1. Joint Programme Enhancing judicial reform in the Eastern Partnership countries Judicial component

2. General purpose General purpose Support judicial reform in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine Support judicial reform in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine  Independence  Professionalism  Efficiency Judicial component

3. Specific objectives  Challenges vs European standards on judiciary: identification  Solutions: finding  Recommendations: formulation, dissemination and follow-up Judicial component

4. Methodology MultilateralRegional approach ► Peer-to-peer approach ► ► Bilateral ► Process of intensive information and best practice exchange  CoE expertise Discussion of country recommendations; Follow-up with national authorities on concrete steps to be taken Judicial component

5. Project progress in 2011-2012 During one year there were organised: 11 activities; 11 activities; 7 Working Groups (WG) and sub-group meetings; 7 Working Groups (WG) and sub-group meetings; WGs on Independent and Professional Judicial System completed their work and prepared three comprehensive reports; WGs on Independent and Professional Judicial System completed their work and prepared three comprehensive reports; Preparations are underway for the WG on Efficiency of Justice. Preparations are underway for the WG on Efficiency of Justice. Judicial component

6. Progress vis-à-vis specific objectives Target: Legal and practical obstacles to the implementation of the European standards as regards judicial reform to be identified, through intensive information and best practice sharing Target: Legal and practical obstacles to the implementation of the European standards as regards judicial reform to be identified, through intensive information and best practice sharing Almost fully achieved – fully identified legal and practical obstacles to an independent and professional judiciary; identification of shortcomings in the field of judicial efficiency - underway. Regional trends and problems also identified. Almost fully achieved – fully identified legal and practical obstacles to an independent and professional judiciary; identification of shortcomings in the field of judicial efficiency - underway. Regional trends and problems also identified. Judicial component

7. Progress vis-à-vis specific objectives (continued) Target: Projects recommendations and best practices are disseminated among key national authorities and stakeholders at the national level with a view to adjusting judicial reform policies in the identified areas of concern. Target: Projects recommendations and best practices are disseminated among key national authorities and stakeholders at the national level with a view to adjusting judicial reform policies in the identified areas of concern. Partly achieved – dissemination of the recommendations and discussions on a bilateral level started in May 2012; the reports are further disseminated among the key stakeholders and beneficiaries Partly achieved – dissemination of the recommendations and discussions on a bilateral level started in May 2012; the reports are further disseminated among the key stakeholders and beneficiaries

8. Judicial component Three reports on Judicial Self-Governing Bodies and Judges’ Career, The Profession of Lawyer, Training of Judges include: Comprehensive analysis of the legislation of participating countries; Comprehensive analysis of the legislation of participating countries; Recommendations at a country and regional level; Recommendations at a country and regional level; Examples of best practices from the participating countries; Examples of best practices from the participating countries; Up-to-date country sheets and relevant legislation of the EaP countries. Up-to-date country sheets and relevant legislation of the EaP countries.

9. Country discussions 22-23 May, Moldova 22-23 May, Moldova 5-6 June, Ukraine 5-6 June, Ukraine 12-13 June, Azerbaijan 12-13 June, Azerbaijan 18-19 June, Georgia 18-19 June, Georgia 27-28 June, Armenia 27-28 June, Armenia Judicial component

10. Project impact on national process of judicial system reform Difficult to measure before the project is completed; Difficult to measure before the project is completed; Some countries have already started revision of national legislation in line with CoE standards, on issues pointed out in the Reports (e.g. Georgian Law on Disciplinary responsibility and disciplinary proceedings of judges of Common Courts; Approval of the Rules for Selecting of Judges, etc.) Some countries have already started revision of national legislation in line with CoE standards, on issues pointed out in the Reports (e.g. Georgian Law on Disciplinary responsibility and disciplinary proceedings of judges of Common Courts; Approval of the Rules for Selecting of Judges, etc.) Judicial component

11. Positive factors contributing to the project implementation: Added value of the multilateral forum; Added value of the multilateral forum; Excellent collaboration with beneficiary institutions and countries; Excellent collaboration with beneficiary institutions and countries; Participation and critical consideration from the Civil Society Forum (CSF); Participation and critical consideration from the Civil Society Forum (CSF); Good project timing. Good project timing. Judicial component

12. Next steps Ensuring follow-up on the recommendations through discussions with: Ensuring follow-up on the recommendations through discussions with: National authorities Legal professionals NGOs, professional associations Review and reflect the results of the discussions in the relevant project documents; Review and reflect the results of the discussions in the relevant project documents; Start-up of the WG Efficient Judicial System, September 2012. Start-up of the WG Efficient Judicial System, September 2012.

13. WG Efficient Judicial System Methodology of the WG differs from the other two: Methodology of the WG differs from the other two: It relies on the expertise of the CoE European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ); It relies on the expertise of the CoE European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ); CEPEJ data available on evaluation of the judicial systems of member states, including the EaP countries, will be used as a basis for the preparation of more thorough country tailored analysis; CEPEJ data available on evaluation of the judicial systems of member states, including the EaP countries, will be used as a basis for the preparation of more thorough country tailored analysis; Analysis and recommendations developed by the experts will be discussed with the beneficiaries at a later stage. Analysis and recommendations developed by the experts will be discussed with the beneficiaries at a later stage. Consultations are underway on future members of the WG – representatives of national judiciary and national co-ordinators of CEPEJ. Consultations are underway on future members of the WG – representatives of national judiciary and national co-ordinators of CEPEJ. Judicial component

14. For further details about the project please contact: DGHL_capacitybuilding@coe.int http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/capacitybuilding/ Judicial component