Independence and Impartiality

of the Judiciary

1 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

1. Introduction
a. What is the Rule of Law Forum for South East Europe?

The Forum, founded by the AIRE Centre and Civil Rights Defenders, provides a platform to promote the
implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) across South East Europe. It brings together
European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judges from the region, presidents and judges of the region’s supreme
and constitutional courts, presidents of judicial councils, representatives of judicial training institutes, government
agents before the Strasbourg Court, representatives of NGOs and prominent legal experts in the field. The Forum’s
organisers and attendees work to inspire regional cooperation in the strengthening of the rule of law and respect for
human rights, and to assist the countries of South East Europe in the process of EU integration.

The Forum is the result of a longstanding partnership between the AIRE Centre’s Western Balkans Programme
and Civil Rights Defenders, both of whom have extensive experience in working to strengthen the rule of law in
the region. The Forum is also indebted to the continued and vital cooperation of the European Court of Human
Rights, without which our work would be infinitely poorer. Finally, we must thank the Forum’s supporters and their
continued commitment to the principles of the rule of law and human rights: the Konrad Adenauer Foundation,
for their expert contributions and support, the UK Government and the Government of Sweden.

b. The Forum 2021: Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary

In 2021, the Eight Annual Rule of Law Forum was a welcome opportunity to meet and discuss the rule of law,
following months of disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. With the restrictions of the Covid-19 pandemic
still preventing a large conference being held in South East Europe, we decided to reprise the successful hybrid
format first implemented in 2020, to ensure participation and debate between participants from across Europe
could continue to take place.

With a central hub in Dubrovnik, where the Forum’s panel presentations were held, the Forum was linked virtually
to seven city hubs in the legal centres of the region. Representatives from all the legal communities of South East
Europe came together in groups of up to 30 in Belgrade, Podgorica, Priština, Sarajevo, Skopje, Tirana and Zagreb
to join the Forum via video link and gain the opportunity to meet and debate, and to contribute lessons from
their national experiences to heighten regional understanding and develop best practice. The Forum benefitted
from the combined knowledge and experience of over 120 participants across the eight different hubs. These
delegates were joined by a further 200 online participants.

The restrictions put in place across Europe in response

to the Covid-19 pandemic not only precluded the
Forum from going ahead in its usual form they also
impacted the functioning of the judiciary and raised
new questions and concerns in respect of the topic
for this year’s Forum. The 2021 Forum was therefore
an invaluable opportunity to come together, in
person, to discuss the most important issues of the
year and the fundamental issue of the independence
and impartiality of the judiciary.

The international nature of the 2021 Forum, with

attendees joining from not only South East Europe
but also from across the continent (and further afield)
demonstrated that whilst the Forum is designed for South East Europe, the work done and the issues raised and
debated are relevant and important across Europe and indeed across the world.

2 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

This Forum was designed to address comprehensively one of the most significant issues facing the rule of law
and the Convention system in contemporary Europe. To that end it was important to bring together not only the
legal community of South East Europe but to also bring perspectives from across the wider European judicial
community.

c. Forum Speakers and Panellists

The Forum benefited from the presence of many of Europe and the Region’s top judiciary. From the Council of
Europe and ECtHR, discussions in the central hub were led by:

Robert Spano Ledi Bianku
Former ECtHR Judge and
President of the European
Associate Professor at the
Court of Human Rights
University of Strasbourg
Ksenija Turković Tim Eicke Ivana Jelić
ECtHR Judge Elected
ECtHR Judge Elected ECtHR Judge Elected in
in Respect of the
in Respect of Croatia Respect of Montenegro
United Kingdom

Faris Vehabović Erik Wennerström Paul Lemmens Branko Lubarda Jovan Ilievski
ECtHR Judge Elected ECtHR Judge Elected
ECtHR Judge Elected ECtHR Judge Elected in ECtHR Judge Elected
in Respect of Bosnia in Respect of North
in Respect of Sweden Respect of Belgium in Respect of Serbia
and Herzegovina Macedonia

Darian Pavli Krešimir Kamber Thomas Markert Mirjana Lazarova

Lawyer in the Directorate
ECtHR Judge Elected
of Jurisconsult of the
in Respect of Albania
ECtHR Registry
Former Director
and Secretary of the Trajkovska
Former ECtHR Judge
Venice Commission

Across the regional city hubs the Forum also benefitted from the presence of presidents and judges of the region’s
supreme and constitutional courts, ministers of justice, ambassadors and representatives from the supporting
countries, ombudspersons, national representatives before the ECtHR and prominent academics. Their expertise
and the quality of their contributions to the Forum’s discussions were crucial in ensuring that this year’s Forum
could still maintain its reach across South East Europe and remain relevant to the region’s issues and challenges.

