguished: Section I : The set of general professional, organization and execution skills; Section II : The set of judicial and technical professional abilities Section III : The set of human skills and professional engagement.

Judicial and technical professional abilities In this section, it must be assessed: If the judge is able to draft clear decisions. The evaluated judge’s ability to manage a fair legal process. the judge’s competence to set up and organize a judicial file in a way that makes it readily usable.

Scoring criteria The relevant score is allocated according to the following criteria: 50% experiences, seniority, up to 100 points can be achieved: Three points are allocated for each year of professional experience as a judge, which add up to a maximum score of 80 points. Two additional points are assigned for each year of professional experience as a judge in the court of appeal, which add up to a maximum score of 20 points. 40% evaluation results, up to 80 points can be reached. 80 points are assigned if a judge receives an evaluation of “very good” in all three categories. The evaluated judge receives 60 points for an overall evaluation of “very good”. 10% scientific and academic activity, up to 20 points can be achieved.

Thank You..