Slovenia has successfully eliminated backlogs as a systemic problem that has burdened the Slovenian courts for two decades. The innovative, tailor-made solutions prepared within the judiciary have been recognised on an international level. The number of unresolved cases has been cut in half over five years and the length of trials has been significantly shortened, even though the number of judges has been reducing for the past decade. These improvements were recognised by the Council of Europe and the European Commission: the Secretariat of the Council of Europe adopted a decision in 2016, stating that trial within a reasonable time is no longer a systemic problem in Slovenia. The EC Commissioner for Justice and Consumers in her presentation of the EU Justice Scoreboard 2018 mentioned Slovenia as the country which had significantly reduced the number of unresolved cases.
All these positive steps made it possible for the Supreme Court of Slovenia to strategically address issues regarding quality. Two main problem areas have been identified: the quality of judicial work (skills and transfer of knowledge) on the one hand and the low trust in the judiciary on the other.
These problems had to be addressed with limited human and financial resources, and bearing in mind that Slovenia has no real judicial academy and there is no formal obligatory specialised training for court staff.
The goals of the project were multiple and interconnected:
- increase the quality of judicial activity;
- increase the competence of court staff to enable them to support judges in their work;
- better satisfaction of court staff and judges with working conditions within the judiciary;
- improve communication between judges of different court instances;
- better communication with court users by providing procedural justice;
- foster judicial self-governance;
- increase trust in the judiciary.
The activities within the IQ Justice project have been evolving organically. More judges are trained to be mentors to new judges, so more new judges became mentored. Similarly, judicial workshops with supervision techniques are receiving more applications, following the word-of-mouth praise of judges who took part, creating a more integrated community within the judiciary.
As the documents are regarded as living instruments, reflective of changes in the legislation and case-law, they will be updated regularly. It should be noted that in line with the living instrument approach, there is an online platform attached to every manual where the users can comment on the content and suggest improvements. Following the example of the manual for new judges, a special manual will be prepared for new members of court staff. The same applies, mutatis mutandis, to the procedural justice component of the IQ Justice project – the brochures and the website will be regularly updated, supplemented by new animations. The brochures will be disseminated in all courts in the second half of 2019. To encourage even more judges and court staff to use them, more presentations will be made at training events to reach as wide a potential audience as possible. Other stakeholders will be informed including the Ombudsman, the Ministry of Justice, and the Ministry of Education, Science and Sports. Special training events are foreseen for judges and court staff across the country to familiarise them with procedural justice issues and challenges.
The total quality management approach, which stems from the needs of users, judges, court staff and court users, and the methods used in the IQ Justice project are usable in other courts or court systems. All the planned activities and products delivered in the project came as a direct consequence of qualitative research. The findings of such research might vary from country to country, as some of the issues judicial systems have to address are common and similar, others are specific to a court or a country. However, the added value of the project lies in its focus to foster the sharing of knowledge and practical experiences (these differ from country to country) which exist within the judicial system. It does not offer a final document or a solution; it rather outlines a methodology on how to meet challenges people face, either at the workplace or in contact with courts, and how to tackle them.
The project is of particular interest to countries with a similar situation as Slovenia, where there is no judicial academy for judges and judicial staff. The Slovenian example shows that even with limited financial, spatial and human resources, a well-planned and structured project with motivated representatives of judges and judicial staff (supported by the court leadership) can result in the overall improvement of the judicial system. This approach has a potential not only to improve judicial proceedings, it can lead to – as it did in Slovenia – a more cohesive judicial community.