1
Draft minutes of the Working Group Judicial Training Methods Meeting 26-27 January 2017, SSM – Scandicci (Florence) – Italy
PARTICIPANTS
EJTN Secretariat VERMIGLIO Benedetta
MEMBERS IN ATTENDANCE
Belgium KITTEL Axel
IGO
Bulgaria MADANSKA Neli
National Institute of Justice
Croatia VALENTINC Sandi
Academy of Justice
Czech Republic GLOTZMANN Filip
Judicial Academy
Denmark GAARRE ANDERSEN Pernille
National Court Administration
ERA RIEHLE Cornelia
France MARTINVILLE Erick
Ecole Nationale de la Magistrature
2
Germany TRATZ Stefan
German Judicial Academy
Greece CHASSIRTZOGLOU Maria
National School of Judges
Italy - CONVENER PERILLI Luca
School for the Judiciary MORLINI Gianluigi NAPOLITANO Luisa DEL RE Andrea
Italy IODICE Teresa
Council for the Judiciary ASCHETTINO Lucio
Latvia KALNINA-CAUNE Solvita
Judicial Training Center Poland
National School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution KRYSIAK Katarzyna
Portugal PERQUILHAS Maria
Centro de Estudos Judiciarios
Romania PACURARI Otilia
National Institute for the Magistracy
Slovenia ROBLEK Janja
Ministry of Justice
Spain TERRICABRAS CARULLA Clara
Escuela Judicial CGPJ
Spain VILLAMARIN LOPEZ Maria Luisa
Centro de Estudos Juridicos
3
Sweden HOLST ÅHBECK Caroline
Prosecution Service
Sweden HAGG BERGVALL Magdalena
Judicial Academy
The Netherlands (invited: former Convener) JANSEN Rosa
SSR GLIME Nathalie
United Kingdom/ England and Wales HATTON Andrew Judicial College
MEMBERS EXCUSED
Norway (observer) BERGET Kari
National Court Administration
Introduction
WelcomeThe meeting opens at 9h30 and Mr. Luca PERILLI, Convener of the WG Judicial Training Methods, welcomes the members of the WG JTM, in its new composition, at the Italian School for the Judiciary in Scandicci (Florence, Italy).
He considers how, in the last two-and-half years, the WG JTM focused on its original mission “Training methods” and a lot of work has been implemented, with great creativity. Then, he says that now it is pivotal to assess and evaluate what it has been done, to consider:
- The effectiveness of what the WG JTM concretely realises;
- The impacts of its activities;
- The tools/manuals which are produced.
The focus on “training methods” is due to the JTM’s main target: the impact on the quality of justice.
Hence, in this light, a lot of investment has been done in the “judgecraft” (through the development of “soft skills”) and in the “leadership” (by investing in training of leaders).
Mr. PERILLI says that it has been put on the table a lot of energy and fresh ideas while implementing JTM actions and it has been done for the sake of the EU judiciaries: the final users. Hence, he considers that the WG JTM should get confirmation that the implemented work produces the expected outcomes and effects. On this aspect, he concludes by saying that the WG should not only works on
4 the development of new training methods, but it requires the certainty that the same methods do fit with the judiciaries needs’.
Mr. PERILLI then informs the WG JTM members that the EJTN Steering Committee (SC) is currently discussing about the Strategy 2020-2027: among the topics, the EJTN’s visibility of the works carried out plays a great role. On this assumption, he launches a reflection: are the EJTN implemented tools known? Are they useful? Which is their impact? What could be done better? To give a concrete reply to these questions, the WG has already started to report and to assess the activities carried out and to disseminate their outcomes.
Mr. PERILLI adds that this works implies time and lot of energy. Moreover, the WG JTM in its new composition, is big and the work coordination might be complex: for this reason, it shall be important to define clearly the WG’s roles and structure, and he considers the following examples: “what is supposed to do the Activity Coordinator (AC) to be effective”? “Is the material we produce usable”?
“Do we need a way to make the material we produce better known (i.e. trough newsletters?”).
Strategic discussions hence need to be carried out in this framework to organise the WG JTM works and measure their impact, also on the budget. Then Mr. Luca PERILLI leaves the floor to Ms. Rosa JANSEN, former Convener of the WG JTM. She says to be glad to attend this meeting after two-and- half years’ mandate and being awarded the opportunity to make a conclusion of the JTM implemented actions. She says that all JTM members are aware of the importance of the WG works, whose final objectives are: a) the mutual understanding on training within the judiciaries and b) the continuous improvement of the quality of justice. Before closing her speech, she wishes “good luck” to Mr.
PERILLI, for the new convenorship of the WG JTM.
Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO after welcoming all the WG members also on behalf of the EJTN Secretary General, Mr. Wojciech POSTULSKI, she wishes to thank Mr. PERILLI and the SSM for the kind hosting of the meeting.
1. Opening and approval of the agenda.
• Welcome & Apologies for absence
Mr. PERILLI, before the official opening of the agenda’s discussion, he considers that this is the first meeting of the WG JTM in its new composition: then he invites the members to introduce themselves in a round table. At its closing, Mr. PERILLI wishes to inform them about the current absence of Ms.
Kari BERGET, representative of the National Court Administration of Norway and observing-member of the WG JTM.
•
Approval of the minutes of the WG JTM meeting held in Amsterdam in September 2016Mr. PERILLI asks the WG members if the draft minutes of the last WG JTM meeting held in Amsterdam on 22-23 September 2016 ca be approved.
The WG JTM members do approve the minutes unanimously.
• Approval of the agenda
Mr. PERILLI asks the WG JTM members if the following modifications to the agenda can be made:
5 - Point n. 4 “Training tools”: he asks whether it could be added the following item:
discussion on the “Questionnaire on Criminal Project”, elaborated by Ms. Višnja Marinović and Ms. Cristina Ramos.