3 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 d. The 2021 Forum Guide

This year’s Forum was accompanied by a practical guide for the judiciary and legal practitioners on how to
approach cases concerning the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. The guide includes an analysis of
Article 6 ECHR, as well as relevant international and EU law. It also examines the nature of the requirements of
an independent and impartial tribunal established by law, and considers the relationship between this right and
other Articles of the Convention. Finally, it provides clear and concise summaries of the relevant caselaw of the
Strasbourg Court and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).

We hope that the guide will assist judiciaries, legal practitioners and decision-makers in assessing how States
should seek to promote the independence and impartiality of their judiciaries. Beyond the courts and government,
we also hope that this guide will assist any non-governmental organisations working towards the promotion of
this crucial aspect of the rule of law. We also hope that this guide will be of use to any interested reader.

While the guide will be referenced throughout this report, it may be found in its entirety here.

4 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 e. Opening Thoughts

The Forum began with opening speeches from the Forum founders, Biljana Braithwaite and Goran Miletić. These
speeches emphasised the fundamental importance of safeguarding the independence and impartiality of the
judiciary. Biljana recognised that the existence of an independent and impartial judicial system is required to hold
State authorities to account where their actions threaten human rights or run contrary to the rule of law. Goran
expressed his concern about the measures taken to combat the pandemic, and the need for independent and
impartial courts to ensure the proportionality and necessity of such measures. He further underlined that the
existence of truly independent courts is a necessary prerequisite to improvements in any area of human rights.

Dr Pavel Usvatov, Director of the Rule of Law Programme for South East Europe at the Konrad Adenauer
Foundation, echoed these sentiments and reminded us that implementing a technical notion of independence of
the judiciary is not enough. Widespread public trust in the court system is also needed.

Biljana Braithwaite’s speech may be viewed here:

Goran Miletić’s speech may be viewed here:

5 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 Dr Pavel Usvatov’s speech may be viewed here:

2. Agenda
The Forum Agenda

Under the title Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary the Forum was organised into six substantive parts.

1. ECtHR President Robert Spano delivered the keynote speech entitled ‘The Rule of Law under Pressure –
Reflections on the Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary’.
2. In the first panel discussion, judges of the ECtHR explored the key criteria to determine if a tribunal is
independent, impartial and established by law in light of recent developments in the caselaw of the ECtHR.
3. In the second panel discussion, judges of the ECtHR explored the relationship between independence and
impartiality and other Articles of the Convention.
4. Attendees from each of the Forum’s regional city hubs fed back to the main hub on the outcomes of each
city hub’s discussions.
5. Thomas Markert, Former Director and Secretary of the Venice Commission, delivered a speech on the role
of the Venice Commission in safeguarding judicial independence.
6. In the third and final panel, judges and former judges of the ECtHR explored the key challenges to
safeguarding the right to an independence and impartial judiciary established by law, and best practice in
the region.

For further information and a more detailed look at the Forum’s structure, please see the 2021 Agenda here.

6 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

3. Keynote Speech
Judge Robert Spano, President of the ECtHR, delivered the keynote speech to the Forum.

President Spano’s speech focussed on the importance of protecting democracy and the rule of law at a time
when the independence and impartiality of the judiciary is under pressure across Europe. He highlighted factors
such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the onset of populism as two issues which have challenged the judiciary.

By way of a cure, Judge Spano suggested that courts can seek to tackle the spread of misinformation by
communicating judgments to the public effectively and transparently. Judges may also speak out in public on
questions concerning the functioning of the justice system, provided that their conduct lives up to the high
standards of integrity expected of them. Associations of judges and judicial training can further bolster the
independence and impartiality of the judiciary. Lastly, the speech acknowledged the fundamental importance
judicial diversity.

