Commission Report (2002): Czech Republic

The judicial system

The judicial system is composed of four main tiers: 86 district courts, 8 regional courts, 2 high courts and the Supreme Court. In addition there is the Constitutional Court, which may be addressed directly by citizens in some cases of alleged violation of fundamental rights. Prior to the communist era, the court system was largely based on that of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Since then, post-1989 basic codes have drawn upon prewar, communist and modern elements and thus require extensive revision.

Judges are nominated by the Ministry of Justice and appointed for life by the President of the Republic. Certain State prosecutors are subject to a security vetting procedure. The Ministry of Justice determines the number of judges and state prosecutors and their promotion, and administers the budgetary resources of the judiciary. Judges` salaries, which are relatively high, are set by Parliament. The Constitution enshrines the independence of judges, although the Minister of Justice is responsible for appointing, transferring and terminating the appointment of the President and Vice-Presidents of courts.

Several developments can be noted over the reporting period. The important and much debated Act on Courts and Judges entered into force in April 2002. The Act introduced a first step towards self-government of the judiciary by the creation of Judicial Councils which have the status of consultative bodies at all court levels. It also seeks to promote greater professionalisation of the judiciary by establishing new procedures for the selection, training and evaluation of judges. However, members of the judiciary and the Union of Judges criticised the Act as undermining the independence of judges and, for similar reasons, the President of the Republic referred it to the Constitutional Court.

In June the Constitutional Court subsequently struck down certain provisions of the Act, on the grounds that they did not respect the constitutional principle of division of legislative, executive and judicial powers or the principle of independence of the courts. These provisions concerned the system of ``re-evaluation'' of judges' competence during their career, the compulsory training of judges in the Judicial Academy and the performance of administrative responsibilities by the Presidents and Vice-Presidents of courts.

The ongoing constructive debate in the Czech Republic concerning the reform of the judicial system can be expected to continue.

The Act on Courts and Judges also creates a new Judicial Academy. This began operations in September 2002. The Academy is to provide life-long training for the judiciary. The Ministry of Justice has revised the curricula for training of judges and State prosecutors, covering all relevant areas including human rights as well as civil and criminal judicial co-operation. It is important that the appropriate representatives of the judiciary are involved in the functioning of the Judicial Academy.

The Administrative Court Proceedings Code and the Act for Solving Some Questions of Jurisdiction were adopted in March 2002 and will enter into force on 1 January 2003. They introduce a new, modern system of administrative law which consists of Regional Courts, which will act as first instance courts for all administrative matters, and a Supreme Administrative Court, which will act as the second instance. This system was adopted following a Constitutional Court decision that the current arrangements were unconstitutional. Furthermore, the Administrative Court Proceedings Code extends the possibility of free legal aid to administrative justice. These reforms should complement the adoption of the Civil Service Act (see previous section on the executive) in establishing a legal framework governing administrative actions.

The amendments to the Criminal Proceedings Code and to the Act on State Prosecutors (adopted in December 2001) began to be implemented in January 2002 and March 2002 respectively. Both amendments strengthened the powers of the State prosecutors, who are directly responsible for investigating all criminal offences, including economic crime, money laundering, organized crime, corruption and misuse of powers. The amendments to the Criminal Proceedings Code and the reform of the system of criminal prosecution have had a very beneficial effect on the efficiency of preparation and organisation of criminal trials and have reduced delays in the criminal trial system. Cases appear to be better prepared for trial, pre-trial proceedings are faster than before and the incidence of guilty pleas before trial has increased. The amended Criminal Proceedings Code also regulates the use of pre-trial detention (see below under Civil and political rights).

On the basis of the Act on Judicial Executors of 2001, 103 judicial executors` offices have been created and the Chamber of Judicial Executors has begun to operate. This is an important step forward which has improved the speed and efficiency of the enforcement of civil judgements.

Administrative support for judges has improved. For example, as of 1 January 2002, there were 621 higher court officials, compared to 591 noted in the previous report. Since the previous Regular Report, the number of judges and State prosecutors has increased. By 1 January 2002 the number of judges' posts had increased to 2 941 (in comparison with 2 893 in 2001); 2 669 judges were in active service (as of 1 April 2002) while 272 judicial vacancies remained. The total number of public prosecutors' posts had increased to 1 250 by 1 January 2002 (compared to 1 055 in 2001); 973 prosecutors were in active service (as of 1 April 2002) while 277 vacancies remained.

Good progress continues to be made in the re-codification of criminal and commercial law, with a view to its completion by January 2005.

Access to justice is reasonably well maintained save that, except in family cases, there is still no general provision in most first instance courts for emergency judges for urgent matters when the courts are closed. Legal aid is available in criminal and civil cases. However, less well informed members of the public may not be fully aware of their entitlement. The development of professional enforcement officers has improved the speed and efficiency of enforcement of judgements.

A key area for further improvement remains the reduction in length of court proceedings, which are a concern also for the Human Rights Commissioner. In particular, the amendments to the Civil Proceedings Code of 2001 have so far had little discernible effect except that injunctions can now be more speedily obtained. Otherwise, the civil litigation system does not yet appear to have become significantly speedier. Recent figures from the Ministry of Justice show that the duration of criminal and civil proceedings increased in 2001 compared to 2000 and 1999.

Overall, the recent judicial reforms need to be further underpinned by additional human and material resources. The burden of routine administrative duties continues to slow down the justice system by deploying judges on routine administrative work when they could otherwise be deployed in judging cases. Therefore, increased efforts are needed to ensure adequate administrative support for judges and courts, notwithstanding some progress in the provision of information technology to the courts. District courts and some regional courts continue to lack sufficient financial support.

Judicial training is developing well but there is an urgent need for the further training of teaching staff in interactive methods, such as simulated hearings, and regarding the reform of the system of criminal prosecution. The setting up of the judicial academy is a positive step, although its success depends on how far judges can make use of it, since it is situated far from the judicial centres of Brno and Prague.

Furthermore, there is widespread dissatisfaction with, and allegations of corruption concerning the administration of the commercial business register which is operated by the judiciary. The register appears to be chronically understaffed. The 15-day deadline for handling requests for company registration, introduced by an amendment to the Civil Proceedings Code, has not so far had a significant impact.

Finally, the courts do not have sufficient judges trained in asylum law or available to hear the number of asylum cases likely to come to court in the near future. The capacity of these courts needs to be strengthened in order to cope with the introduction of the new appeals procedure.

---

Next: Anti-corruption measures
Up: 1.1. Democracy and the rule
Previous: The executive