The WG members do agree on this change and the agenda is unanimously approved.
3. Report of the JTM activities 2015-2016. Achievements and perspectives
• Report of the WG JTM. Achievements and perspectives
Ms. Rosa JANSEN presents a document illustrating the path accomplished in the past mandate of the WG JTM, starting from the elections at the EJTN General Assembly, held in Thessaloniki in 2014.
She considers that training of judges and prosecutors is to be considered as training of professionals, and the WG JTM should: a) identify topics and materials to ensure better quality of the training provided, b) strengthen the development of the best practices. She considers then the produced outcomes should be used and the impact of their effectiveness should be measured.
She says that the mission of the WG JTM could be described as follows:
- Sharing good practices
- Combining training with judicial needs - Setting up a new approach towards training - More use of E-tools
• Report of the TT Evaluation-assessment/Methodologies. Achievements and perspectives
Mr. Stefan TRATZ, before starting with the illustration of his power point, puts forward the following questions for reflection:
- “why are we there”?: we need to check the results we got and the methodology implemented;
- Which are the aims? Support the institutions, the trainers and the course directors;
- How to improve the exchange of experiences and best practices? By developing new model tools
Then he illustrates the JTM activities carried out in 2015 and 2016 in the framework of the TT
“Evaluation/Assessment” and the registered outcomes:
a) Seminar held at the Judicial Academy in Zagreb (HR) on 5-6 May 2015 on the following topic:
“Measuring Learning Results and Training Effects – The Challenge of Proper Evaluation and Assessment at the Reactionary Level”. While resuming the event, he recalls the importance of two aspects: the exchanges of best practices and the development of a model tool for the level 1 of the Kirkpatrick method. In conclusion, he illustrates to the WG members the questionnaire which was elaborated and circulated to the participants of this event, to be further examined in the occasion of the next JTM seminar (see point b), which has been held in Trier in 2016;
b) Seminar held at the ERA in Trier on 3-4 March 2016 on “Measuring Learning Results and Training Effects – The Particular Challenge of Long-Term Evaluation and Assessment”: Mr.
TRATZ has reported the very good results registered at this event and the good evaluation received by the participants.
6 c) Seminar held at the IGO in Brussels (BE) on 13-14 December 2016 on the following subject
“Novelties in training methodologies” : Mr. TRATZ also in this context expresses his satisfaction for the reached outcomes and he recalls the several topics which have been dealt by the groups works carried out by the participants during this event.
d) The “EJTN Handbook on Judicial Training Methodologies in Europe”: regarding this tool, Mr.
TRATZ recalls its update carried out in 2016 and now, thanks to the collaboration of the EU COMM, it has been translated in all the EU languages and disseminated, by EJTN, to all its members/institutions.
Moreover, Mr. TRATZ illustrates some ideas to further invest on: 1) levels 2 to 4 of the Kirkpatrick model and drafting of a questionnaire (like a Handbook); 2) distance learning; 3) coaching and supervision; 4) E-learning; 5) training on the job.
In conclusion, he refers on the activities which are planned for 2017, in the framework of Evaluation/assessment:
1) Seminar “On job training: tutoring, mentoring and coaching”, which will be organised in Berlin (Germany) at the Judicial Academy of Brandenburg on 11-12 April 2017. The AC is Ms. Otilia Pacurari;
2) Conference on “Training design” which will be held on 14-15 December 2017 at the NIM in Bucharest (Romania). The AC is Ms. Cornelia Riehle;
3) Development of a Handbook based on the Kirkpatrick model 1-2-3.
• Report of the topical team Judgecraft. Achievements and perspectives Mr. Andrew HATTON illustrates the outcomes of the works carried out by the TT judgecraft: he considers that the TT’s focus lies on the development of soft skills (behavioural, attitudes etc.) which are essential for judges’ and prosecutors’ daily work. This training aims effectively to support judges/prosecutors’ work since it includes - among other topics - courses on:
- Time management;
- Capacity to communicate effectively during the litigation;
- Ethics and conduct;
- Judicial resilience (by working under pressure);
- Unconscious bias.
Mr. HATTON informs the WG JTM members about the positive outcomes registered following the first (of the four) cluster organised on 17-18 November 2016 at the CEJ in Lisbon (PT). He adds that the three more events to come, identic in their structure, will be organised as follows: the first seminar will be held on 13-14 March in Nicosia (CY), the second will take place in Riga (LV) on 19-20 June and the last will be held in Brussels, on 25-26 September. The participation (as of countries) to these events is already defined through the declarations of interest, disseminated in 2016, however Mr. HATTON wishes to precise, namely for the new WG JTM members, that participants from different countries will be welcomed, according to the available places per each one of the events.
On this aspect, Mr. Luca PERILLI recalls the above-mentioned strategy currently under discussion by the EJTN SC and informs the members about the importance and the expectations which are awaited from the works carried out by the TT “judgecraft”. Hence a synergy could be envisaged between the Exchange Programme activities and the TT Judgecraft - in the framework of the “initial training”- by developing new models as, an example, it could be to provide “judgecraft training” within the AIAKOS programme. Mr. PERILLI adds that such these approaches would lead to look at the future as a Network and not just as a group.
7 ACTION POINT A: The WG JTM proposes to create a synergy between the Exchange Programme activities and the TT Judgecraft - in the framework of the “initial training”- by developing a model providing “judgecraft training” within the AIAKOS programme.
• Report of the topical team Leadership. Achievements and perspectives Mr. Luca PERILLI takes the floor to illustrate the outcomes reached within the TT Leadership and he considers how this kind of training is not performed in all EU countries; moreover, where it is implemented, it is not always considered as satisfactory in all its aspects. These reflections become very relevant when training deals with the quality, since it involves: knowledge, experience and know- how, all key-factors which do normally belong to the competence of the training institutions. Initially, leadership practices and training applied mostly to the private sector; then, in a second moment, they applied also to the public sector (and the judiciary).