A full video of President Spano’s keynote address may be found here:

4. Panel discussions (Day 1)

Panel Discussion No. 1 - Moderators: Ledi Bianku and Biljana Braithwaite

The right to a “tribunal established by law” as a standalone right

Judge Ksenija Turković of Croatia spoke about the right to a tribunal established by law as provided by Article 6 §
1 ECHR. She reminded us of the test to determine whether a tribunal is established. She also emphasised that the
appointment of judges is an inherent part of the concept of “established by law”.

7 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 Judge Turković’s speech may be found here:

The Forum Guide

The AIRE Centre’s guide, ‘Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary: An overview of relevant jurisprudence
of the European Court of Human Rights’, devotes a chapter to the right to a “tribunal established by law” as a
standalone right. The guide sets out the three-part test to determine whether a tribunal is established by law and
also examines the requirement of diversity in the appointment of judges.

The chapter on the right to a tribunal established by law can be found here.

Case summaries relevant to the right to a tribunal established by law can be found here.

The key criteria to determine if a tribunal is impartial

Judge Eicke of the United Kingdom spoke about the concept of impartiality in the context of the right to a
tribunal established by law. He stressed that, in contexts where judicial impartiality is in question, a judge has
a responsibility to raise any such issues with the parties. He also pointed towards the importance of systemic
and structural processes, such as the rules of court, in safeguarding the impartiality of judges. Although there
is both a subjective and an objective element to the notion of impartiality, the Court will often conduct a holistic
assessment.

Judge Eicke’s speech may be found here:

8 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

The Forum Guide

The AIRE Centre’s guide, ‘Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary: An overview of relevant jurisprudence
of the European Court of Human Rights’, examines the notion of impartiality in detail. It sets out the distinction
between subjective and objective impartiality. It also considers functional impartiality and personal impartiality.

The chapter on impartiality can be found here.

Case summaries relevant to the issue of impartiality can be found here.

The key criteria to determine if a tribunal is independent

The final contribution to the panel was that of Judge Ivana Jelić, of Montenegro, who spoke about judicial
independence in the context of the right to a tribunal established by law. Judge Jelić considered the criteria
by which a tribunal can be found to be independent, which include the manner of appointment, the existence
of safeguards and whether there is an appearance of independence. She highlighted various factors, including
the manner of appointment and the length of term of office, which are left within each Member State’s margin
of appreciation. However, she stressed that whatever rules are put in place, a judge must be free from outside
pressure and the Court will examine closely any mechanism by which a judge is removed from office.

Judge Jelić‘s speech may be found here:

The Forum Guide

The AIRE Centre’s guide, ‘Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary: An overview of relevant jurisprudence
of the European Court of Human Rights’, also examines the notion of independence in detail. In particular, it sets
out the criteria by which to determine whether a tribunal is independent.

The chapter on independence can be found here.

Case summaries relevant to the issue of independence can be found here.

9 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 Panel Discussion No. 2 - Moderators: Judge Erik Wennerström and Goran Miletić

The relationship with other aspects of Article 6

Judge Jovan Ilievski of North Macedonia presented a speech on the relationship between impartiality and other
aspects of Article 6 ECHR, including the presumption of innocence, the right to a hearing within a reasonable time,
the right to a public hearing and the requirement to provide reasons for judgments. He stressed the importance
of judges refraining from giving public statements about potential guilt, to protect the presumption of innocence.
He also highlighted the necessity of ensuring that judgments of the national courts are publicly available.

Judge Ilievski‘s speech may be found here:

The Forum Guide

The AIRE Centre’s guide, ‘Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary: An overview of relevant jurisprudence
of the European Court of Human Rights’, considers the relationship between independence and impartiality, and
other aspects of the right to a fair trial under Article 6.

This section can be found here.

The relationship with the procedural protections which arise under other Convention rights

Judge Paul Lemmens of Belgium presented a speech on the right to an independent and impartial tribunal
established by law, as an aspect of the procedural protections which arise under other Convention rights. Judge
Lemmens emphasised that the requirements of independence and impartiality are relevant outside of Article 6
proceedings. For example, in cases concerning the right of a person who has been detained to be brought before
a judge, or those involving the right to an effective remedy. He highlighted that where there are more serious
interferences, such as in cases involving Article 2 or Article 3, these positive obligations are stronger.