Mr. PERILLI illustrates the outcomes of the 2015 and 2016 actions organised by the TT Leadership:
a) the first event, the Conference on Leadership, was held on 30th June and 1st July 2015 at the National School of Judges in Thessaloniki (GR). In view of this event, it was drafted a questionnaire aiming to compare the different realities across Europe in the field of leadership and training.
He adds that, as training providers, we should consider different concepts, by investing on : 1) leadership and communications skills; 2) change management capacity; 3) how to strength the judicial organisation.
Moreover, while closing the presentation of the Conference’s outcomes, Mr. PERILLI recalls the partnership which has been settled with the ENCJ, which will continue in the future.
Further events organised have been the following:
b) a conference on “Training to leadership: going to the concrete problems”, held on 12-13 July 2016 at the Escuela Judicial in Barcelona (ES). The audience for this event was composed (for the majority) by leaders/courts presidents. This event allowed to explore relations between leaders and their institutions on the following topics: independence, accountability, leaders’
evaluation, resource allocation. The added value of this event was the exchange of experiences: new methodologies have been experimented as i.e.: trainers were interviewed by leaders (and vice versa) on needs and expectations through a very concrete approach. The outcomes of this event have been essential for the organisation of the
c) Third and last event, the seminar held in Paris on 24 and 25 October 2016 held at the ENM in Paris on the subject “How to train a leader in justice”. The outcome of this event will be presented by Ms. Solvita KALNINA CAUNE.
As for the 2017 actions, Mr. PERILLI illustrates the works which will be implemented by the TT leadership:
1 ) a seminar which will be held on 15-16 May 2017 at the CSM in Rome (IT). The target audience for this event: leaders only.
2) a seminar which will be organised at the Judicial Academy in Prague (CZ) on 8-9 November 2017 ).
The target audience for this event will be trainers.
8 Before closing his presentation, Mr. PERILLI invites the WG members to consider how in EJTN’s members training institutions there are different “speeds” regarding training in leadership, and we need to consider these diversities, even if changes and improvements are ongoing also as effect of JTM training events. Moreover, he invites the WG to consider the different training targets which are of interest for the TT Leadership: current leaders and future leaders (practice which already exists in some countries, as in Italy).
Finally, Mr. PERILLI considers that, in terms of training methodologies, frontal lectures should be avoided because they do not help in confrontation. To conclude, he launches an open question to the WG members: “how should we train our leaders?”.
The floor is opened for comments and Ms. Rosa JANSEN says that the training of Presidents is very important; Ms. Janja ROBLEK informs the group that the Slovenian Ministry of Justice has been deeply inspired by the outcomes of these first actions and started to implement - internally – leadership training for State attorneys, prosecutors and court presidents. She says that it was a challenge to set up training for such profiles as well as to combine training with leaders’ daily work. The outcome is very positive and Slovenia is thinking about a higher-level training, also by implying resources as the Handbook.
Mr. Erick MARTINVILLE takes the floor to say that the EU COMM asks an evaluation of the judicial systems across Europe and not just the evaluation of the justice itself. Hence, he considers important to shift the focus on the quality of the judicial systems.
4. Training tools
• TT Handbook. Dissemination, implementation, evaluation of its impact, update.
Mr. Luca PERILLI says that, within the WG JTM, we deal with a lot of skills and tools: one example is
“The EJTN Handbook on Judicial Training Methodologies in Europe”, which has been translated in all EU languages and which is currently in use for training practices at the SSM in Italy. Then he asks the WG members: how to use these tools? This question raises because the WG JTM has planned to realise additional handbooks and it should be clearly defined their use, their purposes in support to training needs, their impact and how they will be disseminated.
Mr. Stefan TRATZ considers that it should be improved the information on the existing material and tools since the access to the resources available on the EJTN website is not very easy and EJTN should invest more on the dissemination of information. Ms. Neli MADANSKA says the substantial diffusion of the information is made at national level – during the training courses - i.e. through the dissemination of the Handbook. This opinion is shared and supported by the following members: Ms.
Clara CARULLA TERRICABRAS, Ms. Pernille GAARRE ANDERSEN, Ms. Maria PERQUILHAS (who recalls the importance, for the national training institutions, to organise regular meetings to inform trainers, trainees and related audience how EJTN works and which are the produced outcomes) and Ms. Solvita KALNINA.
Then Ms. Solvita KALNINA puts forward the following proposal to the WG members: (budgeting and) organising learning sessions for the WG members, since most us/them are responsible for drafting training programmes.
9 ACTION POINT B: Ms. Solvita KALNINA puts forward the following proposal to the WG members:
(budgeting and) organising learning sessions for the WG members, since most of us/them are responsible for drafting training programmes.
Mr. PERILLI considers that it is very satisfactory to know the EJTN Handbook has been disseminated widely; hence he says that the steps further are to clear “how is evaluated the impact of our work”
and “Do we have tools to measure this”?
Mr. Erick MARTINVILLE agrees on the importance of the evaluation as well as of its tools, since they are pivotal to detect how judges and prosecutors are trained. To shift the focus on a larger scale, Mr.
MARTINVILLE would be interested in knowing more about the training practices implemented in other EU countries to judges and prosecutors. Ms. Rosa JANSEN shares the comments of Mr. MARTINVILLE;
as for the EJTN Handbook she points out that it has not been successful in the Netherlands after its dissemination also because its perspective appears smaller than the Council of Europe’s Handbook.
Ms. Otilia PACURARI says that the EJTN Handbook is a tool which can be used in different ways according to the needs; additionally, more time might be requested by the schools/institutions to introduce this tools in the “standardized” training practices.
Before the conclusion, Mr. PERILLI reminds the evaluation tools elaborated by Mr. Rainer HORNUNG (model tool and questionnaire) and invites the WG JTM members to reflect on their possible use.
• Questionnaire on “Criminal Project”, elaborated by Ms. Višnja Marinović and Ms. Cristina Ramos.
Mr. PERILLI reminds that the questionnaire has been finalised, and Ms. Višnja Marinović has now ended her mandate within the WG JTM. However, she has confirmed her availability to disseminate the questionnaire (to more than 600 participants of the criminal project), as well as to collect the outcomes and to analyse the results. He then asks the WG JTM members whether a volunteer could be interested in associating to Ms. MARINOVIC tasks and reporting to the WG. Ms. Neli MADANSKA volunteers to this aim.
DECISION 1: Ms. Višnja MARINOVIC will disseminate the finalised questionnaire on the long-term evaluation to the Criminal project participants; she will also be responsible for the collection of the outcomes and the analysis of the results, together with Ms. Neli MADANSKA, who will report to the WG JTM.
• Request by DG JUST to EJTN for the elaboration of tools (a questionnaire?) to evaluate EC funded programmes.
Mr. Luca PERILLI says that the EU COMM asks the EJTN about a tool to evaluate the EU COMM co- financed projects and he considers that the WG JTM should set up a specific work.
5. Evaluation of the activities performed by the topical teams after September 2016
Reports for each one of the following three seminars have been drafted by the AC (or WG members), uploaded on the members’ area before the WG JTM meeting and illustrated during the meeting:
▪ Seminar on training to leadership (Paris-October) – drafted and presented by Ms. Solvita Kalnina
▪ Seminar on judgecraft (Lisbon-November) – drafted and presented by Ms.
Maria Perquilhas
10
▪ Seminar on novelties in training methodologies (Brussels-December) – Drafted by the experts group of the seminar and presented by Ms. Otilia Pacurari.
Following these presentations, the floor has been opened for comments:
- On the Seminar on novelties in training methodologies: Mr. Axel KITTEL considers how interesting this event has been, mainly for a couple of leading ideas:
o “new technologies at the disposal of judicial training” and
o the participants recognized how many profiles can be met in these occasions.
Ms. Rosa JANSEN underlined the creative inputs delivered during this event and Ms. Otilia PACURARI added, after her presentation, that the concept which has been of application for this seminar has been very simple “giving an input → carry out a practical activity →reach the outcome”.
- Seminar on training to leadership, Ms. Solvita KALNINA, after her report, recalls some of the critical aspects of this event: her concern goes mainly on the fact that the seminar might not have reached the expected outcomes; moreover, additional comments have been added on the following aspects:
o one of the experts spoke in German language and an interpreter was invited to translate his speech. Additionally, the interpreter, has been considered as a speaker (also included in the evaluation form), while she was not;
o the comments in the statistic outcomes sent by the EJTN Secretariat might not always include all the comments written by the participants;
o why there were also non-trainers among the audience?
Mr. Luca PERILLI considers that the overall evaluation of this event, made by the audience, has been positive and some speakers delivered interesting speeches. Some adaptations should be done on the adopted methodology: for example, the frontal teaching, did not help to share experiences with the public.
Mr. Erick MARTINVILLE, AC for this event, considers how the organisation of this seminar has been hard to be carried out, since this work was to be added to his daily tasks within the ENM. He says that it was difficult to play, at the same time, the role of AC, to take notes for the report and be moderator for the event itself. As for the content side, he reflects on the fact that he took part to the two previous leadership events (Thessaloniki and Barcelona Conferences) and a fil rouge can be traced for all the three of them, by showing a coherent approach. Finally, Mr. MARTINVILLE observes that the evaluation questionnaire in use by the EJTN Secretariat does not focus on the contents delivered by the expert but rather on the speaker’s personality/behaviour/attitude: hence he invites to make a reflection on how questionnaires and questions are made.
Ms. Rosa JANSEN says that it is very big the work which is carried out for the preparation of these events, and that implies a lot of time and energy. She suggests that the number of hours devoted to these tasks should be calculated.
Ms. Maria PERQUILHAS shares the concern expressed by Ms. Solvita KALNINA about the selection of the German expert (Mr. Harald Jenet), since his intervention resulted too hard to follow due to the breaks required for his translation.
Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO, wishes to offer a clarification to some of the points raised during the debate:
a) as for the participation of the German expert (Mr. Harald Janet) and the interpreter (Ms. Anne-Kathrin Arendholz): both have been designated, as speakers, by the Activity Coordinator, Mr. Erick MARTINVILLE. Regarding their participation, EJTN has paid, in addition to the travel costs and a per diem, also an expert fee, for both, Mr. Jenet and the interpreter. It resulted that, due to audit reasons, both were to be considered as experts, in the agenda and the evaluation forms;
11 b) the evaluation form (which is filled-in by the audience) aims to assess the training provided by each expert according to three different criteria: “knowledge of the subject matter”, “capacity to encourage the discussion” and “teaching skills”; hence the analysis can be wider that the expert’s profile;
c) In conclusion, with reference to the elaboration of the statistic outcomes, Ms Benedetta VERMIGLIO confirms all the comments written by the participants are included in the statistic outcomes report, none excluded.
- Seminar on judgecraft (Lisbon-November) – Ms. Maria PERQUILHAS considers that it has been a very successful event, similar - in the approach - to the first training delivered in Omsenie (SK) in 2015 with the difference that in Lisbon it was not included the topic “stress situation in court”. It has been interesting to see how the audience, composed by judges coming from different countries, have very similar problems.