10 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 Judge Lemmens‘s speech may be found here:

The Forum Guide

The AIRE Centre’s guide, ‘Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary: An overview of relevant jurisprudence
of the European Court of Human Rights’, examines the procedural protections, and importance of independence
and impartiality, which arise in the context of:

• Article 2 – Right to life

• Article 3 – Protection against torture and ill-treatment
• Article 4 – Prohibition of slavery and forced labour
• Article 5 – Right to liberty and security
• Article 8 – Right to private and family life
• Article 10 – Freedom of expression
• Article 13 – Right to an effective remedy
• Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 – Peaceful enjoyment of possessions
• Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 – Obligation on States to hold elections

This section can be found here.

The rights of judges

Judge Branko Lubarda, of Serbia, delivered a speech on the rights of judges, in which he focused on striking a
balance between protecting the rights of judges as individuals and the requirement for them to preserve the
independence and impartiality of the judiciary in the discharge of their duties. Judge Lubarda’s contribution
referred to several international judgments involving Ecuador and Honduras, as well as numerous ECtHR cases
relevant to this issue. With a nod to Alexis de Tocqueville, he reminded us that nothing improves the welfare of a
nation so much as a well-organised judiciary.

11 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 Judge Lubarda‘s speech may be found here:

The Forum Guide

The AIRE Centre’s guide, ‘Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary: An overview of relevant jurisprudence
of the European Court of Human Rights’, also features careful analysis of the rights of judges under the following
articles, including how the rights under these Articles interact with the right to an independent and impartial
judiciary:

• Article 5 – Right to liberty and security

• Article 8 – Right to private and family life
• Article 9 – Freedom of religion
• Article 10 – Freedom of expression
• Article 11 – Freedom of assembly and association

This section may be found here.

5. Overview of the situation in the Western

Balkans - Moderator: Krešimir Kamber
In Belgrade, Podgorica, Priština, Sarajevo, Skopje, Tirana and Zagreb, delegates from across each country’s legal
community came together to observe, discuss and contribute to the conversations and debates taking place
amongst the judges in the main hub.

a. Belgrade City Hub

Providing a summary of the hub’s discussions, Violeta Beširević, Professor at Union University Law School Belgrade,
and Ivana Krstić, Professor at the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law, reported a variety of concerns. These
included concerns about the conduct of judges and officials on social media, the need for training on judicial ethics,
and the need to bolster disciplinary bodies. An overarching issue is the lack of public trust in the judiciary.

The participants further discussed the lack of effective communication between the judiciary and the media. It
was noted that measures are needed to address this, such as bringing interesting cases to the public’s attention.

12 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 For further detail on all these topics please watch the Belgrade city hub report, which may be found here.

You can read a summary here.

b. Podgorica City Hub

Valentina Pavličić, State Agent before the ECtHR

in Strasbourg, and Snežana Armenko, Deputy
Ombudsperson of Montenegro provided a summary
of the hub’s discussions. They reported widespread
agreement between the participants on the need to
implement recommendations aimed at strengthening
independence and impartiality. One shortfall
identified by participants was the lack of effective
routes by which to secure rights to independence
and impartiality in practice, for example, because
the highest courts did not have capacity to respond
effectively to complaints concerning the effectiveness
of legal remedies against judges. To tackle this issue,
they suggested the creation and implementation of a
special structure, through a relevant body to secure
and protect this right. They also reported that more
attention needs to be paid to the selection process of judges. In this regard, they suggested that there should be
greater cooperation between the Judicial Council and the judicial training centre. It was also suggested that the
Judicial Council should take a more active role in strengthening the professionalism of judges.

For further detail on all these topics please watch the Podgorica city hub report, which may be found here.

You can read a summary here.

13 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 c. Priština City Hub

Providing a summary of the hub’s discussions, Edona

Hajrullahu, Deputy Ombudsperson of the Republic
of Kosovo, and Flaka Braha, independent researcher
and PhD candidate in Law, noted concerns to do with
communication and finance. It was agreed that there
is a pressing need for the judiciary to communicate
more with the public, which in turn would build greater
awareness with the country’s youth population. A
manual on the proper use of social media by the
judiciary would be a positive step forward.

The participants also discussed the impact of poor

financing on the proper functioning of the judiciary,
with reference to complaints concerning the length
of proceedings.