Mr. Luca PERILLI refers to the template which has been elaborated by Ms. Otilia PACURARI and Ms.
Benedetta VERMIGLIO to allow the ACs to evaluate a training action under the content’s point of view.
This template shall be read in addition to the statistic outcomes, which do show the satisfaction rate expressed by the participants.
He says that the AC template is interesting; however, some challenges need to be highlighted:
1) Do we have capacities and resources to continue with its use?
2) The AC action/guidelines are rather free, because actually do not exist precise guidelines;
3) Can we develop these reports in something which could be disseminated also outside EJTN?
That would improve the visibility of EJTN and of its actions.
Ms. Solvita KALNINA considers that these reports are a good tool but she is wondering who may find the time to read them in full. Ms. Otilia PACURARI expresses as well some hesitations. Ms. Pernille GAARRE ANDERSEN considers that it is a good tools and highlights that it might be used to detect dos and don’ts for the future, since a lot of valuable inputs are included. Ms. Janja ROBLEK considers that the report which has been elaborated – at national level – after one of the EJTN’s events to disseminate its outcomes- has not registered a great success. Ms. Maria PERQUILHAS considers that the report is important both at national level and for the WG members as well.
Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO wishes to add that one of the reasons why this template has been conceived, was to allow a wider insight on the contents of the implemented training actions and consider whether they did correspond (or not) to the expected outcomes. However, a step further made by the AC, who is the designer of the event, could be to start filling-in the report before the event itself, so to fix its leading principles, in line with the expected outcomes. Then, after the conclusion of the event, the overall outcomes can be described more in detail by the AC.
In conclusion: Mr. PERILLI considers that there is still room for improvement in the use of this template however, at now, the practice is unchanged and the AC will continue to use it for the evaluation of the implemented actions.
DECISION 2: The practice to fill in the evaluation report by the AC is confirmed; there will be room for its improvement whenever needed.
After the lunch break, the Convener asks the WG JTM members if they agree to postpone the discussions about point n. 6 to the following day: the WG agrees, hence he opens the discussion about the point n. 7 of the agenda.
12 7. Portfolio meetings: state of play; agendas for 2017 activities, planning 2018 activities
Mr. Perilli invites the TTs, respectively: “Leadership”, “Judgecraft” and “Evaluation/Assessment &
Methodologies” to split into three groups to finalise the programmes for 2017 and draft the provisional budget for 2018 actions in their respective field of action.
Before the split, he asks to each WG member to express, in view of the future actions of JTM, his/her preference to attend one of the three TTs: the here below table shows the outcomes.
Evaluation &
Methodologies
Leadership Judgecraft
SE (Prosecution Service) CZ BG
ES (CEJ) DK GR
PL LV ES (Escuela Judicial)
SE (Judicial Academy) HR PT
ERA SI UK
RO FR BE
DE IT
The works of the TTs do continue until 17.00, when the meeting is suspended.
The works restart on January 27th at 9.30 and the Convener, Mr. Luca PERILLI opens the discussion with point n. 8 of the agenda.
8. Presentation concept activity, planning and discussion
The Convener recalls the importance to fix the “vision” of the WG JTM, but he also recognises that it might be difficult to trace it during this first meeting, considering also the participation of the new members. Hence, while not getting a finalised decision on the JTM vision, Mr. PERILLI invites the WG members to discuss about the WG vision to trace its main guidelines and he anticipates that he will send the WG members a paper to fix the ideas for the next three years’ mandate and it will be opened for discussion. The outcome will play a great role also in the framework of the mentioned EJTN strategy 2020-2027 as the SC considers the WG JTM a key-group and has a lot of expectations about the results which can be achieved.
Then Mr. PERILLI considers that, for the annual and multiannual vision, the WG can also substantially change the current trends, but it is important to keep record of what has been done till today: that needs to be kept and enhanced. To conclude, Mr. PERILLI considers that, among the three TTs,
“judgecraft” and “Leadership” might see an end due to the accomplishment of their tasks.
Regarding the possible links with other EJTN actions, Mr. PERILLI highlights the opportunity to invest more on initial training through a joint-cooperation with the Exchange Programme (i.e. Aiakos programme) and judgecraft (I.e. regarding ethics & conduct, time management, stress resilience).
However, he points out that, despite the exchanges are running, their outcomes/feedbacks are not available: that input should lead then to a better organisation of our job. Mr. PERILLI asks the WG members: “which methodology would be of application?” “who would be competent to take care of this work”? Those are just some of the hints which should be considered while tracing the roadmap for the future of the JTM actions.
13 ACTION POINT C: Mr. PERILLI says that, regarding the outline of the WG JTM vision, he will send ta vision-paper to the WG members and it will be open it for discussion.
Ms. Rosa JANSEN considers that EJTN should become a “learning organisation”, stepping from
“quantity” to “quality”. She supports then the proposal of combining WG JTM actions with the EXP.
Mr. Erick MARTINVILLE says that the EU COMM (DG JUST) is interested in what EJTN does and we should reflect on that by making the EJTN the “collection point” of the directions and trends which are taken at national level. This would give added value to our action and moreover that would help in tracing the JTM roadmap more easily. Moreover, he reaffirms the fact that the work carried out by the ACs is very heavy and, as in other EJTN SWGs (as for the case of the Criminal SWG) it has been adopted the decision to externalise the scientific tasks to external experts: he would propose the same approach for the WG JTM.
Mr. Luca PERILLI says that on this last point, (externalisation of ACs functions) it has been already undertaken a discussion at the last WG JTM meeting in Amsterdam (September 2016) and he adds that what is carried out within the framework of the WG JTM is something that is normally is not done at national level, hence he expresses some perplexities about the possibility to decentralise this expertise. Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO, on this point, invites the WG members to remind what indicated by the EJTN Secretary General during the last WG meeting in Amsterdam “when a confrontation has been made within the Criminal SWG on their effective role, a lot of discrepancies have been raised as for the different visions on the concrete organisation of the event. So, in conclusion, the Secretary General invites the WG JTM members to reflect on the following: “are we still a Network”? “Where do we want to go?”.
Ms. Solvita KALNINA expresses her wish that the WG JTM could be well structured and organised with, in addition, the possibility of undertaking learning sessions for the WG members as well, to be held during the WG’s meetings. Her proposal is shared by Ms. Pernille GAARRE ANDERSEN. She considers that it is important to invest on us and that could be also beneficial for the group.
Mr. Stefan TRATZ highlights three points for the future: a) improve the visibility of the produced outcomes; b) improve the EJTN website; c) support the proposal for a cooperation with other EJTN WGs, in specific with the EXP (as illustrated).
Mr. Erick MARTINVILLE agrees on the proposal to strengthen the dissemination of the implemented activities; moreover, he considers that the lack of information (or its difficult access) on the produced outcomes has led to simplistic conclusions that our actions might appear as “judicial tourism”. He regrets to hear that and, proactively, proposes the improvement of the EJTN website, to allow an easier access to the information and, at the same time, favour the dissemination of the produced outcomes.
Luca PERILLI, concerning the proposal of Ms. KALNINA to organise “learning sessions for the WG members” says that it might be challenging, due to the usual heavy agendas of the WG meetings: that might prevent from allowing the necessary time for learning sessions. Mr. Erick MARTINVILLE invites then the WG to be less ambitious (I.e. implement just 1 module instead of 2) to save time and resources and allow a wider investment on training the trainers. Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO reminds the words spent by the Convener referring to the innovative trend and key-importance of the WG JTM also in regards to the SC decisions: in this light, how would be then considered the adoption of an inverse trend, decreasing the number of JTM planned and implemented actions?
In case this opportunity could be implemented already in 2017, Mr. PERILLI proposes to benefit of the
“reserve list” action (included in the 2017 budget but not yet confirmed – until July 2017) as the
14 possibility to organise a “learning session for the WG members”, despite the number of the budgeted participants is of a maximum of twenty. Mr. HATTON proposes to increase the number of attendees by shortening the length of the meeting (actually 1,5 day) to one day: on this point, Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO puts a reserve for further confirmation.
The WG JTM members agree on the possibility to organise – in 2017- “learning sessions for the WG members” one day long, immediately before or immediately after, the next WG meeting. It appoints Solvita KALNINA CAUNE and Pernille GAARRE ANDERSEN to draft a proposal of agenda for the learning session.
DECISION 3: The WG JTM members agree on the possibility to organise – in 2017- “learning sessions for the WG members”, one day long, immediately before or immediately after the next WG meeting.
It appoints Solvita KALNINA CAUNE and Pernille GAARRE ANDERSEN to draft a proposal of agenda for the learning session. To implement this event, not preliminarily budgeted for the current year, the following proposal has been made: benefit of the “reserve list” action (under confirmation until July 2017); moreover, since this event could allow the participation of a maximum of 20 attendees for a 1,5-day length, it is proposed to shorten its length to one-day meeting so to allow a wider participation. On this point, Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO puts a reserve for further confirmation.
Ms. Otilia PACURARI proposes to organise a plenary meeting with the three “WGs members” to share common problems/targets in a unique forum. Mr. PERILLI proposes to discuss about that during the General Assembly.
Mr. PERILLI, once agreed that a “meeting for the 3 EJTN WGs” should be organised in 2018, asks the WG members “how” should it be held; the following three proposals are put forward:
1) Organise a general meeting of the 3 WGs (all members included);
2) Regularly some members of the 3 WGs take part to other WGs meetings;
3) Organise a learning session which can be extended to the other WGs.
On these three proposals, the WG JTM members have expressed their preference and the majority have supported the proposal N.2.
Then, he invites the members to discuss, also in the light of the 2018 draft budget, which shall be defined by this meeting, whether to include – or not – the planning of such this event for next year.
DECISION 4: Following the WG agreement to organise a “meeting for the 3 EJTN WGs members”
also in 2018, the WG members have agreed that “regularly some members of the 3 WGs may take part to other WGs meetings”.
6. Structure, coordination and functioning of the WG
Mr. Luca PERILLI says that the WG JTM does not appear as efficient as it could be: more time is often necessary to the TTs to prepare their works and more communication among the members is expected.
He proposes some solutions:
- Share, in advance, the available information;
15 - Preparation of the draft agendas in addition to short explanatory notes in advance;
- Allow the finalisation of the meeting documentation in advance so to favour their upload on the EJTN member’s area in advance;
- Set the WGs JTM meetings based on the discussions needs: the first WG JTM meeting should be organised in January and it should be 2 days’ length; the second one, could be organised in the autumn, for 1,5-day length.
Then Mr. Luca PERILLI asks the WG members their opinion about the following possibilities within the JTM:
- Is the creation of new TTs to be foreseen?
- Would the creation of sub-working groups be preferable instead of TTs?
While opening the discussion, Mr. PERILLI considers that the TTs do have a more flexible concept, while the SWGs are more structured, since they do have an independent budget and do meet separately from the WG.
Following a debate among the WG JTM members, the following decision is adopted:
DECISION 5: The WG JTM members agree to keep the same structure as it is: TTs are the choice.
Moreover, the WG agrees to meet twice a year:
- in January, with a 2-day meeting length - and in the autumn, a 1,5-day meeting length.
In line with this decision, Mr. Luca PERILLI asks the WG JTM members about the organisation of the next WG meeting, and leaves the floor to Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO who explains the budget restrictions - for the interpretation service - which needs to be taken into account in view of the organisation of the next WG JTM meeting. For interpretation purposes, only 1.200€ are left - after this first meeting in Scandicci: therefore, she invites the members to consider that the next hosting institution should be already provided of the technical equipment, to avoid its rental.