For further detail on all these topics please watch the Priština city hub report, which may be found here.

You can read a summary here.

d. Sarajevo City Hub

Providing a summary of the hub’s discussions, Sevima

Sali-Terzić, Senior Legal Adviser at the Constitutional
Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Elma Veledar
Arifagić, Lawyer and External Associate at the AIRE
Centre, recognised a need to improve the judicial
appointments procedure, as well as a need to bring
about the full financial independence of the judiciary.
Judicial appointments and promotions should take
account of the quality of work carried out, rather than
being based simply on statistics. Looking forward,
the adoption of a new law on the High Judicial
and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC) will be crucial to
securing the independence and impartiality of the
judiciary.

The participants, like those of many other City Hubs, also highlighted the issue of biased media reporting.

For further detail on all these topics please watch the Sarajevo city hub report, which may be found here.

You can read a summary here.

e. Skopje City Hub

Providing a summary of the hub’s discussions, Dr Denis Preshova, Assistant Professor at the Department of
Constitutional Law at the Faculty of Law of Skopje, and Velimir Delovski, Legal Consultant, reported a host of
concerns to do with public trust in the judiciary, external political influence on the procedure for appointing
and promoting judges, inadequate financial allocations, poor communication with the public and, in some
cases, judicial corruption. The issue of the lack of statutory regulation concerning the appointment of judges
to the Constitutional Court was also raised. Concerns were also expressed about the practice of the frequent

14 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

exclusion of judges to sit on highly sensitive cases.
It was highlighted that the Academy for Judges and
Prosecutors should continue to play an important role
in training members of the judiciary on the ECtHR
standards on impartiality and judicial ethics. One
crucial step forward to ensure transparency was the
dialogue between judges and journalists established
through the Judiciary-Media Council, as a unique
example of good practice which could be shared
with other countries across the region. Lastly, it was
suggested that there should be greater involvement
of the Judicial Council in providing guidance on the use of social media by judges.

For further detail on all these topics please watch the Skopje city hub report, which may be found here.

You can read a summary here.

f. Tirana City Hub

Providing a summary of the hub’s discussions, Dr

Ledina Mandia, Former General State Advocate,
lawyer and lecturer at the University of Tirana, and
Dr Petrina Broka, Lecturer at the Law Faculty of
the University of Tirana, informed participants that,
although public trust in the judiciary was decreasing,
a National Strategy (2021-2025) is in place which
prioritises investment in judicial infrastructure, as
well as the existence of criminal sanctions for undue
influence. Training on non-discrimination is offered
by the Albanian School of Magistrates.

Further, the issue of judges commenting and giving reasons for their judgments outside of judicial proceedings
was raised.

For further detail on all these topics please watch the Tirana city hub report, which may be found here.

You can read a summary here.

g. Zagreb City Hub

Providing a summary of the hub’s discussions, Štefica

Stažnik, Representative of the Republic of Croatia
before the ECtHR, reported that the judicial academy
provides effective training for sitting judges, that a
judicial communications strategy is being drafted
and an official Twitter account is being opened.
Although Croatia has complied with its EU accession
requirements, it was recognised that more needs
to be done to secure judicial independence and
impartiality.

For further detail on all these topics please watch the Zagreb city hub report, which may be found here.

You can read a summary here.

15 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

6. The role of the Venice Commission in
safeguarding judicial independence
Thomas Markert, Former Director and Secretary of the Venice Commission, provided a fascinating contribution
on the role of the Venice Commission in safeguarding judicial independence.

His speech highlighted the wider aims of the Venice Commission (which include providing opinions on legislation),
as well as more specific work in the Western Balkans region (such as providing an opinion on the reform of the
prosecution service in Montenegro). The Venice Commission has also carried out work on the judiciaries of Bosnia
and Herzegovina, North Macedonia and Albania.

In addition to drawing attention to general principles such as the irremovability of judges, he emphasised that these
principles may be applied differently in different national contexts. Of central importance to the protection of judicial
independence is the existence of judicial councils, where members are elected by their peers and may include non-
judges (e.g. MPs, legal academics, representatives of NGOs and representatives of the Bar) as well as judges.