Following a discussion among the members, the following decision is taken:
DECISION 6: The WG JTM agrees to meet in September 2017; following the kind offer put forward by Ms. Clara CARULLA TERRICABRAS, the meeting can be hosted by the Escuela Judicial in Barcelona.
It will be a 1,5-day meeting and the dates are to be confirmed. The current options are the following:
11-12-13 September or the week from 18 to 22 September 2017. Further confirmation will follow.
7. Portfolio meetings: state of play; agendas for 2017 activities, planning 2018 activities.
State of play of TT Evaluation/Assessment and Methodology:
Mr. Stefan TRATZ summarises the activities which are foreseen for 2017:
Title of the event Dates and venue AC Draft
agenda
Other costs
Seminar “On job training: coaching, tutoring, mentoring.
11-12 April 2017, Judicial Academy of Brandenburg, Berlin (DE)
Ms. Otilia Pacurari
Not yet available
6 experts and interpretation EN/FR
Conference on
“Training design”
14-15 December 2007, NIM, Bucharest (RO)
Ms. Cornelia Riehle
Not yet available
6 experts and interpretation EN/FR
16 Handbook: to be
intended as a work on the long-term assessment, in order to finalise the works already carried out with the questionnaire elaborated jointly WG JTM/WG Programmes
Regarding the drafting of the Handbook, Mr. Luca PERILLI considers that the “long term questionnaire”
drafted by Višnja Marinović and Ms. Cristina Ramos is now completed and it shall be disseminated to the 600 participants of the criminal project. Hence, he recalls the attention on the fact that last year, it was requested the budget for drafting a “Handbook”, which should contain the Evaluation on the levels 1-2-3 of the Kirkpatrick model, work which should be completed by end of May 2017 to comply with the publication of the EU COMM Call expected by June. On these basis, he asks the TT members whether this work will be accomplished and who could be the responsible persons. Ms. Otilia PACURARI and Ms. Neli MADANSKA volunteer to draft the Handbook. Mr. Luca PERILLI thanks the two members for their availability and considers that the team just need one more external expert (to be identified) to be competed.
DECISION 7: Ms. Otilia PACURARI and Ms. Neli MADANSKA will draft the Handbook which shall be finalised by the end of May 2017. One more external expert shall be determined.
State of play of TT Judgecraft:
Mr. Andrew HATTON summarises the activities which are foreseen for 2017
Title of the event Dates and venue AC Draft
agenda
Other costs
Judgecraft seminar 13-14 March 2017, Supreme Court of Nicosia (CY)
Mr. Jeremy Cooper
Available No
interpretation (EN only) Judgecraft seminar 19-20 June 2017, Latvian
Judicial training Center – Riga (LV)
Mr. Jeremy Cooper
Draft No
interpretation (EN only) Judgecraft seminar 25-26 September 2017,
IGO, Brussels (BE)
Mr. Jeremy Cooper
draft No
interpretation (EN only)
Mr. HATTON then informs the WG members that the pool of experts will be composed by Mr. Jeremy Cooper (AC), Ms. Maria Perquilhas, Ms. Michelle Austin and Ms. Margarida Reis: then a change shall be foreseen for the participation of Ms. Maria de la O Silva Fernandez, former expert, who is no longer member of the CEJ (ES).
The three seminars will follow the same time schedule as proposed in Lisbon (Day 1: 9.00 – 17.45 /Day 2: 9.30 – 12.45). the only change which might be foreseen in the programme is a slight amendment to make it a little bit less “UK centric”.
17 State of play of TT Leadership: Mr. Luca PERILLI summarises the activities which are foreseen for 2017:
Title of the event Dates and venue AC Draft
agenda
Other costs
Leadership seminar (targeted audience = courts presidents.
Collaboration with ENCJ)
15-16 May 2017, at the CSM, Rome (IT)
Mr. Luca Perilli
Not yet available
6 experts and interpretation EN/FR
Leadership seminar (targeted audience = trainers)
8-9 November 2017, at the Judicial Academy, Prague (CZ)
Mr. Filip Glotzmann
Not yet available
6 experts and interpretation EN/FR
Research on best practices
Mr. Luca PERILLI adds that - as for the 1st seminar which will be held in Rome at the Italian CSM - the structure of the seminar has been decided by the TT leadership; some contributions will also come from ENCJ’s experts who will play an active role in the organisation of this event. As for the topics’
selection, the three leading ones are the following:
- Moral leadership: which will be developed by Ms. Rosa Jansen - Qualitative and quantitative performance: dealt by the ENCJ’s expert - Personal Leadership: which will be followed by Mr. Erick Martinville.
These three presentations will be done within three separated groups and the three coordinators will act also as group-leaders. Moreover, it has been agreed that, on the basis of the overall number of participants (35), 10 more Italian participants will be attending the seminar and they will be funded by the IT CSM.
As for the second seminar, Mr. PERILLI says that it has not yet been outlined in all its details.
Finally, with reference to the study/research, Mr. PERILLI considers that more time shall be necessary to decide about the selection of the expert who will be in charge of travelling to five countries, to carry out interviews and draft the research accordingly. Actually, some proposals are under evaluation about the ideal profile of this expert.
Each TT Coordinator, following the illustration of the TT actions for 2017, has reported the decisions of each one of the TT about the activities to be proposed for 2018. Here below the summarising table:
Proposal of draft budget for JTM actions in 2018:
Evaluation-assessment &
Methodology
Judgecraft Leadership
2 seminars (one devoted to Methodology and the other to Eval/assessment). For each one of the two events, it should be budgeted:
- 35 participants each
- 6 experts’ fees - Length 1,5 day.
3 seminars: For each one of them it should be budgeted:
- 30 participants each
- 1,5-day length - 2 (or 3) actors’ fees - 2 experts’ fees (no interpretation foreseen: EN only)
1 seminar which will foresee:
- 35 participants - 2 days’ length - 6 experts’ fees - Interpretation
costs (EN/FR) 1 Conference, which will foresee:
- 60 participants
18 - Interpretation
costs (EN/FR)
- 1,5-day length - 8 experts’ fees - Interpretation
costs (EN/FR) 2 WG JTM meetings (with interpretation EN/FR)
- The first (in January 2018): 2 days’
length
- The second (autumn): 1,5 days’
length
21 members of the WG JTM
Meeting of the 3 WGs: 35 / 40 participants (=representatives of the three WGs) and experts.
9. Preparation of the General Assembly, Malta, 22nd and 23rd June 2017
Ms. Rosa JANSEN is invited to take the floor to trace the main axes of the next GA, which will be held in June 2017 in Malta. She considers that this event shall need to be short, effective and allowing a collective work. Mr. Luca PERILLI recalls the fact that this event will talk to country representatives who might hot have followed the technicalities of the preparation of the EJTN’s actions, but it shall be important to inform them properly and concretely. Then he invites the WG JTM members to decide about the composition of the panel which will report – within the GA - the JTM actions (for no longer than 20 minutes in total): after a debate, the following three representatives have been indicated:
- Mr. Luca PERILLI: for TT Leadership
- Ms. Maria PERQUILHAS: for the TT Judgecraft
- Ms. Otilia PACURARI: for the TT Evaluation/assessment and Methodology (however her participation is not actually confirmed because the decision is to be carried out by the Rumanian NIM).
ACTION POINT D: In regards to the proposed panel of three experts, the participation of Ms. Otilia Pacurari is subjected to approval by the national judicial training institution of Romania (NIM).
Without that, the issue will be presented to the EJTN Secretary General.
In this framework, Mr. Andrew HATTON proposes the use of films and videos. Mr. Erick MARTINVILLE alerts the WG JTM members that filming events might appear easy but that requires a lot of technical and pedagogical support. Moreover, in a second phase, a lot of work is requested to download the videos’ contents. On these basis, Mr. HATTON proposes the use of DVDs (on judgecraft) and the WG agrees on this choice because part of the works carried out by the TT can be shown to the GA audience.
Ms. Pernille GAARRE ANDERSEN, in the same perspective, will provide additional videos for the presentations. Ms. Otilia PACURARI will send pictures which might be useful too for the presentations.
The meeting is closed at 13.00 Read and Approved Brussels, 07/02/2017
The Convener EJTN Secretariat
Luca PERILLI Benedetta VERMIGLIO
19
DECISIONS REGISTRY
Decisions
D 1
Ms. Višnja MARINOVIC will disseminate the finalised questionnaire on the long-term evaluation to the Criminal project participants; she will also be responsible for the collection of the outcomes and the analysis of the results, together with Ms. Neli MADANSKA, who will report to the WG JTM.D 2
The practice to fill in the evaluation report by the AC is confirmed; there will be room for its improvement whenever needed.D 3
DECISION 3: The WG JTM members agree on the possibility to organise – in 2017-“learning sessions for the WG members”, one day long, immediately before or immediately after the next WG meeting. It appoints Solvita KALNINA CAUNE and Pernille GAARRE ANDERSEN to draft a proposal of agenda for the learning session. To implement this event, not preliminarily budgeted for the current year, the following proposal has been made: benefit of the “reserve list” action (under confirmation until July 2017);
moreover, since this event could allow the participation of a maximum of 20 attendees for a 1,5-day length, it is proposed to shorten its length to one-day meeting so to allow a wider participation. On this point, Ms. Benedetta VERMIGLIO puts a reserve for further confirmation.
D 4
Following the WG agreement to organise a “meeting for the 3 EJTN WGs members” also in 2018, the WG members have agreed that “regularly some members of the 3 WGs may take part to other WGs meetings”.D 5
The WG JTM members agree to keep the same structure as it is actually: TTs are the choice.Moreover, the WG agrees to meet twice a year:
- in January, with a 2-day meeting length - and in the autumn, a 1,5-day meeting length
D 6
The WG JTM agrees to meet in September 2017; following the kind offer put forward by Ms. Clara CARULLA TERRICABRAS, the meeting can be hosted by the Escuela Judicial in Barcelona. It will be a 1,5-day meeting and the dates are to be confirmed. The current options are the following: 11-12-13 September or the week from 18 to 22 September 2017. Further confirmation will follow.D 7
Ms. Otilia PACURARI and Ms. Neli MADANSKA will draft the Handbook which shall be finalised by the end of May 2017. One more external expert shall be determined.20
ACTION POINTS REGISTRY
Action Point Tasks Responsible body for
execution AP A
The WG JTM proposes to create a synergy between the ExchangeProgramme activities and the TT Judgecraft - in the framework of the “initial training”- by developing a model providing “judgecraft training” within the AIAKOS programme.
SC, WG members of JTM & EXP
AP B
Ms. Solvita KALNINA puts forward the following proposal to the WG members: (budgeting) and organising learning sessions for the WG members, since most of us/them are responsible for drafting training programmes.WG JTM members
AP C
Mr. PERILLI says that, regarding the outline of the WG JTM vision, he will send ta vision-paper to the WG members and it will be open it for discussion.Convener
AP D
In regards to the proposed panel of three experts, the participation of Ms. Otilia Pacurari is subjected to approval by the national judicial training institution of Romania (NIM). Without that, the issue will be presented to the EJTN Secretary GeneralNational Institute for the Magistracy
(Romania)