Mr Markert’s speech may be found here:

7. Panel discussions (Day 2)

Panel Discussion No. 3 - Moderators: Judge Tim Eicke and Biljana Braithwaite

The role of other institutions

Robert Spano, President of the ECtHR, spoke about the role of institutions such as judicial councils and the media.
He examined the nature of a judge’s right to freedom of expression, distinguishing between judicial participation
in societal debate, which is acceptable and (for example) represents a key element of the Rule of Law Forum, and
judicial commentary on cases in the media and on TV, which is unacceptable.

President Spano also drew a distinction between the caselaw of the Strasbourg Court and that of the CJEU.
Whereas the CJEU will take a contextual approach to questions of judicial independence and impartiality,
considering the history of how the separation of powers has developed in a particular state, the ECtHR is
concerned with the application of minimum standards throughout the 47 Member States.

16 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 President Spano’s speech may be found here:

The Forum Guide

The AIRE Centre’s guide, ‘Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary: An overview of relevant jurisprudence
of the European Court of Human Rights’, devotes a section to the role played by institutions other than the
judiciary, in protecting the independence and impartiality of the judiciary. In particular, it considers the role played
by judicial councils, disciplinary bodies and disciplinary proceedings.

This section can be found here.

The role of the judiciary

Former Judge in respect of North Macedonia, Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, presented a speech on the role of the
judiciary, including transparency, publicity, judicial training and ethics. Her contribution emphasised the extent
to which independence and impartiality go hand in hand with training and ethics. Echoing the words of earlier
participants, she pointed towards judicial councils and the importance of having an effective media strategy.

Delving into the notion of publicity, Ms Trajkovska suggested that this does not simply refer to the relationship
between the judiciary and the media, but can also include the organisation of events and communication of
important judgments to the public.

Ms Trajkovska‘s speech may be found here:

17 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

The Forum Guide

The AIRE Centre’s guide, ‘Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary: An overview of relevant jurisprudence
of the European Court of Human Rights’, contains analysis of the role of the judiciary in safeguarding the
independence and impartiality of the judiciary, including publicity, transparency, training and ethics.

These sections can be found here and here.

The role of other branches of government

The third and final panel contribution was provided by former ECtHR Judge Ledi Bianku, who spoke about the
role of other institutions in protecting judicial independence and impartiality. Mr Bianku recalled the ECtHR case
of Mr Allenet de Ribemont, a man arrested in connection with the murder of a French politician, whose right to
the presumption of innocence was found to have been violated by comments made publicly during the course of
the investigation. This provides a cautionary tale for the comments of officials in the public sphere.

Mr Bianku further highlighted the issue of non-enforcement of judicial decisions, pointing towards the role played
by Parliament and the executive. Of upmost importance is the need to ensure that judicial reforms are carried out
in a way that respects, rather than violates, human rights.

Mr Bianku‘s speech may be found here:

The Forum Guide

The AIRE Centre’s guide, ‘Independence and Impartiality of the Judiciary: An overview of relevant jurisprudence
of the European Court of Human Rights’, also examines the role played by the other branches of government,
including parliament and the executive, in safeguarding independence and impartiality of the judiciary.

This section can be found here.

18 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

8. Technology and the 2021 Forum
As was the case last year, the 2021 Forum was highly dependent upon technology. With the city hubs connected
to the main hub via video link it was vital that the technological solution to the problems posed by the Covid-19
pandemic was smooth and professional.

The Forum used KUDO as the software to broadcast the main hub discussions online and to each of the city
hubs in high definition. This software allowed for seamless simultaneous translation into multiple languages, with
English, BCMS, Albanian and Macedonian available to all online participants and to delegates in each city hub.

Online participants were able to join from their computers or their phones after completing a registration form.

9. Event Evaluation
In the days after the 2021 Forum concluded, a detailed evaluation questionnaire was filled out by attendees. This allowed
us to make a comprehensive evaluation of our attendees’ thoughts and build on the organisers’ own experience to
ensure we can provide a unique offering that is continually improving. Feedback from attendees for the 2021 Forum
was very encouraging and we have already been able to gain valuable insight into the Forum’s successes and potential
areas for improvement. The following graphs represent a useful analysis of attendee experiences.

How would you rate the event overall?

How would you rate your satisfaction with the following areas of the Forum experience?

19 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 How would you assess the Forum’s focus?

After assessing the data provided by the Forum’s participants, the organisers have decided upon a number of
positive steps that can be taken to improve attendee experiences in the coming years:

• Ensure the translated versions of the guide and case summaries are available online.
• Where relevant, involve representatives of other branches of government or other organisations outside
the judiciary in discussions pertaining to their obligations under the Convention.
• Further increase the time available for discussion and questions from all participants.

20 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

10. Closing Remarks
Now in its eighth year, and in spite of the continuing challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic, the Rule of Law
Forum continues to provide an essential opportunity to meet and discuss cotemporary human rights issues.

The Forum was rounded off by closing speeches from Goran Miletić, Europe Director for Civil Rights Defenders,
and Biljana Braithwaite, Western Balkans Programme Director for the AIRE Centre.

Their speeches may be viewed here:

Further information on the 2021 Forum, and all Forums past, in all the languages of the region, as well as recordings
of all videos and publications, may be found on the Rule of Law Website http://rolplatform.org.

11. Beyond the 2021 Forum

Main takeaways and discussions

The following main takeaways can be drawn from the discussions and debates that took place over the two days
of the 2021 Forum:

• The independence and impartiality of the judiciary are fundamental aspects of the rule of law.
• The existence of an independent judiciary is necessary to ensure effective protection of all Convention
rights and to ensure states are held to account for their actions.
• The ECtHR has recently issued three key judgments on the right to a tribunal established by law:
1. Gudmundur Andri Astradsson v. Iceland [GC], 1 December 2020, app. no. 26374/18
2. Xero Flor w Polsce sp. z o.o. v. Poland, 7 May 2021, app. no. 4907/18
3. Reczkowicz v. Poland, 22 July 2021, app. no. 43447/19
• These cases provide essential guidance on the meaning of impartiality and independence. Domestic courts
are required to give effect to these decisions in relevant cases that come before them.
• The onset of populism and the additional pressure created by the pandemic are just two examples of a
number of threats to the independence and impartiality of the judiciary both in and out of Europe.

21 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report

 • Additional factors which were identified by the participants as further undermining the independence and
impartiality in the Western Balkans include: widespread public mistrust in the judiciary, a low standard of
media reporting, a low standard of judicial reasoning, inadequate financial independence for the judiciary,
inefficiencies in the judicial system (e.g. vetting procedures), issues with the bodies appointed to protect
the rights of judges (e.g. Judicial Councils) and a lack of diversity on the bench.
• States should identify those issues which are relevant to their own judiciaries and take steps to implement
restorative strategies. For example:
» Outreach activities: strong communication of judgments can act as a powerful bulwark against
misinformation. This can be achieved through the creation of public relations teams, which can
communicate decisions to the media and the public in a clear and understandable way.
» Judicial Councils (JC): some States lack a JC, in which case the creation of one is likely to be a positive
step forward. Where a JC already exists, it should play its role effectively by shielding judges from
media attacks.
» Media participation: judges themselves must engage with the media in an appropriate way, in particular
they must not comment on proceedings. On the other hand, participation in a public debate concerning
the judiciary may be appropriate.
» Finance: States should ensure that their judiciaries are properly financed. This means paying judges an
adequate salary and ensuring that courts are properly staffed. Insufficient resources can have a direct
impact on the functioning of the judiciary, such as by hampering the vetting procedure during the
recruitment of judges.
» Cooperation: States should ensure that the various bodies of the judiciary cooperate effectively with one
another. For example, cooperation between courts to ensure the proper enforcement of judgments, or
between the judicial council and the prosecutor’s office, should be encouraged.

The next steps

In response to the conversations held at the Forum the AIRE Centre have pledged to do the following:

• Ensure that the translated versions of the guide and case summaries are available online and in printed
format, and distributed to judges across the region in cooperation with the judicial training institutes.
• Share the content of the discussion and findings of the forum with members of legislature and executive
branches of government in participating countries, given their vital role in safeguarding independence and
impartiality of the judiciary
• Continue to work with judiciaries in the region to help improve their transparency, media strategies and
communications strategies.
• Update the online version of the guide with any new, relevant case law.

Thank you to everyone for their contributions

and we look forward to seeing you all in 2022.

22 Rule of Law Forum 2021: Report